The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBefore the FERC Application for License for a Minor Water Power Project, Volume 2 Old Harbor Project 1999• - - • • • • • • • - • • • - - • - - BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION ApPLICATION FOR LICENSE FOR A MINOR WATER POWER PROJECT, VOLUME 2 OLD HARBOR PROJECT FERC PROJECT No. 11690-000 AND No. 11561-000 April 26, 1999 Submitted by ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. 4831 EAGLE STREET ANCHORAGE AK 99503-7497 prepared by polarconsult alaska, inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Phone: (907) 258·2420 License Application and Draft Environmental Assessment Old Harbor Project, FERC # 11690-000 VOLUME 2 Appendix C . List of Correspondence included with this EA Copies of Correspondence Appendix D Comments from National Marine Fisheries Service, January 27 1999 Comments from United States Department of the Interior, March 11 1999 EXHIBITS F and G Cover/Project Map Figure G-l, Figure G-2, Legal Description of Lands Occupied by the Project and the Required Access Routes Figure F-l, Figure F-2, Figure F-3, Figure F-4, Figure F-5, Figure F-6, Figure F-7, Figure F-8, Figure F-9, Figure F -10, April 26, 1999 Project Layout Pipeline Plan And Profile Pipeline Plan And Profile Pipeline Plan And Profile Pipeline Plan And Profile Pipeline Plan And Profile Pipeline Plan And Profile Intake, Truss Bridge, and Pipeline Details Powerhouse Site Plan, Bridge, and Access Trail Details Powerhouse Details Page 5 .. Draft Environmental Assessment Old Harbor Project, PERC # 11690-000 • - .. .. - • • • • .. .. .. - - - - - - APPENDIXC • --• • • • , , ,• • • • .. • .. Il I I Old Harbor Project Project No. 11690·000 Communications Log 4126/99 NOOF TO TO ORGANIZA nON FROM ORGANIZATIONFROM DATE PAGES DESCRIPTION preliminary permit application acceptance Charles Walls Electric Coo""ralivt> Inc'_~..~t--.~~__ Federal Commission 3/30/99 3 letterAlaska ~~'::::'=-'--~--- No comments fax from Alaska Hydrologic Daniel Hertrich Alaska Department of Natural Resources 311 /99 isurveyPolarconsult ~____.______~_ Federal EllergyReguiaiorY-com~ission 12/31198 __ _ ~otice ofav<li!.ii~iliiY~of DL~lIll~XDEA Participants ~articil'aTlts PolarcollsUit ~-12/11/98 ___}i:>raft License Application . Polarconsult 9114198 Scoping Document 1 needs no revIsIons Daniel Henrich Polarconsult Participants I ..~.. ~.-.-~-. ....~~~~-~- LASER 6/1/98+~ Co~ment'onprojeCt,requ~st for studies Phonefog regarding thestl'eam gauge at the Dan Vos 5127/98.Polarconsult intakeIN";O",' FOh~;" S,~k, Comments on Scoping Document and Reques Daniel Hertrich !Polarconsult 5/15/98jNational ~~nne ~i::i~~service 2 for Additional Studies -----,--- Polarconsult .-_..._-_. -.~----.-- r Regulatory Commission Departll1ent of Fish and Game Deoartment of Environmental Conservation Enl!.r.g)lRegulatory Commission Kodiak Mirror Anc~o!a~o:.[)aily News Polarconsult Polarconsult Polarconsult i Kodiak Mirror 4/22/98 Affadavit of Publ icationDaniel Hertrich Polarconsult notice Notice of Intent to conduct environmental Earle Ausman 4114/98Polarconsult __.Xederal Energy Regulatory Commission scoping meeting and a site visit Notice'of-Scoping attached- Participants 418/98 ~copingDocumel1t_1____ 'Finalized S.tUd.Y PlanS.. Based on ISCD 4/1/98Participants 2 Comments . . Proposed Study Plans Basecton ISCDj3/6198Participants 2 Comments 2/25/98 !Acceptance of ArEA Process by I'ERC ~-~~-._-_.._--t ---------. comments on iscd • request for lagoon creek Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 2/17/98 stream gauging to assess flow impacts -commeni.Sonicsd~request for ~bi'~dsurYey, continued fish surveys, lagoon creek now Daniel Hertrich 2 2/13/98 2 .s~rvey_ Iregarding the 401 Water Quality Certification Daniel Hertrich 1/16/98 land Coas~al/Con.s~t~.l1.c1.~l'lications. . _ ,request for comments on intent to perform Participants 1/8198 IAPE!-.l'!:.0~lJ!>s. . ._ Daniel Hertrich 11121197 Affadavit of Publication oLll1eeting notice Daniel Ilertrich ;\ff.'l.davit ofPulJli<;llti.~n of meeting notice ParticiJlllllts. ISeD letter, n Lois Cashell, Secretary Federal Regulatory Commission Waiver Req~est ;Acceptance of Communications Protocol and Lois Cashell, Secretary 5 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 3 !NEPA Consolidated Process Page 1 of3 • • I I I I t I• •• • • , • • • • • • Communications Log Old Harbor Project 4/26/99 Project No. 11690-000 TO Daniel Hertrich Earle Ausman Charles Walls Wayne Dolezal Daniel Hertrich Participants Walter Ebell ACMP reviewers Participants The Secretary Michael Strzelecki A VEC Members Charles Walls ACMP reviewers Arlene Murphy The Secretary Earle Ausman The Secretary Mark Robinson Earle Ausman The Secretary TO ORGANIZA nON FROM FROM ORGANIZA nONI -------,--~- . Polarconsult Wayne Dolezal IAlaska{)ep.'lrt.ment ofFisha~d Game I Polarconsult IWayne Dolezal I Alaska of Fish and Game .. _------------- I Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, lilt:· ILarry Brockman Environmental Protection_.A~ency IAlaska Department ofFish and Game -~- " Polarconsult lJamin, Ebell, Bolger, and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Federal Energy Regulatory Alaska Village Electric Division of Govemmental Coordination IFederal Energy Regulatory Commission Polarconsult I Federal Energy Regulatory Commission I Federal Energy Regulatory Commission I Polarconsult IFederal Energy Regulatory Commission iDaniel Hertrich \POlarconsult-1 IRonald Morris IU.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA __ [Daniel Hertrich IPolarconsult iTillery._ i Department of Law Division of Governmental Coordination [Daniel Hcrtrich ' Polarconsult IArlene Murphy I jDaniel J1ertric~... IpolarConSult Om" ".";'"-1"""'"'"" Charles Walls Alaska US Department us Fish and [Wildlife Service jArieneMurPhy -Division of Governmental Coordination iEarle Ausman ,Polarconsult .~Ronald Morris . W-s Del'8rtment NOAA Secretary Federal Energy JSecretary Management Federal Energy Re_gulatory _ColTlmission '1 Secretary Alaska Department of Fish and Game Iwayne Dolezal Harbor Tribal Council Page 20f3 DA TE 9118/97 8113/97 712197 612/97 4/9/97 2/19/97 217197I 12/2/96 9/23/96 9/12/96 9/12/96 8/8/96 7/31/96 4115/96 3/29/96 3/20/96 3/14/96 3111/96 2/22/96 2/8/96 1119/96 1118/96 12/8/95 i 1217195 1NOOF PAGES1---' 2 " . 3 5 2 4 2 2 3 I 2 2 2 5 3 2 2 4 DESCRIPTION comments regarding the comm protocol and waiver items --_.. comments regarding the comm protocol and waiver items Response to notice I comments regarding the comm protocol and waiver Items ._.---- Approval of Communications Protocol requested. comm protocol, approval fonn, an j""of port;""''', ,""hod _ land issues, changes re_quired in covenants correction to comm protocol, copy of notice 0 apea process to reviewers draft -com protocol, list of parties, -draft com cover leiter for progress report I of intent to do apea proces (fiSh concerns Iorder _ preliminary penn it ._. regarding land issures, other comments to preliminary permit acknowledge receipt of preliminary penn it, Iland status 1';-""";0" '0' "m~".'" "",m" on", acknowledge receipt ofpreJiminary perm ii, fish concerns & wildlife concerns l!esolution supporting project Iresolution supporting project • • • • • • • • • • • I a , , I I , , Communications Log Old Harbor Project 4/26199 Project No. I J690-000 TO Earle Ausman Earle Ausman The TO ORGANIZATION Polarconsult' FROM Earle Ausman ! l' NOOF ____!.It~M ORGANIZATlONLDA~ . PAGES Federal Energy Regulatory Commission I 1217195 Fede~ai Energy Regulatory CommisSlon- PolarconsUit······--~---·· DESCRIPTION of preliminary permitfilj-;,-g of£reiimjn~i~ermii.filirlg --- permit application Page 3 of3 • FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGtON. D. C. 2o.&~6 " ' ...~, . MAR 3 0 1999 OfFICE OF HVDROPOWER LICENSING- project No. 11690-000-Alaska Old Harbor Project• Alaska Village Electric .Cooperative , Inc. Mr. Charles Y. Walls -General Manager Alaska Electr:ic. Cooperative, Inc. 4831 Eagle Street - Anchorage, Alaska 99503-7497 • Dear Mr. Walls: Your preliminary permit application for the Klamath County Water Power Project has been accepted by the Commission for filing as of March 1, 1999. Federal, state l and local agencies• will be informed in the Commission's public notice that a copy of the complete application may be obtained from you. Within 5 days after you receive this letter, send one copy -of the application to the following: the Commission1s Portland Regional Office; the Department of the :nterior. Office ot Environmental Affairs; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District; the Dir.ec::t:or, Bureau of Land Managrn:nem: i .:..nd 'i:.he Alaska -Director, Bureau of Land Management. A list of chair addresses is enclosed. • • Since your project includes federal lands within its boundaries, please complete the appropr~ate 9Lclosed land description form and prepare a microfilm copy of the permit application's Exhibit 4 mounted on apert~re cards (as referenced on the land description form). If the lands can be described in the Rectangular Survey System, complete the =orm for public land states; if not, complete the for.m for non-pUblic land states.• Submit one copy of the land description form and aperture cards to the Secretary of the Commission (ATTN: DLe, ijL 11.1) and an additional copy of both to the Alaska Bureau of Land Management state office within 45 days of the date of this letter.- • .. III til - If you have any questions, please contact Hector M. Perez on (202) 219-2B43.- Sincerely, - • James M. Fargo Chief Engineering West Section • cc: Public Files Enclosures; • • • ., .. • --.. list of addresses land description forms • .. • LIST OF ADDRESSES• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ~ortland Regional Office 101 S.W. Main Street,· #905 -Portland, O~ 97204 • Department of the Interior Office at Environmen.tal Affairs Room :2340 MB 1849 C Street, NW• Washington, DC 20240 .. u. S. Army Corps of Engilleers Portland District P.O. Box 2946 Portland, OR 97.208-2946 • State Director Alaska State Office Bureau of Land Management Division of Lands and • • Renewable Resources (AK-930) Attn: FHRC Withdrawal Recordation 222 West 7th Avenue, #J.3 Anchorage, AX 99513-7599 Director Bureau of Land Management • • Branch of Lands Attn: FERC Wi~hdrawal Recordation 7450 Boston Blvd. Springfield, VA 22153 • .. .. .. -.. .. II .. .. Alaska Departmenr d NATURAL .. RESOURCES .. DIVISION OF MINING AND WATER MANAGEMENT ALASKA HYDROLOGIC SURVEY 3801 C Sl, Suite 800 Anchorage, Ak. 99803-5135 Phone: (I07}289-8600 FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO• .. TO: Daniel Hertich DATEITIME: 0310119910:32 AM COlD EPT: Polaroonsult Alaska. Inc. FAX ##: 258-2420 PHONE #: 258·2419 • FROM: Stan CarriC'X, Hydrologist PHONE t: (907)269-8637 DIVISION OF MINING AND WATER MANAGEMENT FAX If;: (901)562-1384 NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: 1 • IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE AU PAGES. PLEASE CALL THE SENDER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE COMMENTS: .. -lliave reviewed the Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment for the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project dated December 15, 1998, and we have no comments at thIs time. Thank you for including us in the review process. ~ /") r.->~~~:iIt:..-• Stan Carrick Hydrologist .. -.. .. .. • • • • • • • • • • • I I a I I I I I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION NOTICE OF DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION, PRELIMINARY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSM~NT (PDEA), AND SOLICITING PRELIMINARY TERMS, CONDITIONS, ru~D RECOMMENDATIONS (December 31, 1998) Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. Type of Application: Minor Unconstruct~d Project h. Project No.: 11561-000 c. Applicant Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Anchorage, Alaska d. Name of Project: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project e. Location: Partially within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, on Mountain Creek, a tributary to the East Fork of Barling Creek, near Old Harbor, Alaska. f. Applicant Contact: Mr. Dan Hertrich polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue Anchorage, AK 99503 (907) 258-2430 g. FERC Contact: Nan Allen (202) 219-2938 h. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., mailed a copy of the PDEA and draft license application to interested parties on December 15, 1998. The Commission received a copy of the PDEA and Draft License Application on December 21, 1998. i. As noted in the Commission's February 25, 1998, letter to all parties, with this notice we are soliciting preliminary terms, conditions, and recommendations for the PDEA and comments on the draft license application. j. All comments on the PDEA and draft license application for the Old Harbor Project should be sent to the address noted above in item If) with one copy filed with the Commission at the following address: OC-A-14 Project No. 11561-000 - 2 David P. Boergers, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Dockets -Room IA BBB First Street Washington, DC 20426 All comments must (1) bear the heading "Preliminary Comments", 'Preliminary Recommendations", "Preliminary Terms and Conditions", or ·Preliminary Prescriptions"; and (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the ication. Any party interested in commenting must do so March IS, 1999. k. With this notice, we are initiating consultation with the STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER (SHPO), as required by § 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 36 CFR 800.4. Linwood A. Watson, Jr. Acting Secretary • polarconsult alaska, inc. E:"JGINEERS • SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS Project No. 11561-000 - - • • • • • • • - - - - Old Harbor Project December 15, 1998 To: PARTICIPANTS Subject: Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Enclosed is a draft application for license and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA) for the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project, prepared by Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., on behalf of the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (A VEC). These documents are part of the stage II consultation required by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regulations (18 CFR §4.38). Please review the draft application and provide Polarconsult with your written comments no later than March 15 1999. It is important that we receive your comments by this date so we can incorporate them into the draft application and PDEA before we file it with the Commission. In addition to comments on the draft application and PDEA, we are requesting preliminary terms, conditions, and recommendations from the resource agencies for the PDEA. The draft application and PDEA have been distributed to the parties on the attached mailing list. If you need additional copies, please let us know. Please call us as soon as possible if you have any questions concerning the documents. Thank you for your comments and interest in the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. Sincerely, y~;/~ Daniel Hertrich, PE cc: Nan Allen Brian Anderson Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle John Bregar Lois Cashell, Secretary Emil Christiansen Wayne Dolezal Walter Ebell Christopher Estes Linda Freed U. Gross Steven Hom Don Kohle Shirley Macke Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Prokosh Bennie Rinehart Tim Rumfelt Tim Smith Brad Smith Rita Stevens Dan Vos Charles Walls Gary Wheeler John Williams Jennifer Wing • 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 - • • - • • • • • • • • • - - - - - polarconsult alaska, inc. Project No. 11561-000 I=IIJGINEERS • SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS Old Harbor Project September 14, 1998 To: PARTICIPANTS Subject: Scoping Document 1 The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) proposes to construct and operate the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. The project would be located on Kodiak Island, near Old Harbor, Alaska, partially within the boundaries of the Kodiak Island National Wildlife Refuge. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and Commission regulations, Polarconsult, as the agent for AVEC, will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) for the project and submit it to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Polarconsult solicited comments from appropriate federal, state, and local resource agencies, the public, and other interested parties through the scoping process. Scoping Document 1, which was issued on April 10, 1998, includes a brief description of the proposed action, potential alternatives, a list of preliminary environmental issues identified, a preliminary schedule for preparation of the EA, and the mailing list for the project. Based on the review of the comments received, no changes to Scoping Document 1 are needed. We will prepare the EA based on the outline and issues identified in Scoping Document 1. If you have any questions on this matter, please call Dan Hertrich at 907-258-2420. ;;~~ Daniel Hertrich, PE cc: Nan Allen Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle John Bregar Lois Cashell, Secretary Emil Christiansen Wayne Dolezal Walter Ebell Christopher Estes Linda Freed U. Gross Steven Hom Don Kohle Shirley Macke Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Muehlenhardt Gary Prokosh Bennie Rinehart Tim Rumfelt Tim Smith Brad Smith Rita Stevens Dan Vos Charles .Walls Gary Wheeler John Williams Jennifer Wing • 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420. TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 .. • • • • • • • • • • • - • .. - .. .. .. JOHN WILLIAMS 12770 SW FOOTHILL DR. PORTLAND, ORE 97225 503-626-5736, FAX-503-641-2093 JUNE 1, 1998 Mr. Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult Alaska Suite 310 Anchorage, AK, 99593 SCOPING COMMENTS, OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT, No. 11561 Dear Mr. Hertrich: I am a researcher for LASER, a labor-affiliated group, which has many members who work, live, hunt, fish and seek recreation with their families, in the vicinity of the proposed project. Laser is concerned at this time about the project's causing wetlands losses, noise, impacts on the drainage basin and the aquatic species therein, and the socio-economic impacts from this project. LASER urges that a Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) analysis be conducted under appropriate Fish & Wildlife criteria, to calculate the Habitat Units (HUs) at the project site, both before and after project constmction and operation. We urge no net loss of HUs. Please send the EAlDEIS, and related correspondence, to my address above. Yours, John Williams CC: FERC /l j //\./t~'-jiC/'.y . / RECEIVED Dale: (9/;; fj?> polarconsult alaska, inc . • ENGINEERS· SURVEYORS· ENERGY CONSULTANTS specializing in energy conservation systems CONVERSATION RECORD • - - DATE: May 27,1998 PROJECT: Old Harbor Project TIME: 2:00PM CONTACT: Dan Voss COMPANY: Nmfs PHONE#: FAX#: Taken By: Daniel Hertrich SUBJECT: Stream Gauge at Intake Site • SUMMARY: I mentioned to Dan Voss that the stream gauge that was at the intake site was damaged • • and subsequently removed. I said that I didn't recall discussing that stream gauge during the agency meeting. Dan Voss conferred with Wayne Dolezal and they agreed that a new gauge should be installed at the intake site. I agreed to install one at the same time we install the gauge at the canyon of the Barling Bay Creek Tributary. • .. • - - - - - • • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service 222 W. 7th Avenue. #43• Anchorage. Alaska 99513-7577 • May 15. 1998 Daniel Henrich .. Polarconsult Alaska. Inc. 1503 W. 33,d Avenue #310 Anchorage, AK 99503 .. .. RE: Old Harbor FERC License Number 11561-000 Scoping Comments and Request for Additional Studies Dear Mr. Henricb: .. RE""~~~;:D ~~tc ~/ze/9? • National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has thoroughly reviewed your scoping documents which included fisheries and hydrology studies. Additionally, NMFS panicipaled in a site visit on May 12. 1998 and a scoping meeting on May 14, 1998. The site visit and following meeting were well organized and very infonnative. NMFS has several comments and recommendations. • In the NMFS letter dated March 14, 1996. we requested. " ... surveys to enumerate adult spawning populations. juvenile studies to describe rearing habitat use. and mapping of spawning habitat. Flow studies of these drainages must also be done to describe the relative changes of the project on naturally-occurring flow patterns." • In order to address this request. the fisheries and hydrology information presented in the document needs to be augmented. The primary questions that should be answered arc: • A. How much salmon production (migration. spawning. incubation and rearing habitats) will be lost in Barling Creek Tributary due to the diversion? • B. How much salmon production (migration, spawning. incubation and rearing habitats) will be gained in Lagoon Creek due to the diversion? • In order to answer these questions NMFS recollllllends: -A stream gage be placed below the canyon in Barling Creek Tributal)'. -Cross sections are done in Barling Creek Tributary. - -Additional cross sections are done in Lagoon Creek down to salt water influence. - -Flows and dry sections are correlated for Barling and Lagoon Creeks. -Adequate spawning surveys are conducted during appropriate times for pinks. chum and coho salmon on both streams when there is adequate water ror passage. - --Juvenile sampling surveys should include the canyon section ofBarlillg Creek Tributary. • - • • dry sections at different flow regimes and juvenile sampling locations . - -Analysis of Barling and Lagoon Creeks should include natural and predicted project conditions for: Flows Dry stream channel (migration impacts) Spawning area Incubation area (based on fall and winter base flows) • Fish production The Environmental Assessment should also include: • -Detailed construction plans that include culverts, bridge plans, diversion structure, powerhouse tailrace, etc. Considerations should include adequate culverts, drainage on bridge approach, erosion prevention along pipeline, and a tailrace design that doesn't attract fish. • -A comprehensive erosion control and revegetation plan with specific procedures and metltods. Include scale drawings when appropriate . .. -Timing for in water construction. -Maintenance timing . • -Analysis should include ATV access, restrictions and impacts. -A detailed monitoring plan that includes adult salmon escapement, flow monitoring and cross section analysis. • Thank you for the opportunity to comment. • PMeanne L. Hanson ~• Acting Field Office upervisor Habitat Conservation Division - NMFS Contact: Daniel J. Vos cc: FERC, USFWS, EPA. DGC. ADFG, ADEC -Anchorage -Applicant - - - - - Publisher's Affidavit • - - • • • • • • • - • - - • UNITED STATES OF AMERICA State of Alaska SS: -4117 NOTICE OF INTENT'TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING MEETING AND A SITE VISIT (APRil 22. 1998) Blling Code 671Nl1-M United Stat8$ of America Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Ala..VI. EkIcttic Cooperative ProjeCt No. 1156' AIaIIIa The Energy Policy Act of ll1e2 don appli cants 10 prepare llleir own E~1l Aa __I (EA) lot hydroponr projects and file it with the Federal EIMH"gY Regulatory Com mission (Commission) IIong with their license application as pan of tha applicant..prepared EA (APEA) prOC8$S. The Alaska Village Elec tric Cooperative (AVEC)lntands to prepare an EA to Iile with the Comml$$ion lor the pro poSed Old Harbor Hydroelac1ric Project. no. 11561. AVEC will hold two scoping meeting$, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 01 '969, to identity the scope 01 .....vironmental issues thai should be analy~ed in the EA. Seeping Meetings The times and locations 01 the two seoping meetings ara: Public Meeting Data: Tuesday, May 12. 1998 Piece: City Hall. Old Harbor. Alaska Tima: 7:00 p.m. Agency Meeting Date: Thursday. May 1 ... 1998 Place: Division 01 SeniOrs Conlerance Room. 380' C Sireet, Suha 3'OA (Fronlier Building) Anchoraga. AlaSka Time: 9:00 a.m. At Ihe $COping mealings. AVEC WIll: (1 )5um marize Ille environmantal issuas lenlatively identified lor analysiS in !he EA: (2) oulline any resources they beliave would nOl require a de tailed analysis; (3) identify r"$OOabie ahema tivas to be addresSed in the EA; (") solicit Irom tlla meating palliclpanls all available inlorma tion. especially quantilative deta. on the re sources all$$ue; and (5) ancourage stalements ! _,It lrom axperts and lhe public on ;SSU8$ that should ba analyzad in the EA. . Allinterasted individuals. OI'lIani~alions. and agancies are Invhed and encouragad 10 attend ailhe, or bOlh meatings 10 assisl in identifying and claritying lhe seope 01 anvlronmental is sues the I should be analyzed in the EA To halp locus discussions al Ihe meellngs, AVEC prepared and diSlribuled an Initial Slage Consunation Documant (lSCD) on November 13. 1997. and a Scoping Documanl on April 10. 1998. Copies ollhe ISeD and the Scoping Document can be obtained by calling Daniel Hanrlch 01 Polerconsull Alaska. Inc .• AVEC's llganl. al (907) 25&-2420. Copies 01 belh doCu manls will also be available al bOth seoping meelings. S~e Viii! For Ihose who inland 10 particlpata in seoping. AVEC wHI alSo conducl a sita vis~ to _ tha proposed Old Harbor Projecl on Tuesday. May 12. 1998. Those attending must meal at I, the undersigned, being first duly sworn, depose and say: I am editor or publisher of the Kodiak MIRROR, a daily newspaper published at Kodiak, TI'drd Judicial Division, State of Alaska, and that the annexed printed notice was published in said newspaper in issues of the following dates: x State of Alaska. My Commission expires C(.-s:.:X?....C / tha Sitkalidek lodge in Old Harbor. Alaska al -10:00 a.m. Wa will promptly leeve lor Iha , project slta, via halicoplar. Those baing Shunled by helicopter to the prOject sita may need 10 sign a waive, 01 liability 'egarding heli coptar use. Because of Ihe ,emOlaness and R F r: r, PI T'f diffieultv nf """"---' __...........6 .~ • -Dc: _ iJ.flt '? Jq '5' I I I• • • I I I • .. .. .. .. .. • I I • BILLING CODE 6717-01-M UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Alaska village Electric cooperative ) Project No. 11561 ) Alaska NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING MEETINGS AND A SITE VISIT (April 14, 1998) The Energy policy Act of 1992 allows applicants to prepare their own Environmental Assessment (EA) for hydropower projects and file it with the Federal Energy Regulatory commission (Commission) along with their license application as part of the applicant-prepared EA (APEA) process. The Alaska Village Electric cooperative (AVEC) intends to prepare an EA to file with the commission for the proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project, No. 11561. AVEC will hold two seoping meetings, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, to identify the scope of environmental issues that shOUld be analyzed in the EA. seoping aeeting_ The times and locations of the two scoping meetings are: hbUg aeetlDlJ Agenel' aeetiDq Date: Place: TUesday, May 12, 1998 City Hall Old Harbor, Alaska Thursday, May 14, 1998 Divisi~n of Seniors Conference Room 3601 C Street, Suite 310A Time: 7:00 P.M. (Frontier Building) Anchorage, Alaska 9:00 A.M. At the scoping meetings, AVEC will: (1) summarize the environmental issues tentatively identified for analysis in the EA; (2) outline any resources they believe would not require a detailed analysis; (3) identify reasonable alternatives to be addressed in the EAI (4) solicit from the meeting participants all available information, especially quantitative data, on the resources at issue; and (5) encourage statements from experts and the public on issues that should be analyzed in the EA. All interested individuals, organizations, and agencies are invited and encouraged to attend either or both meetings to assist in identifying and clarifying the scope of environmental issues that should be analyzed in the EA. OC-I\-12 Project No. 11561 - 2 To help focu~ discussions at the meetings, AVEC prepared and distributed an InJtial Stage Consultation Document (ISCD) on November 13, 1997, and a Scoping Document on April 10, 1998. copies of the ISCD and the Scoping Document can be obtained by calling Daniel Hertrieh of Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., AVEC's agent, at (907) 258-2420. Copies of both documents will also be available at both scoping meetings. till nI1.t For those who intend to participate in seoping, AVEC will also conduct a site visit to the proposed Old Harbor Project on Tuesday, May 12, 1998. Those attending must meet at the Sitkalidak Lodge in Old Harbor, Alaska at 10:00 A.M. We will promptly leave for the project site, via helicopter. Those being shuttled by helicopter to the project site may need to sign a waiver of liability regarding helicopter use. Because of the remoteness and difficulty of ground access at the project site, those attending the site visit should be physically fit and must wear appropriate clothing and footgear. The site visit should be completed by 4:30 P.M. Participants must provide their own sack lunches. To plan on helicopter use in advance of the visit, AVEC must identify the number of individuals interested in the site visit. Therefore, if you intend on visiting the proposed project site, you must register ~ith Daniel Hertrich at (907) 258-2420, no later than April 24, 1998. If inclement weather prevents a site visit on May 12, the alternate date will be May 13 at the same time and location. M.eting Procedur•• The meetings will be conducted according to the procedures used at Commission scoping meetings. Because this meeting will be a NEPA scoping meeting under the APEA process, the Commission will not conduct a NEPA scoping meeting after the application and draft EA are filed with the Commission. Both scoping meetings will be recorded by a stenographer or tape recorder, and will become part of the formal record of the proceedings for this project. Those who choose not to speak during the scoping meetings may instead submit written comments on the project. written comments must be submitted by June 15, 1998, and should be mailed to: Mr. Daniel Hertrich, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. All correspondence should show the following caption on the first page: • polarconsult alaska, inc. -. 'GINEERS • SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS • - To: PARTICIPANTS-Subject: Scoping Document 1 and Scoping Meeting Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project April 8, 1998 Attached is Scoping Docwnent 1 for the Old Harbor Project. Please note the following: • • Volwne 2 (Appendix D) is exactly the same as Volwne 2 (Appendix B) of the Initial Stage Consultation Docwnent (see Scoping Docwnent table of contents). Volwne 2-is not included. Please contact me if you would like a copy. • The site visit and public meeting are scheduled for May 12, 1998 in Old Harbor. • The agency meeting is scheduled for May 14, 1998 in Anchorage. - Please refer to the scoping document for details. FERC representatives will be present at the site visit and both meetings. • Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions . • ;;:J)&~-Daniel Hertrich, PE cc: • -Nan Allen Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle John Bregar • Lois Cashell, Secretary Emil Christiansen -Wayne Dolezal - --- 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 Waiter Ebell Christopher Estes Linda Freed U. Gross Steven Hom Don Kohle Shirley Macke Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Muehlenhardt Gary Prokosh Bennie Rinehart Tim Rwnfelt Diane Sheridan Tim Smith Brad Smith Rita Stevens Charles Walls Gary Wheeler • polarconsult alaska, inc. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS .. Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project .. April 1, 1998 To: PARTICIPANTS .. Subject: Study Plans Based on [SCD Comments - Dear Secretary, The following are the study plans in response to the comments received from the Alaska .. Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the Initial Stage Consultation Document (ISCD). The requests submitted can be summarized as follows: • • 1. Perform a breeding bird survey that is conducted in the spring/summer of 1998 with special emphasis on determining whether Klttlitz or marbled murrelets nest within the Project area. • 2. Conduct fish surveys similar to the past surveys on an annual basis during the period of the preliminary permit. Goals are to determine the frequency and extent • that the tributary to Barling Bay Creek is dry in its lower reaches, determine the relative value of this stream for salmon usage, and to determine the upper extent of fish presence in the stream. 3. Item 2 be done for Lagoon creek also. Specifically however, installation of a stream gauging station is recommended near the Projects outfall as soon as possible.• 4. Outline and discuss expected daily, monthly, and yearly fluctuations induced by power/demand changes in Project's discharge to Lagoon creek with emphasis on • subsequent impacts to fish. S. Stream channel cross sections profiled with reference to their location along the .. reach for Lagoon creek. Also, a map showing the locations of each stream reach and the surveyed cross sections . -To satisfy #1, AVEC proposes to have Rich Macintosh perform a breeding bird survey sometime in June. -To satisfy #2, Lonnie White of White Fisheries will conduct two fish surveys that will assess the type of fish, approximate number of fish, and extent of fish population. One survey will be performed in August and the other in September. His survey will include .. both the Barling Bay Creek tributary and Lagoon Creek . .. To satisfy #3, a stream gauge will be installed by Polarconsult near the location of the powerhouse on Lagoon Creek sometime around the 1st of May. The stream gauge will be • 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258·2419 - • Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project .. left in place until late summer. Two flow measurements will be taken, one upon installation of the stream gauge, and another upon removal of the gauge. To satisfy #4, an analysis will be performed on the fluctuations in the output of the• project along with their corresponding impacts to the stream flow regimes and water depths. This analysis will be contained in the scoping document using estimated flows in Lagoon Creek and will be updated around late summer using flow data from the stream • gauging in Lagoon Creek. .. The approximate location of the existing stream cross section information gathered thus • far will be shown on a map. Additional stream cross sections will be taken of Lagoon Creek. These locations will also be put on the map. A drawing showing the profile information will be made. There will be approximately 20 new cross sections measured along Lagoon Creek from the powerhouse to the mouth at the salt lagoon. This will work will be done in the first week of May. • Sincerely, • P~/~ Daniel Hertrich, PE • .. • '. - - - .. • - cc: Nan Allen Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle John Bregar Lois CasheJ/. Secretary Emil Christiansen Wayne Dolezal Walter Ebell Christopher Estes Linda Freed U. Gross Steven Hom Don Kohle Shirley Macke Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Muehlenhardt Arlene Murphy Gary Prokosh Bennie Rinehart Tim Rumfelt Rita Stevens Tim Smith Brad Smith Charles Walls Gary Wheeler I .. polarconsult alaska, inc. ~NGINEERS • SURVEYORS· ENERGY CONSULTANTS Project No. 11561-000• Old Harbor Project March 6, 1998 - To: PARTICIPANTS Subject: Proposed Study Plans Based on ISCD Comments Dear Secretary, • The following outlines the proposed study plans in response to the comments received from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on -the Initial Stage Consultation Document (ISCD). The requests submitted can be summarized as follows:• 1. Perform a breeding bird survey that is conducted in the spring/summer of 1998 with special emphasis on determining whether Kittlitz or marbled murrelets nest • within the Project area. 2. Conduct fish surveys similar to the past surveys on an annual basis during the period of the preliminary permit. Goals are to determine the frequency and extent • that the tributary to Barling Bay Creek is dry in its lower reaches, determine the relative value of this stream for salmon usage, and to determine the upper extent of fish presence in the stream. 3. Item 2 be done for Lagoon creek also. Specifically however, installation of a stream gauging station is recommended near the Projects outfall as soon as possible. 4. Outline and discuss expected daily, monthly, and yearly fluctuations induced by power/demand changes in Project's discharge to Lagoon creek with emphasis on subsequent impacts to fish . • .. 5. Stream channel cross sections profiled with reference to their location along the reach for Lagoon creek. Also, a map showing the locations of each stream reach and the surveyed cross sections . .. To satisfy #1, AVEC proposes to have Rich Macintosh perform a breeding bird survey sometime in May. To satisfy #2, Lonnie White of White Fisheries will conduct two fish surveys that will assess the type of fish, approximate number of fish, and extent of fish population. One - -survey will be performed in August and the other in September. His survey will include both the Barling Bay Creek tributary and Lagoon Creek. To satisfy #3, a stream gauge will be installed by Polarconsult near the location of the powerhouse on Lagoon Creek sometime around the 15t of May. The stream gauge will be• • 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258·2419 • • Project No. 11561-000 • Old Harbor Project left in place until late summer. Two flow measurements will be taken, one upon installation of the stream gauge, and another upon removal of the gauge. To satisfY #4, an analysis will be performed on the fluctuations in the output of the project along with their corresponding impacts to the stream flow regimes and water depths. This analysis will be contained in the scoping document using estimated flows in .. Lagoon Creek and will be updated around late summer using flow data from the stream gauging in Lagoon Creek. • The approximate location of the existing stream cross section information gathered thus • far will be shown on a map. Additional stream cross sections will be taken of Lagoon Creek. These . locations will also be put on the map. A drawing showing the profile information will be made. There will be approximately 20 new cross sections measured along Lagoon Creek from the powerhouse to the mouth at the salt lagoon. This will work will be done in the first week of May . .. • p:t;~ • Daniel Hertrich, PE • • .. • - .. • • cc: Nan Allen Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle John Bregar Lois Cashell, Secretary Emil Christiansen Wayne Dolezal Walter Ebell Christopher Estes Linda Freed U. Gross Steven Hom Don Kohle Shirley Macke Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Muehlenhardt Arlene Murphy Gary Prokosh Tim Rumfelt Kelly Simeonoff, Jr. Tim Smith Brad Smith Charles Walls Gary Wheeler .. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C 20426 fEB 2 5 1998 .. OFFICE OF HYDROPOWER LICENSING Project No. 11561-Alaska -Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.- To the Party Addressed: - -On January 8, 1998, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) issued a notice of Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.'s (AVEC) request to use alternative procedures in filing a license application for its Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. In support of the use of alternative licensing procedures, AVEC demonstrated that they have made an effort to-contact all resource agencies, citizens' groups, and others affected by the AVEC's proposal; and that a consensus exists that the use of an alternative procedure is appropriate in this case. AVEC also submitted a Communications Protocol that is supported-by most interested entities. The notice requested any additional comments on AVEC's proposal to use alternative procedures . .. We received no comment letters in response to our notice; In light of the support shown for using an alternative.. licensing process, I believe that the use of alternative licensing procedures would be appropriate in this case because it would foster improved communications, participation, and -cooperation among the participants, and ultimately simplify and expedite the licensing process. Therefore, I am approving AVEC's request to follow alternative licensing procedures in accordance with the Commission's Regulations for Licensing Hydroelectric Projects ~I and the Communications Protocol submitted to the -Commission on October I, 1998. .. Please call Nan Allen at (202) 219-2938 if you have any questions. Sincerely, .., ~/'-1fr~~-,--· )A-i'h Carol L. Sampson Director -Office of Hydropower Licensing cc: Public Files • ~I 81 FERC ~61,103 (1997). - - TONYKNOWLE~GOVERNOR• • 333 RASPBERRY ROADDEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99518-1599 PHONE: (907) 344-0541 HABITAT AND RESTORATION DIVISION - February 17, 1998 • -Mr. Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult Alaska Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 • Dear Mr. Hertrich: Re: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project -Initial Stage Consultation • FERC N2 11561-000 The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the November 13, 1997 Initial • Stage Consultation Document. The report accurately describes what we understood the project proposal to be. We wish to take this opportunity to identify additional information that will be needed during the environmental assessment for this project. • Hydrologic information collected to date has centered on the East and West Forks of Hydro Creek (also referred to as Barling Creek), the Barling Bay tributary from which water will be withdrawn to ,. operate the hydroelectric facility. Although a limited amount of spawning area data have been collected for Lagoon Creek, the hydroelectric project's discharge receiving water body, almost no information is available concerning its stream flow. To be able to assess pre and post project affects ., on this system, adequate baseline data are needed. We recommend that a gauging station be established at or near the project's outfall as soon as possible to begin gathering this information. Stream channel cross section profiles and stream flow data for the Lagoon Creek stream reaches identified in Table 3 of the October 8, 1996 Fishery Report for those reaches, located downstream of - the project's outfall will also be needed. A map depicting the loc:::.tion of each strealIl reach should be included and the site of each channel profile station should documented. In addition, we request an .. • assessment be completed of whether the project's water discharge will follow a power demand cycle resulting in multi-daily or seasonal fluctuations in stream flow and the predicted magnitude of those fluctuations . We appreciate the opportunity to comment and look forward to the upcoming site visit during May. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 267-2333. Sincerely,-_ Ot~~ D. ~.'-"(>\ V C. Wayne Dolezal -Habitat Biologist Regionll (907) 267-2285- - 11·K107LH • • ., - • • • • • ., • - - ., - - Mr. Daniel Hertrich -2-February 17, 1998 cc: N. Allen, FERC Contact C. Estes, ADF&G J. McCullough, ADF&G L. Schwarz, ADF&G T. Rumfelt, ADEC G. Wheeler, USFWS-WAES J. Bellinger, Kodiak NWR B. Smith, NMFS L. Freed, KIB E. Ausman, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. • United States Department of the Interior • • IN REPLY REFER TO: WAES • Daniel Hertrich, PE .. • Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 W. 33rd Avenue #310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 • Dear Mr. Hertrich: FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ecological Services Anchorage 605 West 4th Avenue. Room 62 Anchorage. Alaska 99501 FEB 3 1998 Re: Old Harbor Project Project No. 11561-000 • We have reviewed the Initial Stage Consultation Document for the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project and have the following comments. • Our comment letter on the preliminary permit for this project listed several bird species of concern that may nest within the project area. We are concerned that to date no breeding bird surveys • have occurred within the project area to determine ifany of these species are present. We request that a breeding bird survey of the project area be conducted during the spring/summer of 1998. A bird survey ofthe project area was conducted August 9, 1996; however, this survey was • conducted after most birds had dispersed from their nesting areas. We request that special emphasis for the survey be placed on attempting to determine ifKittlitz or marbled murrelets nest within the project area . • We have reviewed the fisheries surveys thus far conducted for the project. We request that similar surveys be conducted on an annual basis during the period of the preliminary permit to• determine the frequency and extent that the tributary to Barling Bay Creek is dry in its lower reaches, to determine the relative value of this stream for salmon spawning and rearing, and to determine the upper extent offish presence in the stream. We also request that the stream be surveyed annually during its low water period (March/April) to determine the extent ofthe dry - stream section. We request that Lagoon Creek also be surveyed annually for the same purposes as the tributary to Barling Bay Creek. - We are also concerned about potential fluctuations in the project's discharge to Lagoon creek. .. Project information should include a discussion of the expected daily, monthly, and yearly fluctuations in discharge to Lagoon Creek. Our concern stems from the possibility of salmon spawning in shallow areas of Lagoon Creek under higher flows only to have the eggs perish when project flows are reduced. If it appears there will be substantial changes in flows on a daily or - • • • - • • • - - - - - • seasonal basis, it may be advisable to discharge project flows into a reservoir where releases to Lagoon Creek can be regulated to avoid rapid fluctuations. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this document. Questions regarding these comments or further coordination should be directed to project biologist Gary Wheeler at (907) 271-2780 . cc: Kodiak NWR Realty NMFS ADFG FERC ,~.-.. --.-.... f._ ,-. r-" , ., /i -: ,J \ .; , , ..... " I , \ " .,, _ .. ... ,r'"• 1 , ~ , !!; ,i• ,.., , TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR .'.. iDEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION l Division of Air and Water Quality Phone: (907) 269-7567 555 Cordova Street Fax: (907) 269-7508 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 ITY: (907) 269-7511 January 16, 1998 - Mr. Daniel Hertrich, PE.. • Polorconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 • Re: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project FERC Project #11561·000 Dear Mr. Hertrich: • I have been assigned to work on the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. rn be handling the 401 Water Quality Certification when your proposed project gets to that point in the review process. • In reviewing the PrQject Schedule in the "Initial Stage Consultation Document, Volume 1," I noticed that you have included 401-WQC and Coastal/Consistency Applications together. This is partly • correct in that they will be processed together. However, there isn't a 401-WQC application per se. To initiate the 401-WQC process, you will have to submit an application for a 404-Permit to the Army Corps of Engineers. The COE's application will serve as the 40 1-WQC application. The COE will then make a determination whether a 404 Permit is required. If a 404-Permit is required, ADEC -has to issue a 401-WQC before the 404-Permit will issued. If you have any questions, please give me a call at the above phone number. • Part of your proposal is to use some of the discharged water from the impulse turbine as a source for drinking water. You will need to have your plan reviewed by ADEC's Division of Environmental• Health, Drinking Water Program. Please contact James Weise, Drinking Water Program Manager, at 269-7647 concerning your proposal to use discharge water as a source for drinking water. -You should also contact Bill Lamoreaux at 269-7523 of ADEC's Anchorage Office of Watershed Development Group, Industrial Discharges, on a plan review for controlling storm water runoff from construction related activities. - - • (DAde WQlold·hr.ltt) cc: James Weise, ADEC/Anchorage - - Sincerely, ~~. Gary L. Saupe Environmental Specialist Rf~F:.VED t~ 1!.~/qg • • • • • • • • I I , ,t I ~ a-I I• BILLING CODE 6717-01-M UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Alaska Village Electric Corporation ) Project 11561-000, AK NOTICE OF ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC CORPORATION'S REQUEST TO USE ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURES IN FILING A LICENSE APPLICATION (January 8, 1998) The preliminary permit holder, Alaska Village Electric Corporation (AVEC), has asked to use an alternative procedure in filing an application for original license for the proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project No. 11561. 1/ AVEC has demonstrated that they have made an effort to contact all resource agencies, Indian tribes, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and others affected by their proposal, and that a consensus exists that the use of an alternative procedure is appropriate in this case. AVEC has also submitted a communication protocol that is supported by most interested entities. The purpose of this notice is to invite any additional comments on AVEC's request to use the alternative procedure, as required under the final rule for Regulations for the Licensing of Hydroelectric Projects. 2J Additional notices seeking comments on the specific project proposal, interventions and protests, and recommended terms and conditions will be issued at a later date. The alternative procedure being requested here combines the prefiling consultation process with the environmental review process, allowing the applicant to complete and file an Environmental Assessment (EA) in lieu of Exhibit E of the license application. This differs from the traditional process, in which the applicant consults with agencies, Indian tribes, and NGOs during preparation of the application for the license and before filing it, but the Commission staff performs the environmental review after the application is filed. The alternative procedure is intended to simplify and expedite the licensing process by combining the prefiling consultation and environmental review processes into a single process, to facilitate greater The 380-kilowatt project would be located on Kodiak Island, near Old Harbor, Alaska, partially within the boundaries of the Kodiak Island National Wildlife Refuge. 81 FERC ! 61,103 (1997).?J ":ae,("'ill _n DC-I\-24 ,,< III g Project No. 11561-000 participation, and to the participants. APPLICANT PREPARED EA On November 13, Consultation Document - 2 improve communication and cooperation among PROCESS AND OLD HARBOR PROJECT SCHEDULE 1997, AVEC distributed an Initial stage for the proposed project to state and federal resource agencies, Indian tribes, and NGOs. AVEC scheduled a consultation meeting and site visit for all interested parties on December 15 and 16, 1997, respectively, to solicit study requests from participants. Notices announcing the meeting and site visit were published locally, as required by Commission regulations. Public scoping meetings are planned for Spring 1998. Based on study requests from the December 15, 1997, meeting, study plans would be developed early in 1998. Studies would be conducted during spring, summer, and fall 1998, as needed. The application, including the applicant-prepared EA, would be filed with the commission on or before March II, 1999, the expiration date of AVEC's preliminary permit. COMMENTS Interested parties have 30 days from the date of this notice to file with the Commission, any comments on AVEC's proposal to use the alternative procedures to file an application for the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. FILING REQUIREMENTS The comments must be filed by providing an original and 8 copies as required by the Commission's regulations to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of the Secretary Dockets -Room lA 888 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20426 All comment filings must bear the heading Alternative Procedure," and include the project (Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project, No. 11561). "Comments on the name and number For further information, please contact Nan Allen of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at 202-219-2938 or E-mail at Nan.Allen@FERC.Fed.US. David P. Boergers Acting Secretary • Publisher's Affidavit • -UNITED STATES OF AMERICA State c f Alaska- -.240 • PUBlIC MEETING NOna: OlD HARBOR PROJECT • FEDeRAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION PROJECT NO, 11561.000 NOnCE OF INTENT TO CONDuCT JOINT MEETING AND SITE VISIT AND REOUEST FOR SCIENTIFIC STUDIES • AIaak.a Village EIecIJ1c ~,Inc.(AVEC) MllIIoId a ai'IgIe jOint pubIic:.Iagency IniIiII Stage ConlIuI!aIlon Meeting and site visit II) inbm intereSl~ pantel about the Old Harbor PrO/'1Ie1!PrniecI). . . Joint PublicfAgency Meeting .' ~Monday, December IS, 1997 • .""'" 1 p.m, Place: Old HaIbor City Hall Old HMIor •AI( . . AII.1nIerasted.indMduaIa. organizations,. and alllWlCiM -.iwited II) attend the II1MIi'1g 10 /aam IIflout the Prc;acI and III8isI h ~II1e ICq)aof~__ IhatShouldbe~ For nMew prior 10 the meeting AVEC diStIl). UIed 10 the Pllrticipanrs II1e "Initial Staoe Consulta lion PacIcage" for this PIlllect Cop;aa of this '*-" menl can be IlCIaIned by C81ing Daniel Henrich of Polarconsul al (907) 258-2420 or they can be otuined diracIIy al!he mael"-.• ~eVlsil ~... Dare: Tuesday. DeCember 16. t997 Tme:9a.m. '.' Place: Old Hamor City Hall . Old HaIbor. AK. AVEC will also conwct a Ue visit: Those at lendrlg must 111M! by 9 am, and Ieawt tor !he PfOJ8CI .site via foot lravel. lhosa attending lhe site VIS4 IIhouId be physically iii and must _r W8mI c:/c:IIhi'!g and boots 5uilable for Slraam crnss--I'lgS (-2' depth). '.' The -rlg wiH be recorded and become a part 01 !he tormal record lor this Proie<:t Anyone .. may submit writlen cornmenlS on lhe Project Canrnenll Shoukl be mailed 10: . Daniel Hertrich Polarconsu. 1503 West33ldAvanue. SuMe3tO Anch""'!I8. AIaSl<a 99503. ,. AN COtr8Spondence Should show !he following capllOll on !he IlrSI page: Old Harbor Pr , ...... PI'Of8CI No. 11561.000. ' . . 0,_" • For lurther information. please COIllael Daniel Hettrich al (907) 258-2420, "". ". " Pub: November 21. 1997. • , \ ' . \. - • SS: I, the undersigned, being first duly sworn, depose and say: I am editor or publisher of the Kodiak MIRROR, a daily newspaper published at Kodiak, Third Judidal Diviz!on, St~te of .\laska, and that the annexed printed notice was published in said newspaper in issues of the following dates: NOVt!Ao/lb~ ;2-1 ) /Clgj! X 1104/ibft/e..L?4/11I'iAA-. signature of Editor or Publisher SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me thiscJ&r day of NOVt~\td;?0) !990 CJ:)cna1?t?<L O.~ NOTARY PUBLIC i7and for the State of Alaska . My Commission expiresCy-.)0 ~;;X!JJ ( 'if 1.1. 'JV I • 2582420POL $96.57 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION • STATE OF ALASKA. THI RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT. Eva H. Kallfroann being first duly sworn on oath - deposes and says that he/she is an advertising representative of • the Anchorage Daily News. a • daily newspaper. That said newspaper has been approved by the Third Judicial Court. Anchorage. Alaska. and it now • • and has been published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Anchorage. Alaska. and it is now and during all said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said • newspaper. That the annexed is a copy of an advertisement as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplemental form) of said newspaper on • Nov. 23! 1997 • • • and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is nor in excess of the rate charged private individuals. ~_\ir\__~~~~~______ ... - - !he State of Alas Third Division. Anchorage. Alaska MY COMMISSION EXPIRES .. ............!?"..f... ,.....;'~ .. a Single iolnt public/agencv Initial Stage Consultolian AVEC will also conduel a sile Meeting and site visit 10 visit. Those allendlng must inform interested parties meet by 9 a.m. and leove for about the Old HarbOr Prolect the proiect slle via fool Irovel. (PrOlect). Those ollending the sile visit "Should be phvsically fit andJoint PubliCI Agellcy Meeting must weor worm clothing and Date: Mon.• December 15.1997 bOots suitable for slream Time: I p.m. . crossings {appro'. 2' depth I. Place, Old HarbOr Cifv Holl Old Harbor, AK The meeting will be recorded and became 0 po rt 01 the All interested Individuals. formal record for this Proiect. '.orga!,llalions, and agencies Anvone may submit written •are InVited to o!!end the meet· comments an 'the Proiect. "09 fa I~rn. about the. Pralect Comments should be 1'I10iled ~~pe0~,s~n~7ra::'.:~:~:nrss:~ to: thol should be analyzed. Doniel Hartrich , '---.For review prIOr to the meet· Polorconsull Public Meeting Notice ing. AVEC distribyted to the 1503 West llrd Avenue partiCipants the "'nitiol Stage Suite 310 Old Harbor Project Consultation Package" tor this Anchorage. Alaska 99503. Federal Energy Re.ulalOlY Project, Copies of this Commission . Project No. 11561..000 ~~:~~nf~nH~ri~t~:ned bv All correspondence .should PolorCOnsult at (901) 258-2420, show Ihe tollowlng coptoon on NOTICE OF INTENT TO or thev Can be obtained direct. the flrsl page: Old Harbor CONDUCT JOINT ME'ETING Iy at the meeting. Prolecf, Proiect No. IlS4HlOO. AND A SITE VISIT MfD REQUEST FOR SCIENTIFIC Site ViSit For turther intormotion. STUDIES \ Dille: Tues., December 16.1997 pleose contact Daniel Herlric~ , TIme: 9a.m. 01 {9071 258·2420.Alaska Village Electric. ClIOI" Ptace: Old HarbOr Citv Hall Pub.: November 23. 1997eroti.e. Inc. IAVEC! will hll!d Old HarbOr. AK II • polarconsult alaska, inc. -"'NGINEERS • SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project November 13, 1997 - To: PARTICIPANTS • Subject: Initial Stage Consultation Document (ISCD) and Meeting Attached you will find the ISCD for the Old Harbor Project. This document contains all • of the infonnation that we have gathered regarding the proposed Project and is being sent to you for review. Since I have previously distributed the environmental studies through progress reports I am not attaching Volume 2 of the IS CD (Appendix B). Please contact -me if you would like a copy of Volume 2. If, after reviewing this document, you have any questions regarding the Project please • • don't hesitate to contact me. If you want to submit comments that are included in the public record or wish to request studies then you will need to do so in writing (refer to communications protocol). • You will have 90 days (until 2116/98) to submit comments regarding the Project. Also, this is the first of two chances to request studies. Study requests are also due 2/16/98. The second chance to request studies will occur when Scoping Document 1 is issued • (approximately 4/1/98). The first Scoping Meeting will occur around 5/1/98. This meeting also includes a site visit. If you can only make one of the site visits I recommend attending the Scoping Meeting site visit instead of the 12116/97 one. Daniel Hertrich, PE • .. 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258·2419 Arlene Murphy Gary Prokosh Tim Rumfelt Kelly Simeonoff, Jr. Tim Smith Brad Smith Charles Walls Gary Wheeler .. - - .. .. cc: Nan Allen Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle John Bregar Lois Cashell, Secretary Emil Christiansen Wayne Dolezal Walter Ebell Christopher Estes Linda Freed U. Gross Steven Hom Don Kohle Shirley Macke Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Muehlenhardt .. • polarconsult alaska, inc. -'-"JGINEERS • SURVEYORS' ENERGY CONSULTANTS Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project October 1, 1997- LOIS CASHELL, SECRETARY FEDERAL ENERGY REGULA TOR Y COMMISSION -888 FIRST STREET NE WASHINGTON DC 20426 - Subject: Waiver Request -Alaska Village Electric Corporation (AVEC) and various federal, state, local agencies and special interest groups have agreed to participate in the Applicant Prepared -Environmental Assessment (APEA) process for the licensing the Old Harbor Project, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) Project No. 11561-000 (Project). The intent of the agencies to participate is evidenced by the receipt of the agency • approval and support form's for the NEPA consolidated process. This communication .. seeks the cooperation and participation of the Commission in the APEA process for the Old Harbor Project as well as the waiver of certain requirements of the traditional Commission licensing process. A VEC and the federal, state. local agencies and special interest groups have signed a -Communications Protocol. This Communications Protocol is intended to satisfy the ex parte rules of the Commission and to provide a guideline for communications and coordination among the participants involved in preparation of the Environmental Assessment. A copy of the Communications Protocol is attached hereto. - Coordinating preparation of the application and environmental review processes will .. • require some modification to the Commission's regulations. Accordingly, AVEC requests waiver of regulations that may be inconsistent with the coordinated process. As demonstrated below, AVEC submits that good cause exists for granting the requested waiver. .. BACKGROUND On March 11. 1996 the Commission issued to AVEC a preliminary permit for the Project, setting the License Application filing deadline no later than March 11, 1999. A VEC began it's compliance with the Commission's pre-filing consultation requirements - by contacting agencies and performing studies based on their comments on the Project. Old harbor began it's compliance with it's communications protocol and pre-filing - consultation requirements by preparing the Initial Stage Consultation Package (ISCD) • • 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258·2419 II • - Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project which will be submitted following the response on the waiver request. Included in with -the IS CD will be Scoping Document 1 (SD 1). AVEC will then; in consultation with the Commission, hold the Scoping Meeting with -the public and state and federal resource agencies. Comments, as well as any request for scientific studies, will be due no later than thirty (30) days after the scoping meeting. A VEC will file all review comments and additional study requests with the Commission - and integrate these comments into the NEP A Scoping Document 2 (SD2). AVEC will prepare and distribute SD2 and prepare workplans for completing any additional studies. --Pursuant to the workplans, A VEC will conduct the studies necessary to prepare a draft license application and begin preparing the draft EA. Once the studies have been completed and the results released, the agencies and public will have sixty (60) days in which to comment on the study results and request additional scientific studies. This opportunity to request additional scientific studies will replace the traditional opportunity • to request studies after the license application is filed [see 18 CFR §4.32 (b) (7)]. In preparing the draft license application, AVEC will substitute the draft EA for an• Exhibit E to its License Application, see 18 CFR §4.38(f) & 4.41(f). When completed, A VEC will distribute the draft license application and the draft EA at the same time for review and comment. The documents will provide the information required in the -second-stage consultation package: a draft License Application, study and information gathering results, and a written request for review and commene. See 18 CFR -§4.38(c)(4). The draft EA will incorporate the results of AVEC's studies, including any additional studies, together with any required measures to address environmental affects. Preliminary comments, including draft recommendations and mandatory license terms and conditions or prescriptions, will be due ninety (90) days after A VEC distributes the • draft license application and draft EA for review. See 18 CFR §4.38(c)(5). AVEC will arrange additional public meetings and site visits as needed2• Based on the comments, recommendations, terms and conditions and prescriptions received, AVEC will finalize -the license application and revise the draft EA. AVEC will then file its License Application, including the revised draft EA, with the -Commission, completing second-stage consultation. See 18 CFR §4.38(c)(l0). Throughout the coordinated process and pursuant to the Communications Protocol,- I AVEC intends to submit its application to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation for water quality certification under Section 40 I of the Clean Water Act, 33 USC § 1341, at the same time it -distributes the draft EA and draft License Application. See 18 CFR § 4.38(f)(7)(i). 2 If the written comments demonstrate substantive disagreement, additional meetings will be held in compliance with FERC's requirements for dispute resolution during second-stage consultation (18 C,FR § • 4.38(c)(6) -(8» . .. • .. Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project .. .. information, including summaries of all coordination meetings, transcripts of public meetings, conference call reports, periodic progress reports, and contact logs documenting verbal communication will be maintained on file with the Commission and will be available to the public at the offices of A VEC's consultant: -Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 W 33rd Ave #310 Anchorage AK 99503 -After AVEC files its license application, the Commission will conduct an adequacy review. The Commission will also issue public notice of acceptance of the license application and the Applicant Prepared Draft EA The notice will solicit interventions • and provide sixty (60) days for submitting comments and final recommendations and mandatory license terms and conditions or prescriptions. After receiving these comments • and mandatory conditions, the Commission will issue the staff's Draft EA The • Commission will provide thirty (30) (or forty five (45) ifFERC section 10 applies) days for submitting comments and recommendations on the staffs Draft EA At that time, the Commission will institute the Federal Power Act Section 100) process as necessary. See 18 CFR §4.34(b) & (e). The Commission will then complete and issue the final EA Complete the Section 100) process, and issue an order on AVEC's License Application. • REQUEST FOR WAIVER • AVEC respectfully requests that the Commission waive Sections 4.32(b)(7), 4.34(b), 4.41 (f) and 4.38(f) of its regulations, to the extent that these requirements are inconsistent with the coordinated license application and environmental review process. • Section 4.32 (b)(7) should be waived to the extent it requires the Commission to issue public notice of tendering of the license application and permits interested parties to request additional scientific studies be performed after the License Application is filed.-Under the coordinated process, the substantive elements of this notice and comment procedure will be completed prior to filing the License Application. Interested parties will have the opportunity to comment on SD 1 and, at the same time, also request studies -in addition to those requested during the first stage consultation process. .. Section 4.34(b) should be waived to the extent that it requires the Commission to issue a Notice that the application is now ready for environmental analysis (NREA), which would usually initiate the environmental review process and provide sixty (60) days for agencies to submit initial comments, recommendations, and mandatory terms and -.. conditions or prescriptions. Under the coordinated process, agencies will have submitted preliminary recommendations and mandatory terms and conditions or prescriptions upon • • • - Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project -review of the Draft License Application and Applicant Prepared EA. Thus, when AVEC files its License Application and revised Draft EA, the environmental analysis will be • almost complete. recommendations, AVEC will have already incorporated those preliminary comments, and mandatory terms and conditions or prescriptions in the application. Rather than issuing a NREA, following its adequacy review, the III Commission will notice the filing of the License Application and the Revised Draft EA. That notice will solicit interventions, final comments, recommendations, and mandatory license terms and conditions or prescriptions. After the Commission receives final -recommendations, mandatory terms and conditions or prescriptions, staff will issue its Draft EA and the Commission will again receive comments before finalizing the EA. III Finally, as stated above, the EA will contain most of the environmental reports and other information required in an Exhibit E as outlined in Section 4.41(f). While seeking waiver .. of Section 4.41 (f), A VEC is aware that it must file with the Commission any information typically included in the application, but not typically included in an EA. Similarly AVEC seeks waiver of Section 4.38(f) to the extent it requires documentation of the three • stage consultation process and a discussion of consistency with comprehensive plans . Under the Communications Protocol, throughout the coordinated process, AVEC will document agency and public consultation in its monthly progress reports. Rather than .. documenting the consultation process in the application, A VEC will include a summary of the three-stage consultation process in the License Application and make available the progress reports to entities upon request. Thus, in so much as Section 4.41(f) and 4.38(f) .. would impose unnecessary duplicative requirements on A VEC, they should be waived . AVEC maintains that good cause exists for granting the requested waivers. Coordinating the environmental review and application preparation processes will result in a more efficient and comprehensive review of the Project. Advancing requests for information that the public, federal and state resource agencies and the Commission make before the -application is filed will improve the quality of the environmental information developed about the Projecrl. Allowing the public and state and federal resources agencies to review and comment on application related material simultaneously with the EA will reduce the time and effort associated with Project review. Final recommendations and mandatory license terms and conditions and prescriptions will not be solicited until after the final -License Application and Revised Draft EA are made available. Further, commission staff will issue a draft and final EA before completing the environmental review process for the Project. Integrating preparation of the EA and the License Application will change - J AVEC recognizes that FERC retains authority under section 4.32(g) of its regulations to request -additional infonnation from AVEC throughout the process. Prior to filing the License Application and formal invocation of Section 4.32(g), AVEC voluntarily agrees to submit to that authority. - III • - Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project the scheduling of some events, however, no major consultation requirement will be - omitted. CONCLUSION - WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, AVEC respectfully requests that you grant the waivers described herein pursuant to your authority under 18 CFR §375.314(c)(4) & -(c)(9). - -Further AVEC, respectfully requests waiver of any other provisions of part 4 of the regulations that might otherwise conflict with the coordinated application and environmental review process described herein. • Daniel Hertrich, CE • - - - .. .. - • - cc: Nan Allen Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle John Bregar Lois Cashell, Secretary Emil Christiansen Wayne Dolezal Walter Ebell Christopher Estes Linda Freed U. Gross Steven Hom Don Kohle Shirley Macke Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Muehlenhardt Arlene Murphy Gary Prokosh Tim Rumfelt Kelly Simeonoff, Jr. Tim Smith Brad Smith Charles Walls Gary Wheeler • polarconsult alaska, inc. r-"JGINEERS -SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS -Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project October 1, 1997- LOIS CASHELL, SECRETARY FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION -888 FIRST STREET NE WASHINGTON DC 20426 -Subject: Acceptance ofCommunications Protocol and NEP A Consolidated Process -Dear Secretary, Alaska Village Electric Corporation (AVEC) expressed its intent to prepare an ,Applicant -Prepared Environmental Assessment (APEA) in place of an Exhibit E for the License Application it will prepare during the preliminary permit term for Project No. I 1561-000. The letter ofintent was filed with the Commission on September 12, 1996. Commission• staff requested A VEC seek approval from the state and federal resource agencies regarding the APEA process and communications during this process. -With the following exceptions, all of the approval forms have been signed. -ADEC Exxon Valdez Trustee Council This council is deferring to agencies. They have stated that they don't have a role in this area.-Department of Trans po ration Will not sign but say go ahead with the APEA process anyway . • Division of Governmental Coordination This agency doesn't have a role in decision making directly. They defer to the individual -agencies in this matter. U.S. Corps of Engineers-They state that their expected level of involvement in the project does not require signing the agreement form. -Alaska Department ofFish and Game Have not signed the form yet but agree with the reVISIons m the communications protocol. -- - - 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 • - Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project Department of Environmental Conservation -Have stated that they will sign the form but have not received it yet. Environmental Protection Agency -Have not received a response yet. U.S. Department of the Interior - States that BLM doesn't have involvement in the land issue due to lack of ownership. -If the Commission has any questions for these agencies you may wish to contact them directly. The attached list of interested parties includes numbers and addresses. -A VEC herein files an original and eight (8) copies of the Agency Approval and Support Request for the APEA process and Communications Protocol approved by the resource management agencies. - Direct any questions to Polarconsult • Sincerely, p~1i:z:;;X Daniel Hertrich, CE - Attached: Revised Communications Protocol • List of Interested Parties Signed Agency Approval Forms (Lois Cashell, Secretary, only) • cc: Nan Allen - Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle - -John Bregar Lois Cashell, Secretary Emil Christiansen Wayne Dolezal Walter Ebell Christopher Estes Linda Freed U. Gross Steven Hom Don Kohle Shirley Macke Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Muehlenhardt Arlene Murphy Gary Prokosh Tim Rumfelt Kelly Simeonoff, Jr. Tim Smith Brad Smith Charles Walls Gary Wheeler - - - • • • • • • • • • • • • I I I I I I I List of I ntcrested Parties Old Harbor Project 10/1/97 Project No. 1\561-000 First Name I~ ~a~~ame ~rg~~iza!ion ~am: _ _ _ JlJep~rtlllentlI)~~ision Address I _________ . C~t __ ~~~ IP{)s~l.c:o~el~or~ ~lione -1'~~~/II~lllber Nan Allen Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE Washingto D.C. I 20426202-219-2938 202-219-2732 Tony Azuyak Old Harbor fribal Council P-O.BoxTI-. OldHarbOr AI<---"99643 907~i86-2215 ~y_ _ R Bel~ng~ U ~!~s~~d WiJC!life Service _ . KodiakNattonil1 Wildlife Refu!i: 13.~g.!J~~~.in ~!~~~~{)~~. Kodi~~':-AI(--_~~!~ ~~?:~~7:.3~~_ 9~7.-487-214.4 Rick Berns City of Old Harbor PO. Box 109 Old Harbor AK 99643 907-286-2204 907-286-2278 Walt C Boyle----Federal EnergyReguJatory Commission ---Portland Regional Office -ioCsw Main Street Suite 905 Portland OR .-.. 97204 503-326-5840 503-326-5857 john Bregar--[.rlvironmentalProtect'ionAgency .-------.---12006AVEMAILSioPECO-Seattle . WA--~IOJ 206-553-1984 206-553-6984 Lois ca.Sh.C.II' Seer Federai .Ener~y RcgUliltory.'c.'.om.miSSi.on . . 8.88 F. irs..t.. S.tr.ee.t.. NE. .. W.".as.h.'.i.n..gtO.· .0,. C.' . 2042.6.-202-.219-2700 2.02.-2.1.9.. -. o. 1..2.5Emil Christiansen Old Harbor Native Corporation PO. Box 71 Old HarbOr['AK 99643 907-286-2286 907-286-2287 Wayne Doiezil A:iaskaDepartment-oTFish and Game h3Raspberry ROad Anchorage AK ,99518:1599267:233:; .267-2464 Walter IEbeli -jarr;jn~Ebelf;BOiger.-andGentry 605 First AveSulie-300 . Seattle' WA -~-'98i04 2Q6.:622-7634-206623=-752r Christopher IEsies .,AliiSkaOePartmeiito{f]sh and-Game' SF-RTS" m RasptJeny Road-Anch-orage 'AK-l--·99518 267:2142--267~2422" L1n.~a --. '_\Ij:.r:~d_ iil:od.iak Isfan.~-I!~~~~.gh-.-..---.__ ._. . '1'-'-__ . Ef~~il!Bar!()~d-=_ K~i~~-~~___-9~6!~ ~7~~~6-9366_ 907-4~6-93.i6~ u. L. Gross Koniag Incorporated 4300 B St Suite 407 Anchorage AK 99503 561-2668 562-5258 Steven . . i-lom--. Department offunspOratiOil---.---_.-_. !Pe'rmiiSOfficer -PO B0XI9690o-.Anchorage AK 99519-6900 266-1508 243-6927 .. - Don . ---... Kohle··----US Corps of Engineers ---POBox 898 ---. Anchorage AK 99506::0898 i53~272r 753-5567~.~ir.·iey J . !-1acke.~_.=-1.J(Del'll~nt()ft~e !nterioi =_.. B~~au ofL~nd ~~n~gem~!I~ Attn 931~=~~W ~~y~#13 ~-.'_.. ]~.h()!'age. A~ 995I3-75~~ ~?~6 271-~~._.. _ _ _ . Brad A. Meiklejohn The Conservation Fund 9850 Hiland Road Eagle Rive AK 99577 694-9060 694-9070 Eric Mey-ers-ADEC Exxon Valdez Trustee Council-' ---645 G Street .----, Anchorage AK 99501 278-SO"i2'"-. 276-717-8- Gary Muehlenhard D:s. Fish and Wildlife Service --." lOll E Tudor Rd Anchorage AK 99503 786-3388' 786-3901 Arlene j\,furphy -DIViSionofGovemmentiiicoordimiilon 3601 C Street, Suite 370--' Anchorage AK 99503-5930 269-7475 561-6134 Gary Prokosh Aiaska"oepartment-ofNaturalResollrces Division of Mining and Wateri-·1anage 360ICStreei-Suite800-_.-Anchorage AK-99503=5936269-&600-562-1384 Tim Rumfelt Department·ofEn-V"i"ronmentaIConserVation---··..··-----555 COl-do-va Street Anchorage A~ """99501 269-7564 269-7508 Kelly Simeonof(j Kodiak AreaNiitiVe'AssoClaiion---3449E RezonoffDr ------Kodiak-AK---99615 907-486-9800 907-486-9898 TIm' Smi~-Alaska Department of Natural Resources-' HistoiTi: Preservation office-360TCStreeiSuite 1278 Anchorage AK 99503-5921 269::S'21' 269:;8908 .. Brad-Smith-US. DepartmentorCommerce;i·fOAA--. NatiomifMarine-FisherYesService -222 West 7th AvenueSulte 43" -A.nchorage AK-99513-7577 Z7T:50~ 271-jOJ(j- Charles Y. WailS--AjaskaVITlageElectrtcCoopera!1ve:inc: 4831 EagieStreet-Anchorage AK-99503-7497561-1818 562-4086 Gary . Wheeler jjS~FTsh-andWirdi]fese.iViCe·-605W4thAve,RoomG-=62--Anchorage AK 99501271-2780 271-2786 Page I of 1 TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR .. 333 RASPBERRY ROAD DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99518-1599 PHONE: (907) 344-0541 .. HABITAT AND RES TORA TlON DIVISION .. September 18, 1997 • Mr. Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Mr. Ausman:• Re: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Communications Protocol FERC N£ 11561-000• .. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the August 22, 1997 revised communications protocol for the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. We appreciate the changes made in response to our recommendations of August 13, 1997. In most aspects, the revised protocol clearly details what is to be done. However, as revised, the topic of ex parte communications within and between resource agencies• contained in newly added Section "I", did not adequately address our concerns. Ex parte communications (18 CFR 385.2201) pertain specifically to• communications with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and do not apply to communications among resource agencies. Our position is that inter/intra agency communications for purposes of such things as identifying information requirements, reviewing project documents for adequacy of the data presented, and formulating agency recommendations and responses to project proposals are not subject to .. the formal. rlocumentation and notification requirements of the public communications protocol. .. Therefore, proposed Section "I" should be deleted and changed to read as shown in Section D of the attached September 18, 1997 mark-up of the August 22, 1997 version to the communications protocol. By adding -the new Section D, a few editorial changes are required in the following sections (i.e., renumbered Sections E, F, G, H, and I, and deletion of the reference to paragraph "I" in renumbered Sections E, F, and G). Further, to clarify exactly what is required under FERC's ex parte rules, and to have a copy readily available we recommend that -a copy of 18 CFR 385.2201 be attached to the protocol. Reference to the attachment can be made in renumbered Section H . .. .. • 11·K107LH • Mr. Earle Ausman -2-September 18, 1997• Two other recommendations include; specifying in Section J of the protocol, that changes be made through written concurrence, and-modifying Section B to include that notices of meetings be published in at least one newspaper having statewide circulation (e.g., Anchorage Daily News) . • We appreciate your commitment to working with us to refine the Old Harbor Hydroelectric communications protocol and thank you for the opportunity to comment. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at either the letterhead address or call me at (907)267-2333. -Sincerely, • f.:~::e¥ Habitat Biologist• Region II Habitat Division Enclosures- cc: N. Allen, FERC Contact C. Estes, ADF&G• T. Rumfelt, ADEC G. Wheeler, USFWS-WAES J. Bellinger, Kodiak NWR B. Smith, NMFS- - • • --- • • • • DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME • HABITAT AND RESTORA TlON DIVISION August 13, 1997 .. Mr. Earle Ausman -Polarconsult Alaska Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, AK 99503 -Dear Mr. Ausman: Re: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Communications Protocol • FERC Nil 11561-000 TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR 333 RASPBERRY ROAD ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99518·1599 PHONE: (907) 344·0541 The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the proposed communications protocol for the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. We appreciate the extensive effort you have • put into preparing a comprehensive process aimed at expediting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) hydroelectric project licensing process including baseline documentation that should lead toward preparation of a meaningful environmental assessment. • We understand that the project sponsor, the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC), proposes to use the FERC applicant prepared environmental assessment process (APEAP) to • address National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements for this venture. Toward that end a proposed communications protocol dated February 7, 1997, was drafted and has since been discussed and amended by several pieces of correspondence. • As it now stands, the evolution of this communications protocol is detailed by the following documents (copies enclosed): 1. Proposed COMMUNICA nONS PROTOCOL Page 1, dated February 7, 1997 Page 2, dated April 9, 1997 Page 3, dated February 7, 1997 - Page 4, dated February 7, 1997 2. April 2, 1997 Meeting Minutes which under item 5 provides some clarification on • Agency ex parte communications . 3. April 9, 1997 letter from Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. which (a) clarifies the intents and purposes for the waiver of 3 conditions of the FERC process, and (b) updates section D of the• Communications Protocol. 4. A flow chart received in July 1997, which depicts the schedule for each part of the APEAP - and identifies the beginning and end dates of the associated milestones or steps in the process . • In most aspects of the current Old Harbor Hydroelectric project proposal, the ADF&G supports and will abide by the consolidation of the NEPA process and the Communications Protocol. .. 11·K107LH• • Mr. Earle Ausman -2- August 13, 1997 • However, two topics remain unclear and must be resolved before we will formally commit to the • procedure. These topics include ex parte communications, and a qualifier somewhere in the procedure concerning potential future changes to the protocol. We also have a few editorial comments. • .. Ex Parte Communications: In addition to the information contained in the meeting minutes of April 2, 1997, the issue of ex parte communications must be further clarified and formally incorporated in the protocol. It was our understanding that except for Old Harbor specific • communications (as explained in Section G of this protocol) with FERC, AVEC, or AVEC's representative, communications within or among agencies whether as meetings, telephone communications, or written communications, are not subject to the ex parte rule and do not have to be recorded. However, this is not what Sections D, E, and F now state. Therefore Sections D, E, and F of the proposed protocol must be amended or a new section added which provides this clarification concerning agency communications. • .. In addition, because the ADF&G is involved in reviewing many hydroelectric projects and because many of our communications with FERC are of a general, non-project specific nature, Section G of this protocol should be amended to specify that the procedures contained therein apply only when the Old Harbor project is specifically being discussed. Potential Chanies to Protocol: To avoid future complications, the communications protocol • • should allow for contingencies which might require a modification of the protocol. We recommend a new section be added which states that any changes to the protocol must be made by prior written, mutual agreement of all signatory parties to the protocol. • Editorial Comments: (I) The last paragraph on page 4 should be rewritten to explain who the participants are that will receive copies of the monthly progress report. Are these only protocol signatories or do they include any interested parties? (2) The last sentence on the signature page should either be deleted or rewritten to become a goals statement. At present the consolidated process is an unproven methodology and the statement cannot yet be verified . • Please add Christopher Estes of ADF&G/SF-RTS, to the list of interested parties for receipt of project related correspondence. He is located at 333 Raspberry Road, Anchorage, Alaska, 99518 . .. We appreciate your commitment to working with us to refine the Old Harbor APEAP protocol and thank you for the opportunity to comment. Should you have any questions, please do not .. hesitate to contact me at either the letterhead address or call me at (907) 267-2333 . Sincerely, ]. /!d~ //'-t'. Ivo//GL ~~ By: C. Wayne Dolezal .. Habitat Biologist Region II • Enclosures • • • - - • - ,. ,. • • • - • - - - - - Mr. Earle Ausman -3-August 13, 1997 cc: N. Allen, FERC Contact C. Estes, ADF&G T. Rumfelt, ADEC G. Wheeler, USFWS-WAES J. Bellinger, Kodiak NWR B. Smith, NMFS • • • UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 10 1200 Sixth Avenue -Seattle. Washington 98101 ,~' -.' -.-r::: • \ -..... ;.,.,. i ,/!':.""'\ • -'-A 21&REPLY TO ATTN OF: WO-126 Charles Y. Walls, General Manager -Alaska Village Electric Cooperative 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503-7497 - Re: Notice of Filing of a Preliminary Permit with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Project No. 11561-000 • Dear Mr. Walls: • The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has received the above referenced notice from FERC. The information included in the notice does not • provide the necessary level of detail to enable us to offer sUbstantive comments on the environmental issues at this time . • However, we have enclosed a list of topics to consider while preparing your environmental documents. EPA believes these topics are extremely important in evaluating the environmental effects of small hydropower projects. This is a - • generalized list and all of the items may not be applicable for your proposed projects. Therefore, we suggest that you review this list to determine the applicability of each item to site specific conditions. Please keep us informed of the status of this project. If you would like to discuss any of the topics of concern EPA has raised in the enclosure. please call me -at (206) 553-1750. -;z~. ~--Larry Br man Hydro ower Coordinator -Enclosure cc: FERC-Cashell- • • • o Printed on Recycled Paps! • .. .. • • • • .. .. ... .. .. .. .. • • ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY SMALL HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT IMPACT CONCERNS GENERALIZED LIST WATER QUALITY IMPACTS Provide a discussion of water quality upstream and downstream of the project and in the by-pass reach location highlighting stream temperatures, dissolved oxygen, suspended sediment loads, turbidity levels, and extent of any changes in instream flow patterns. Address how the project may affect fisheries, aquatic life and potable water supplies with regard to these water quality concerns. Water quality assessments based on chemical and physical parameters alone are often not sufficient to identify or address all surface water pollution problems. Biological assessments can measure the condition of the resource at risk. Therefore, EPA recommends that an analysis of the stream biota including studies of population dynamics, food-web organization, and taxonomic structure of communities be carried out. Background hydrologic studies should be included so that the impacts (adverse or beneficial) are fully understood by the reviewing agencies. Indicate whether the construction and operation of the project would cause or contribute to any violations of applicable state water quality standards. Include the stream capability to assimilate point and non-point pollution from other sources. Waste materials allowed to reach navigable waters without proper permits are considered a violation of the Clean Water Act . Monitoring The environmental document should include a discussion of monitoring for each resource category determined to be significant through the scoping process, including fisheries and water quality. A properly designed monitoring plan will demonstrate how well the preferred alternative resolves the identified issues and concerns by measuring the effectiveness of the mitigation measures in controlling or minimizing adverse effects. The environmental document should include a discussion of how the three basic types of monitoring (implementation, effectiveness and validation monitoring) are being incorporated into this project . .. The monitoring plan should include types of surveys, location and frequency of sampling, parameters to be monitored, indicator species, budget, procedures for using data or results in plan implementation, and availability of results to interested and affected groups. A helpful resource for the development of.. water quality and biological monitoring plans is: Rapid Bioassessment Protocols For Use in Streams and Rivers, EPA/444/4-89-001, May 1989.-The environmental document should describe the feedback mechanism which can use monitoring results to adjust BMPs,• standard operating procedures and monitoring intensity at first detection of adverse effects. Provision of such an adjustment process ensures that mitigation strategies will improve in the future and that unforeseen adverse effects are identified and• minimized. • PROJECT COMPONENT ALTERNATIVES Alternative project components should be considered from the water quality/soil stability point of view. For example,• alternate construction techniques and in-stream flow regime needs should be evaluated in order to determine the degree to which water quality impacts may be reduced by each alternative. Alternate access road alignments should be considered in order to• minimize potential erosion and landsliding problems. WETLANDS IMPACTS• Wetlands could be affected by the project. Riparian areas (including spray zones, shrub-scrub, and emergent wetlands) could• be lost or degraded by construction activities. Wetlands are critical resources which have experienced severe cumulative losses nationally. Protection of wetlands is one of the top priorities of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The • functions and values of the area's wetlands should, therefore, be evaluated so that the significance of potential impacts can be determined. Appropriate tools for this evaluation may include• the Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) or Wetland Evaluation Techniques. Any unique or special features of the wetlands should receive special attention.-Once the functions and values of the wetlands are defined, the possibilities for mitigation of potential impacts to these functions and values should be explored. Unique features may be-particularly difficult to mitigate and should again be given particular attention. The key is that the functions and values of the wetlands are the concern, not merely "acre-for-acre"... mitigation. We stress avoidance of impacts over other types of mitigation. Therefore, addressing alternatives is of extreme importance . • 2 .. • • .. .. • • • • • • • ... .. • .. A section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) would likely be required for the project. The Corps can assist you in considering alternatives to determine whether impacts to wetlands can be reduced or eliminated. We recommend that you begin coordination with the nearest Corps District as early as possible so that possibilities of alternatives to wetland impacts are not precluded. If the section 404 alternatives analysis is not incorporated into the FERC hydropower licensing process it is conceivable that alternative routings to avoid wetlands, which have not been evaluated in the licensing process, could be required during the 404 permit process. Delaying the analysis of section 404 alternatives until after completion of the licensing process could result in the applicant needing to change the configuration of the project, thus costing additional time and money. Again we encourage you to contact the nearest Corps District early on in the process . AQUATIC AND RIPARIAN HABITAT Describe and quantify such habitats in the vicinity of the project, emphasizing spawning and rearing habitat for anadromous and resident fish. Project-induced changes in instream flows and river surface elevations would have an effect on the fish resources as well as such processes as sediment transport and gravel recruitment. The environmental report should evaluate and assess these effects and their consequences upon the aquatic and riparian habitat. The assessment should include the acreage and value of the habitat affected. Also the report should indicate how the stream reach for this proposed project has been classified by the Northwest Power Planning Council's "Protected Areas List" (i.e., anadromous fish only, resident fish and wildlife, unprotected ... ). ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES Evaluate in some detail potential measures for minimizing impacts on water quality, fish, wildlife, and associated aquatic and wetland habitats. Give special attention to the habitats of fish, wildlife, and botanical species found on the state and federal Threatened or Endangered Species lists. GEOLOGY AND SOILS A soils stability study should be undertaken for the project which includes the soil type, approximate location and areal extent of each type, and susceptibility to erosion. Discuss the impacts the project may have upon these soils with regard to slope stability and sedimentation. This information is essential in order to determine accurate sedimentation and erosion-related impacts upon the subject basin . 3 .. .. A catastrophic slope movement event in the basin area could also be catastrophic in terms of human and wildlife loss, habitat loss, and monetary loss. A prudent investigation of the geology of the project area can be sound and effective project-failure mitigation in itself, especially if the studies reveal an • inherent geologic weakness that may be exploited by the projects or their related activities. POTENTIAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS• The environmental reports should evaluate the contributions the hydropower project may have on cumulative impacts to water• quality, fish and wildlife, wetlands, riparian areas, and recreation resources in the river basin/watershed. Consideration of these impacts together with those of any past, present, and• reasonably foreseeable future actions, both hydro and non-hydro activities (i.e., forestry, mining, road construction) is warranted. • For any resource, the cumulative impact evaluation must begin with an assessment of the degree to which impacts have already occurred (including impacts resulting from other than • hydropower development). Such a baseline assessment is critical to the ability to ascribe significance to any amount of further impact. For cumulative effects in particular, the magnitude of impact may not be synonymous with the significance of that• impact. A minor impact could be significant. The purpose of this evaluation should be to determine the relationship between -these concepts. It is also important that the environmental documents address possible mitigation for what we have termed "residual" cumulative effects. (By this we mean the cumulative level of impact expected to remain after project-specific mitigation measures have been applied. This would also include effects that may exist if project-specific mitigation is not as effective or• successful as predicted) . • .. - - - • • 4 ,. polarconsult alaska, inc. r-'INEERS. SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS .. June 2, 1997 ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME .. 333 RASPBERRY ROAD ANCHORAGE AK 99518-1599 .. Subject: New Schedule, Stream Flows During Fish Surveys . Dear Wayne Dolezal .. Regarding questions on the schedule we have added a legend and clarified item number 55. If this is insufficient please let me know... Regarding your concerns about knowing all the streamflow characteristics in the creeks by step 46 in the schedule we offer the following information regarding the existing data. .. We hope that this can provide an adequate foundation for any future studies . • September 3rd the Barling Creek and Lagoon Creek flows were measured. This corresponds to the same dates that the pictures were taken shown in Appendix A of the 411 0/97 Progress Report. • The intake site was gauged on August 10th. The flow at the intake site likely did not • change significantly during the rest of the month of August. This assumption is based 'on the September 3rd survey where it was found that Barling Creek ran dry at nearly the same location where it was observed dry on the August 9th survey. To summarize: • • The flow measured 2000' above the dry area in Barling Creek on 913/96 was -14 cfs. The drainage area for this location is 7.32 mi2. Dry section length = 5000 ft. • The flow measured at the intake site on 8/10/96 was 5.5 cfs. The drainage area for this location is 1.79 mi2. • The flow measured 100 ft above dry area of Lagoon creek on 9/3/96 was 1.65 cfs. The drainage area for this locations is 1.45 mi2. Dry section length =4200 but -creek resurfaced with substantial flow about a mile before the mouth. The operation of the hydroplant would remove all of the 5.5 cfs from the intake site and -divert it to Lagoon Creek. The affect would be that the flow in Lagoon Creek would be increased by about 333% (at the gauged site) while the flow in Barling Creek would be reduced by about 39% (at the gauged site). - A quantitative conclusion regarding the change in dry areas of both streams can not be determined with any kind of accuracy. However, based on the above information and the -photos it can be concluded that the amount of water needed in Barling Creek to have sufficient water to sustain fish spawning is substantially larger than the amount ne~ded for the dry section in Lagoon Creek to be productive. Therefore, for the conditions 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 • • .. during the survey, the net effect of the hydroplant would be an enhancement of fish production overall. .. Sincerely, . .. P~/Li:J • Daniel Hertrich, CE Attacrunents: Schedule, 2 pages • • • ... .. - • II • polarconsult alaska, inc. t:NGINEERS • SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS .. Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project .. April 9, 1997 To: PARTICIPANTS • Subject: Response to meeting on 412197 • • Attached are minutes from the meeting. Also attached with this letter is a schedule that answers questions that were brought up in the meeting. The remainder of this letter contains answers to questions brought up in the meeting and a discussion of the schedule. • Item #1 Bullet 1 regards the waiving of Exhibit E requirements by substituting the draft • environmental assessment. Exhibit E is the environmental assessment (EA) that is done after the final application is filed. In the APEA process the EA is done prior to the final application being filed. The EA will be very similar to Exhibit E . • Bullet 2 regards study requests. Advancing the time for submittal of request for additional studies to the time when field studies are completed refers to Stage 2 comment period in the APEA process (see schedule), Typically, in the standard three stage process study requests can be made in stage 3 after the final application is filed (see attached chart). The APEA process limits the study requests to before the final application is filed. Bullet 3 refers to the environmental assessment portion of the project. For this project the environmental assessment is done prior to the final application submittal. The traditional process does the environmental assessment after the final application is filed. FERC is dropping the notice that the project is ready for environmental assessment in APEA processes (because at the traditional time of announcing it, the assessment has already been accomplished in the APEA process). Item #2 Attached are three schedules. They are the same except for fonnatting. The first schedule shows the entire project and timeline and the dates of occurrence and duration of all tasks. The second schedule shows the entire timeline but only shows milestones and tasks that require agency input. The third schedule shows the timeline from 411197 .. 1011/97 and shows only milestones and tasks that require agency input. .. • .. • 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 ,. .. Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project .. Item #4 Attached is the revised section of the communications protocol. Please replace the old • page in the communications protocol with this one . • ::relY~ !lJldd .. /{~ Daniel Hertrich, CE ., • • ", .. - - .. • cc: Nan Allen Tony Azuyak Jay Bellinger Rick Berns Walt Boyle Stan Carrick Emil Christiansen Chuck Diters Wayne Dolezal Bill Donaldson Walter EbelI Linda Freed U. Gross Claire Holland Steven Hom Ali Iliff Michelle Jesperson Don Kohle Shirley Macke Dianne Mayer Maureen McCrea Rich McIntosh Brad Meiklejohn Eric Meyers Gary Muehlenhardt • Old Harbor Project FERC Project # 11561-000 • Meeting Minutes -Date: Wednesday, April 2, 1997 .. Attendees Wayne Dolezal, Alaska Department ofFish and Game Tim Rumfelt, Department of Environmental Conservation Arlene Murphy, Division of Governmental Coordination • • Gary Wheeler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Earle Ausman, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. Daniel Hertrich, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. Subject: Discussion of Communications Protocol and Agency Approval Form • Content: • • 1. Agencies felt that there should have been more clarification on the three waiver conditions. These conditions were stated in the February 7, 1997 letter titled "Approval of Communications Protocol Requested." The requested waivers are as follows: • Waive exhibit E requirements by substituting the draft environmental assessment. .. • Advance the time for submittal of request for additional studies to the time when field studies are completed . • Waive the public notice that the project is ready for environmental assessment due to the APEA already being in place. 2. Agencies wanted a schedulelflow chart describing the FERC process that we are proposing as it applies to this particular project. The schedule should include review times and comment periods, the time at which the 401 water quality permit and coastal/consistency review will take place, identify where in the process field studies are completed, where and when requests for --additional studies takes place, note where reviewed documents are produced in the process, and include ANILCA title XI compliance if applicable. -3. The name and phone number of the FERC representative in Washington DC who is working with this project was requested. That contact is: Nan Allen .. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE Washington, D.C. 20426 .. - April 9, 1997 Page 1 .. Old Harbor Project FERC Project # 11561-000 .. 202-219-2938 voice 202-219-0125 fax .. 4. Agencies requested that a change be made in the communications protocol, section D, to copy meeting minutes to all participants and to anyone else requesting a copy . .. 5. Agencies wanted clarification as to whether section E of the communications protocol required inter agency discussions to be documented and submitted to • Polarconsult. It was determined that this was not required . 6. Also discussed was the inclusion of state entities in the process of transferring.. lands and in making covenant changes in order to construct the project in the refuge. 7. There was a question as to whether the FERC process met ANILCA Title Xl • requirements. Gary Wheeler and Polarconsult will be looking into that. • 8. The timeline proposed by FERC for 40 I permitting and coastal/consistency • review was questioned. PolarconsuIt will put those permitting processes on the schedule for review and comment. , 9. Polarconsult said that they would submit a schedule for the project that would answer the questions in item 2, also submit a letter and modified • communications protocol that would answer items 1 and 4. Also, the State would be included as necessary in the memorandum of understanding with the Department of Interior . • .. .. .. .. .. .. • April 9, 1997 Page 2 • - - • • - - • • • • - - - - - • • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service 222 W. 7th Avenue, #43 Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7577 February 19, 1997 Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue Suite 310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Dear Mr. Hertrich: Thank you for your letter concerning the licensing and communications protocols for the proposed Old Harbor hydroelectric project. We have no objections to the adoption of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Applicant-Prepared Environmental Assessment process in this matter. However, experience to date with the APEA process has found the communications process and FERC requirements to document this communication are often unclear or cannot reasonably be met with existing agency workloads and staffing. The Communications Protocol, as it appears in your letter, establishes how the applicant will disseminate information to agencies and interested parties. It would be most helpful if the protocol was expanded to describe how and when agency input will be sought, and what the FERC requires as far as official response, review, or comment. Also, we believe the FERC should become more active in the early stages of the APEA process. We recommend a contact within that agency be designated to oversee the process and be available for meetings, conferences, and to address any issues arising during the pre-application phase. Regarding the waiver of item 2 in your letter, to advance the time for submittal of additional study requests, we understand this means there will be one opportunity for such requests provided on release of the environmental study reports (prior to the Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment) and another upon release of the draft License Application. Provided this is correct, we agree to the waiver. Finally, we request that the monthly progress report be provided to this office. Please direct any questions to Brad Smith at (907) 271-5006. • Morris aska Office Supervisor Resources Management Division • polarconsult alaska, inc. -~NGINEERS • SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project February 7,1997 -To PARTICIPANTS • Subject: Approval o/Communications Protocol Requested As stated in our previous "Notice of intent to do APEA process" (September 12 th , 1996),• Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) through their consultant, Polarconsult, intends to submit to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) the Environmental Assessment (EA) as part of the Application for License in place of Exhibit• E. A VEC asks for your approval and support on consolidating the NEP A process. AVEC• • intends for the preparation of the Project License Application to coincide with the environmental review of the Project. Under this process, the EA will be submitted to the Commission with the License Application in order to provide a more efficient and expeditious licensing process. • Please note that this process requires certain waivers to be granted by the Commission. By agreeing to this you accept waiving of the following: • • Waive exhibit E requirements by substituting the draft environmental assessment. • Advance the time for submittal of request for additional studies to the time when field studies are completed. • • Waive the public notice that the project is ready for environmental assessment due to the APEA already being in place. • Attached for your review and approval is the Communications Protocol AVEC proposes to follow during this consolidated process. If you agree, and support the guidelines attached, please sign the attached letter of support and return to:• Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 W 33 Ave #310 -Anchorage, AK 99503 - Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, -V~)W Daniel Hertrich, CE • • • 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310. ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258·2419 • - - Project No. 11561-000 Old Harbor Project cc: Eric Meyers • Wayne Dolezal Claire Holland Ali Iliff-Gary Prokosh Tim Smith Charles Walls -Rick Berns Tim Rumfelt • Steven Hom Arlene Murphy Walt Boyle • Secretary Walter Ebell Kelly Simeonoff, Jr. • Linda Freed U. Gross Emil Christiansen • Tony Azuyak Brad Meiklejohn Don Kohle • Brad Smith Jay Bellinger • Gary Wheeler - - - - • • ./• JAMiN, EBELL~ BOlGER &GEUnited States Department of the Interior Ii. Professional Col'J)Ora1for .. ~tl: 0 2 1996OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR Washington, D.C. 20240 IH REPtY Rl!FER 'TO: SEATTLE, WASHI~.. • C. Walter Ebell, Esq. Jamin, Ebell, Bolger & Gentry 300 Mutual First Building .. 605 First Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Dear Walt:• .. This responds to your request for the Federal and State legal views on how the covenants pertaining to the Old Harbor Native Corporation (OHNC) fee lands purchased by the United States last year relate to the proposed Old Harbor hydroelectric proj ect. Since our previous conversations, you have confirmed with the.. • project sponsors that the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) was correct in its determination that a majority of the facilities and activities will take place on lands owned in fee by the United States within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, at least a .. portion of which are subject to certain restrictive covenants contained in the Warranty Deed from OHNC to the United States and the Conservation Easement from OHNC to the State of Alaska, both of which were executed on September 27, 1995. The remaining portion of the project facilities will occur on lands owned by OHNC and the City of Old Harbor ... - Were this project to receive a license to proceed, there is no doubt that the contemplated construction activities would violate .. the restrictive covenants negotiated by OHNC to satisfy its concern that the fee lands would be "maintained in their natural, pristine state, in perpetuity, in accordance with the terms of the Restrictive Covenant contained in the State Conservation Easements and the Warranty Deeds .... " See, Section 5. a. of the Agreement for the Sale, Purchase and Donation of Lands and Interests in Lands Between Old Harbor Native Corporation and the United States of America, dated May 23, 1995 (Agreement).- Under the terms of Section II. (1) of the Warranty Deed and Section a. of the State Conservation Easement, activities such as the• .. construction of buildings or fences and the manipulation or alteration of natural water courses are generally prohibited. The listed exceptions to these prohibitions, for refuge or conservation research or management or for conveying information to the public' to protect public safety or natural resources, are inapplicable to the proposed proj ect . Furthermore, there is no clause in the.. Warranty Deed or State Conservation Easement comparable to Section 3. (c) of the OHNC Conservation Easement which permits the Refuge .. - 2 • -C. Walter Ebell, Esq Manager to approve otherwise prohibited activities upon• determination that "they are compatible with the purposes of this Easement." While the Warranty Deed sets forth no process for approving such• activities, we have consulted with the U.S. Department of Justice, and are all in agreement that the three parties to the Purchase Agreement and related conveyance instruments, OHNC, the State and• the United States, have the discretion to act jointly to modify these restrictive covenants as to a particular project if it is compatible with the restoration and conservation purposes of the Warranty Deed and the State Conservation Easement. We have not yet -concluded what format such an instrument would take, but we believe that it must be suitable for recording in the Kodiak Island land records. Additionally, both governments believe that the Trustee-Council should be consulted on any changes to these deeds, and their concurrence obtained as long as the Council remains in existence .• As the Department of the Interior's February 22, 1996, letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission indicated, this project necessitates the undertaking of certain fish, wildlife and habitat• - studies to assess the impact of the proposed proj ect . Any decision by the State and the United States to consent to modifying the restrictive covenants for this project remains subject to the results of these studies and the outcome of the FERC licensing process. Assuming that studies indicate the proj ect will result in no more than minor to negligible impacts to fish and wildlife resources, that likely impacts can be successfully mitigated, and -that the project is deemed compatible with the purposes for which the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge was established and compatible with the restoration and conservation purposes of the Warranty Deed• and State Conservation Easement, we would seek modification to the restrictive covenants to permit this project with the concurrence .. of the Trustee Council. Both the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) and FWS would be pleased to work with the project sponsor in designing the necessary studies. -The FWS is the lead for the,Department of the Interior on issues related to the studies and evaluations and judgments concerning proj ect impacts. Contact with FWS should be through Jay Bellinger, the Refuge Manager. The ADF&G has the lead for the State. Their - -contact person is Janet Kowalski, the Director of the Division of Habitat and Restoration. Regina Sleater, Esq. of the DOI Alaska Regional Solicitor's Office, is representing the Department in the FERC proceeding and questions involving that proceeding should be • - • 3 • .. C. Walter Ebell, Esq directed to her. In the meantime, we would be happy to work with you and respond to any questions you may have pertaining to the oil spill restoration program and the terms of the purchase agreements. We trust that this letter is responsive to your concerns . .. • ~~ Assistant i~~~~~ General .. Alaska Department of Law • cc: Janet Kowalski, ADF&G• Jay Bellinger, FWS Regina Sleater, Esq., DOl • • • • .. • • .. .. .. .. Sincerely, B~N. Roth Attorney-Adviser Conservation &Wildlife Division Office of the Solicitor • • - OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE • • .. • • • • - .. - - - - .. • - 3601 'C' STREET. SUITE 370 ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503-5930 PH: (907) 269-7470IFAX: (907) 561-6134 September 23, 1996 Dear ACMP Reviewers: Q CENTRAL OFFICE Q P.O. BOX 110030 JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811·0030 PH: (907) 465·35621FAX: (907) 465-3075 TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR PIPELINE COORDINA TOR'S OFFICE 411 WEST 4TH AVENUE, SUITE 2C ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501-2343 PH: (907) 271-4317IFAX: (907) 272·0690 SUBJECT: NOTICE OF APEA PROCESS & COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOL OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJ~CT STATE 1.0. NO. AK9512-21 AA (FERC 11561-000) Attached is the cover letter for the documents listed above. Please let the agent, Dan Hertrich, polarconsult alaska, inc., or me know if you have not received a copy of the packet sent my Mr. Hertrich on September 12th. There is one correction I pointed out today by phone to Mr. Hertrich regarding the C0r.iinl..ilii\:;CitioiiS p;-otocol inciuded in the packet. The project agent is usuaily responsible tor determining if a summary of a meeting is required and he would be the one to prepare the summary. DGC is available to facilitate any interagency meetings requested by the Alaska Coastal Management Program participants. Please copy this office with any corrections or comments to the polarconsult alaska, inc. correspond ence . Sincerely, ~ku1¥u~/ V I Arlene Murphy Project Review Coordinator cc: Don Kuhle, COE Gary Prokosch, DNR, DMWM Tim Smith, DNR, SHPO Wayne Dolezal, DFG Steven Horn, DOTPF Kelly Simeonoff, Jr., KANA Michael Strzelecki, FERC N:\ADMPROJ\OLDHARBO.LT1 01-A35LH Ali Iliff, DNR Claire Holland, DNR, DPOR Tim Rumfelt, DEC Linda Freed, KIB U.L. Gross, Koniag, Inc. Charles Walls, AVEC Daniel Hertrich, polarconsult alaska, inc. • polarconsult alaska, inc. ENGINEERS· SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS Project No. 11561-000-Old Harbor Project September 12, 1996 To: OLD HARBOR PROJECT PARTICIPANTS - -Subject: Progress Report 1, Draft Communications Protocol Attached you will find the cover letter for the first progress report, the current communications log, the current list of interested parties, and a draft communications • protocol. Feel free to make comments on the communications protocol. When I send out the final communications protocol I will ask everyone to give their consent to the APEA process and the communications protocol. • If you have any questions or would like copies of communications feel free to contact me. • Sincerely, • vcJ!Ltd Daniel Hertrich, CE • cc: -Eric Meyers • • -Wayne Dolezal -Ali Iliff -Gary Prokosh -Charles Walls """Rick Bems .,. Brad Meiklejohn • -Tim Rumfelt -Arlene Murphy -Secretary--Walter Ebell -Linda Freed -Emil Christiansen --Tony Azuyak ... Don Kohler -Brad Smith --Jay Bellinger - - --Gary Wheeler 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258·2419 • polarconsult alaska, inc. FNGINEERS • SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS Project No. 11561·000 Old Harbor Project - THE SECRETARY • FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 888 FIRST STREET NE WASHINGTON DC 20426 Subject: Notice o/intent to do APEA process • Dear Secretary, September 12, 1996 Alaska Village Electric Corporation (AVEC) a preliminary permit (effective March 1,• 1996) issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). AVEC has designated Polarconsult to perform investigations, prepare the initial stage consultation document and the draft enviromnental assessment, act as liaison officer with interested • parties to keep them informed as to the progress of the project, and perform other activities regarding the filing of a license . • • AVEC (through Polarconsult) intends to perform the applicant prepared enviromnental assessment (APEA). Polarconsult is requesting that the Commission agree to advise them in this process . Polarconsult has identified a list of interested parties. This list is attached. Also attached is a proposed communications protocol. This communications protocol is being sent to the list of interested parties. Shortly afterwards, a request will be made asking for their assent to the protocol and the APEA process. Sincerely, • p~/h~ Daniel Hertrich, CE - - - - .. cc: Eric Meyers Wayne Dolezal Ali Iliff Gary Prokosh Charles Walls Rick Bems Brad Meiklejohn Tim Rumfelt Arlene Murphy Secretary Walter Ebell Linda Freed Emil Christiansen Tony Azuyak Don Kohler Brad Smith Jay Bellinger Gary Wheeler 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258·2419 - \\1 polarconsult alaska, inc . • a\ 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503-3661 Phone: (907) 258-2420 FAX: (907) 258-2419 From: Daniel Hertrich Date: 08/08/96 To: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FAX Number: 102 -2.1 q. 011..5 Attn: Michael Strzelecki No. of pages including this page: 1• Subject: Old Harbor FERC Permitting -Ust of Interested Parties • We have tentatively identified the you and the following list of people as being on our "list of interested parties" for the FERC pennitting process at Old Harbor. Please review your infonnation and make any corrections needed. If you feel that you or your agency does not belong on this list please let us know. Also, if you think that there is a party affected by this project that is not on this list please let us know. If we have all of your infonnation down correctly you don't need to do anything. • Your infonnation: Name ................................ Michael Strzelecki • Agency ............................. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Address ............................ 888 First Street NE, Washington D.C. 20426 Voice Phone ..................... 202-219-2827 • Fax ................................... ~Z_-2.{C( -Of 2-<5 ..., mail. ............................ .. • Tentative List of Interested Parties I ITony Azuyak Old Harbor Tribal Council • • - - - - Jay Bellinger U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge Rick Berns City of 0 ld Harbor Emil Christiansen Old Harbor Native Corporation Wayne Dolezal Alaska Department of Fish and Game Walter Ebell Jarnin, Ebell, Bolger, and Gentry Linda Freed Kodiak Island Borough Don Kohler U.S. Corps of Engineers r Arthur Martin Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Portland Regional Office Maureen McCrea Alaska State Division ofGovemmental Coordination Eric Meyers Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Exxon Valdez Trustee Council Gary Prokosh Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Mining and Water Management Brad Smith U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Michael Strzelecki Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Charles Walls Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. try Wheeler U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • F960a071.DOC - .. - • - - • • • • • - - - - AVEC~ ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC . July 31, 1996 To our members in Old Harbor, We are working to develop a hydroelectric project for you. This note is to report we are making progress. but have a long ways to go before we start building it. The site is one suggested by Mayor Berns. This site diverts water from the east branch of the east fork of Barling Creek to a powerhouse at Lagoon Creek. The plant will provide about 330 kW to Old Harbor and eliminate most of the diesel power production. The hydro project will not have a reservoir. It will be what is called "run of the river." So, when the creek runs low in the winter time then the diesels will be used . Our challenge right now is to get a permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to build the project. The permit requires that the effects of the project on the environment be stated. This statement is based on a description of the environment, which includes animals, fish, plants, birds, aesthetics (appearance), antiquities (cultural resources) and geology. The permit requirements also ask for comments from the public and other interested entities such as the Refuge Manager. The purpose of all this work is to provide information which will enable a decision to be made if the project is a proper use of the public's resources. The term used for this project is an environmental assessment (EA). The permit process normally takes about three years before construction can be started. We are in our first year of the permit process. For a small project like this. the cost of the permit process can cost as much as, or more than. building the project. The permitting for this project is more complicated than most because it is located on Refuge and trust lands. We have obtained a preliminary permit from FERC that allows us to proceed with the environmental investigations. Our environmental investigation work will begin in August when a fish biologist, and bird people will survey the project for fish in Barling Creek and Lagoon Creek. birds, and plants in the vicinity of the project. At the same time our project engineer, Polarconsult Alaska. will locate the project on the ground and do some minor soils exploration. Information from this work will become part of an EA. The survey team will need support from the community as to labor. equipment, room and board. During the survey any of you with an interest are welcome to come and see what is beim! done. There will be more fish and '" antiquities work done in September and more fish work near the end uf October. - • 4831 E~eStreet· Ancho~e.Alaska99503·7497. Phone (907) 561-1818 • In State (800H78-1818 • Fax (907) 561-2388 • - .. One of the requirements to make this project feasible is to make sure that it results in a positive environmental advantage to the community, refuge and trust lands. If we can use the project to enhance fish, provide a better source of fresh water. reduce the risks of using diesel fuel. reduce engine noise. and reduce the cost of electricity over time there can be a number of positive environmental benefits. You may. however, think of other benefits whic~ can be positive. If you do please bring them to our or Polarconsult's attention. Public hearings on this project will be held in Old Harbor and in Kodiak. You will all be • asked to participate in the hearings. Community support for this project is very important. We are very interested in your opinions. and information you can provide on this project. At • this juncture we expect the public meetings will be held in late September or in October when most people have returned from fishing. The project is estimated to cost $1.6 million. While the environmental work is 'going on we are also working on finding financing for this project. At this date it appears likely that most of the cost of the project can be paid by a combination of state and federal grants. The,. balance would likely be paid for from A VEe's funds. If we succeed in getting most of the project grant funded, then we can lower the cost of power in Old Harbor when we get the project on line. That is our goal: to stabilize or reduce the cost of power in Old Harbor over • the long term. Of course, the economic benefit to Old Harbor will begin now. The people doing the • environmental work will be spending money in Old Harbor. When the project moves into construction, workers will be hired in Old Harbor to build it. However, we must keep the project under tight management so that the costs don't rise. Whatever costs the grant(s) • doesn't pay must be paid by the electric rate payers. So, the less expensive the project is to build then the lower the cost of electricity will be for the Old Harbor electric rate payers (that's you!) . • As we work to develop this hydroelectric project for you we will periodically send out an update like this letter to our members in Old Hu.rbor. We remain optimistic that this -hydroelectric project will be permitted by the government and will prove to be a very important and wise investment for the long term well being of Old Harbor. • Sincerely, ~~C4-~~-zz~• -Charles Y. ~ President & CEO - cc: AVEC Board of Directors Governor Tony Knowles Senator Ted Stevens • • P.02 .," -~ ,,--I" ..... "/ .... "' JUN-24-96 MOM 02~lB PM AG'S AHC E~IRONMENTAL FAX NO. 907 278 7022 • .. United States Department of the Interior FISH AND wn..DLIPESBRVICE fUn 8. Tudor Rd. -AIlI::l:aor.g~ A1A"ka 9950]..6199 DllAFI' BNR. 4/1S196 -- -Mr. Charles Y. Walls General Manager .. Alaska Vil.la&e Electric Cooperative 6831 Bagle Street Anchorage, Alask:a 99501-7497 • Dam: Mr. Walls: Our agenciea have been contacted by Walt Sbell, counsel to Old HaTbor Native COIpOra.tion•• who has requested clarification for you concerning the effect of the Conservation l3asclnent granted by OHNe to the United States and the State of A.lasb. on your appliattioQ for the Old 1:Ia.tbor Hydroelectric Project . • As part of the restoration program for the Et:con Valik oil spill, ORNe sold and donated to the United states and the State of Aluka certain interests in lands. We are advised by.. - Mr. Eben that under the project you cummtly envision. there would be no disturbance of, or acciviti.cs conducted on, the lands purchased by the United Smu:a in fcc. The project would. however, involve a portion of the lands which are subject to the Conservation EaJement gr.mted by OHNC 10 the United States and the Statli: of Alaska. DR September 27, 1995, as well as other lands within the Kodiak National Wildlife R.cfu.ge. By letter of Pebrua:y 22, 1996, the Department of the Intmiar wrote to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commisaion requestingif. that the project applicant undertake cer1a.in fish, wildlife and habitat 3iUdies to assess the impact of the proposed project. • Prior to your undcnaldng the expenditure of funds for these atudie4, you desire clarification wb.etber tile ConaeIVatlon BuemeI1t is an absolute bar 10 this project. We are pleased to advise you that the Conservation Easement does contain provision. whi.ch would pemri.t the approval of the project. assuming that the results of the studies are favorab1e and that recommended -mitigation measures are implemented. -- - - P.03 1.1'-"" _, ""V ''"-''''''l ......... _ JUN-24-86 MON 02:19 PH AG'S ANC ENVIRONMENTAL FA~ NO. 907 2?B 7022-- - - • • • • • • • - - • - We have enclosed far your refa:ence a copy of the entitc Con8eIVation Basemen.t. The fonowing provision i$ rc.sponsivc to your concerns: Section 3. prohibited IIgs ...... (c) The Grantor may undertalas activities upon the Protected Ptcperty that arc othe.tw:isc prohibited under subsection (a)(li)-(vU), only if such activities have been autbo.tized ill writing at the diSCEetion of the Grantee afIm a deb:rm:buUion by the Rduse Manager that they am compadble with tbe putposes of this Basement. The ability Df the Kodiak Refuge Manager to gxant such apptoval is thus dependent upon the IeiuJ.ts of the requested studies. In the event Ibat the activitU:a for this project were to be modified durinB the Ucensin& procea, you Jhould also be aware that the tmna of the deeds for the lands aold by OBNC 10 the United. St&tcs and the State of AIuta arc somewhat di:ffcn:nt, and that there is IlD provision in 1be deeds which is diIectly comparable to the fomgoing. Both the State of Alaska and the U.S. Fish and. Wi1dJ.ife St.1.'Vite would be. pleased to work with you in designing the necessary studies as well as to avoid any impactS on the xestoration of the natural resources injured by the oil spill. Should you have any questicns, pleaae do not hr::si.tate to contact Jay Be11lnger, Refuge Manager, Xodiak: National Wildlife Refuge, 907487-2600 • Commissioner Regional Director, Region 7 AIaskB. Department of Pisll & Game U.S. Fl3h '" Wildlife Servioo Enclosure cc: Walt Ebell, Esq. .. MEMORANDUM • STATE OF ALASKA Office of Management and Budget DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION - 3601 "e" Street, Suite 370 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 -Telephone: (907) 269-7475 Fax: (907) 561-6134 • TO: ACMP Reviewers DATE: March 29, 1996 • FROM: Arlene Murph~ FILE NO: AK9512-21 AA Project Review Coordinator • SUBJECT: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Issued Preliminary Permit Project No. 11561-000 • Attached, for your information, please find copies of the notice that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a preliminary permit to Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc for their proposed hydroelectric project at Old Harbor. The Division of• Governmental Coordination (DGC) typically routes these preliminary notices to reviewers, for your information . • As you may know, FERC licenses go through a long, three-phased consultation process before review actually begins. Phases one and two of the consultation process are .. informational only; the consistency review will begin during phases three when FERC has formally accepted the application and has issued a public notice. At the first stage of consultation, there is usually not an "application", and reviewers are -asked to respond to the applicant by identifying concerns, issues, what further information will be needed, and what studies may need to be done. At the second stage of consultation, • the applicant submits a draft application, and another informational review occurs during which reviewers evaluate how the issues they identified in phase one were addressed. At this point, the applicant takes any comments from the second phase of consultation and -makes any necessary changes to the application before submitting a revised application to FERC. We receive these revised applications, and consider them "draft" until FERC accepts.. them and issues the public notice. No action is required on your part at this time. We simply wanted to take the opportunity-to advise you these preliminary documents have been submitted. Please let me know if you have any questions. -- - N:\ADMPROJ\OLDHARBO.MM1 • - - .. • • • • • .. .. • - ,. .. - Old Harbor Hydroelectric -2 AK9512-21AA cc: Don Kuhle, COE Alice Iliff, DNR Claire Holland, DNR, DPOR Tim Smith, DNR, SHPO Gary Saupe, DEC Wayne Dolezal, DFG Linda Freed, KIB Steven Horn, DOTPF U.L. Gross, Koniag, Inc. Kelly Simeonoff, Jr., KANA Charles Walls, AVEC Michael Strzelecki, FERC March 29, 1996 Scoping N:\ADMPROJ\OLDHARBO.MM 1 .. .~ \V polarconsult alaska, inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 • ·r ' /1\. ) Anchorage, Alaska 99503-3661 ;r. Phone: (907) 258-2420 ~J /J\ FAX: (907) 258-2419 • From: Earle Ausman Dote: 03/20/96 To: See 8elow FAX Number: Attn: See 8elow No. of pages including this page: 5• Subject: OLD HAR80R HYDROElECTRIC PROJECT • • • • • • • • - - - - • • Attn: Arlene Murphy Wayne Dolezal Gary Wheeler Brad Smith Don Kuhle Linda Freed .....ear Attendees: ADGC ADF&G USFWS NMFS USCOE KlB(teleconference) 561-6134 267-2464 271-2786 .In 271-3030""" 753-5567 .ID 486-9374<0. Un behalf of AVEC, thank you for attending last Wednesdays meeting regarding the Old Harbor Hydroelectric project at the Division of Governmental Coordination. The meeting was very helpful in identifying your concerns and obtaining suggestions on how to proceed through the variety of pennitting issues. Attached is a recount of the issues discussed and suggestions. Please take a moment and read this memo for accuracy. Mail or fax additional comments you might have to our office. If there are any other questions about the project that I may clarify, do not hesitate to call. Si~ Earle Ausman, E POLARCONSULT cc: Mark Teitzel, AVEC F9603181 • - - - • .. • .. • ,. • • ,. - • • • • polarconsult alaska, inc. F.NGINEERS • SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS MEMO SUBJECT: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Governmental Coordination Meeting DATE: March 13, 1996, 13:30 PM ATTENDEES: Arlene Murphy Mark Teitzel Wayne Dolezal Gary Wheeler Brad Smith Don Kuhle Linda Freed Earle Ausman David Ausman Missing Missing PURPOSE OF MEETING ADGC AVEC ADF&G USFWS NMFS USCOE KIB( te leconference) PCA PCA ADEC ADNR • To acquaint involved agency personnel with the project. • Identify agency requirements in order to obtain a permit for this project. BACKGROUND PCA provided slides, photographs and written information that included drawings of the project's features. The various features were discussed and included the following: • A narrow trail will provide access to the powerhouse by four-wheeler or light tracked vehicle. The Refuge's assistance with selecting the trail alignment was solicited. • Construction is intended to be performed using a helicopter to move materials in place. • A permanent road is not intended for use to construct the pipeline. • Heavy equipment work is intended to be performed using a small tracked backhoe that would make one trip up the pipeline route and work its way down. • Wherever practical the pipeline will be buried. In some locations it will be partially buried. • For some gully crossings the pipeline will be placed on a trestle. • The intake will consist of a small diversion. • This pipeline will be 16 inches in diameter, black polyethylene and steel. • This plant will have a load governor that will run the plant at full output de pending on the amount of water available. 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258·2419 .. Government Coordination Meeting OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT March 18, 1996 .. • The plant's maximum estimated flow will be about 7.5 cfs which can be car - - .. • • .. .. " .. .. • • ried by a 3.5 foot wide, 8 inch deep tailrace channel. • Electricity in excess of the communities usual needs is proposed to be used to heat water or public bUildings. Polarconsult (PCA) explained that the hydroelectric plant is small and the project/community cannot afford to spend much for environmental studies. Therefore, it would be appreciated if the agencies will keep this in mind and keep the cost of requests low while still meeting their re quirements . GENERAL DISCUSSION Land Status Exxon Valdez Land: Of particular concern is the Exxon Valdez parcel and its covenants. A copy of the covenants was provided by Mr. Dolezal. The Refuge has stated they do not believe there will be a problem getting right-of-way (ROW) over their land as long as the environmental requirements are met. Mr. Wheeler stated that Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS) would remove the land from potential wildness status. This would be an internal process with public comment. Walt Ebel, attorney for Old Harbor Native Association, has assured AVEC they support the proj ect. and will contribute land if needed. It is presumed that the State of Alaska will support this mmor use. It appears that the single greatest uncertainty is the legality of building this project within the covenants on the Exxon Valdez land. An environmental lawyer in the State Attorney General's office, Alex Swiderski, 269-5100, was cited by Mr. Dolezal as a point of contact. Mr. Wheeler was asked if he had received any information from the Solicitors office in Washington. No in formation has been provided as of this time. AVEC does not want to move forward with permitting since it is not appropriate to spend Old Harbor's money unless there is reasonable assurance a project is legally possible. To resolve this issue, it was suggested that A VEe solicit a letter from Interior that states a ROW can be legally granted for this purpose. A letter will be written requesting this assurance. Zoning Concerns: Ms. Freed of the Kodiak Island Borough (KIB) stated that the borough supports hydroelectric projects as an appropriate and beneficial land use. This project is split by the KIB boundary with conservation land zoned to the North and SFR zoning to the South. A conditional use permit usually takes 1-2 months to obtain where a re-zone requires 3-4 months . Fish Concerns The agencies agreed with the January 18th letter from USDFG and the February 22nd letter written by the Dept ofInterior. Fish Survey: The quantification of fish in the tributary to Barling Creek and in Lago~n Creek needs to be performed . Old-har1FERCfDGC1M960313 Page 2 • • - .. • • • • • • • .. .. • • Government Coordination Meeting OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT March 18, i 996 Mr. Dolezal said that salmon ascend Lagoon Creek almost a mile above the powerhouse location as reported from aerial surveys. A ground survey is needed to check this. A baseline survey needed for salmon and for other resident species such as Dolly Varden. Mr. Dolezal suggested the survey include adults, juveniles, particularly silver salmon fry and eggs. Such a survey should address erosion effects, life functions, and incubation. Mr. Dolezal offered to supply a list of bi ologists for this purpose . We discussed the fact that Mayor Rick Berns has reported the tributary as going dry and that parts of Lagoon Creek were dry as well when Mr. Ausman visited it. Mr. Dolezal stated that the tailrace will require barriers to prevent fish from spawning in it to avoid potential de-watering of eggs. Mr. Wheeler's concerns are in part a function of how far do fish extend up the drainage and the amount of water diverted as a percentage of the total normal stream flow. If fish are in this area, the survey should be able to predict the effects of a 10-12 cfs reduction in flow will have on the wetted perimeter. If there are not many fish in this location or the percentage is small, then Mr. Wheeler indicated he would not be as concerned. Mr. Wheeler would like water samples to be collected during the winter and summer seasons to compare water chemistry. Since the divide between the streams is close, the general consensus was that there will be no significant differ ences. Stream Gauging A gauge exists just below the confluence of the two branches of the Barling Creek TribUtary. Last fall the State put a gauge at the proposed intake site on the east fork as well. Mr. Ausman stated that it appeared that the diversion would drain about 25% of the area with the balance draining to the tributary of Barling Creek. Also, since the plant used a maximum of 7.5 cfs most of the time, the withdrawal will have little effect on water flows. The only exception to this is when flows at the diversion drop below 7.5 cfs during cold periods in the winter. These are also the periods of maximum demand. However, during this period Lagoon Creek will be augmented with added water and should increase in productivity. Vehicular Access Concerns Although there are currently A TV trails that run in the vicinity it was agreed that all roads and trails associated with the hydroelectric would be closed off and restricted from access by gates, fences or other means. Wildlife Concerns There will need to be a discussion about bears, and a survey for birds which include Harlequin Ducks, Marbled Murrelets, and eagles. Summer is the time to be concerned with them. Mr . Ausman asked if it is better that the Refuge conduct this survey. Mr. Wheeler said he would contact the bear representative in the area and that the bald Eagle survey should be focused on cottonwood trees near the power plant. Plant Concerns Mr. Ausman asked if the Refuge had a botanist that could perform this work under reimburse ment. Mr. Wheeler said he would check to see if an agency botanist is available. FERC Filing Issues OJd-harIFERCIDGC/M960313 Page 3 • Government Coordination Meeting OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT March 18, 1996 -Mr. Smith asked if the intent that there be an applicant environmental assessment (EA). The an swer is yes but it would be prepared with very close coordination with the agencies, particularly the Refuge as it will save time and should save costs. Wetlands and 404 Permit Issues -.. Mr. Kuhle said that less than 10 cyd of concrete in intake does not require a permit, 25 cyd re quires notification and above this will need a 404 permit. Additionally wet lands up to 112 acre can be crossed. When pipeline and trail alignment have been established it will be furnished to the Corps for their appraisal. It appears the pipeline may be able to proceed under a nation wide permit.-Community Interests Habitat Enhancement: Mr. Ausman reported the community had expressed an interest in con -verting the lagoon to all fresh water. The agencies were asked what their opinion was on this, apart from the practicable problems of embankment and property ownership. There was no definite answer to this question; however, this was suggested as a method of enhancing the pro-ductivity of the area. The agencies were asked for their suggestions in general of how this proj ect could be used to improve the environment. • Economic Enhancement: The community has also expressed an interest in putting in a small freezer which offers local value-added processing. Lower power costs will help in achieving this goal. • Drinking Water System: The community's water system does not meet the regulations under the Surface Water Treatment Act since it removes shallow water from under the mouth of Lagoon Creek. The community would like the hydroelectric plant to provide domestic water. Water from • the project will be taken well above the area frequented by people and can provide enough pres sure to run the extra filtration without pumping that is otherwise required. If this is implemented, Ms. Freed said that the Borough could provide special zoning to restrict access to the project in recognition of it as a part of the local watershed. • - -.. .. Old-harIFERCIDGC/M960313 Page 4 • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE -National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marina Fisheries Service -222 W. 7th Avenue, -*43 Anchorage, Alasb 99513-7577 RECfl V f"I"'· - March 14, 1996 M~R Z, 1996 -Hon. Lois D. Caahell secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street Washington, D.C. 2042G - Re: FERC No. 11561~OOO Old Har~or Project-.. Dear Secretary Cashell: We have recently met with the applicant Regulatory comnission (FERC) Project 11561-000 ,.. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for Federal Enerqy Old Harbor project. has also discussed this proposal with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and wildlife Service, and the Kodiak Island Borough. Through these discussions, we believe the proposed Old Harbor project may ~dverselyimpact the fish-and wildlife resources within the project area. The proposed facility is a cross-basin diversion which W'Quld remOVe water from an u~named waterway (Barling Bay tributary) near Old Harbor and divert flows through an intake structure and• penstock to another unnamed creek, (locally called Lagoon creek) . Both waterways contain spawning populations of pacific salmon. Pink, coho, and chum salmon and Dolly Varden occur. in these • .. streaas, although there is little site-specific information on the number or extent of use. The project has the potential to impact fishery resources through flow reductions within the Barling Bay tributary I flow reductions or elimination within the by-pass reach of Laqoon Creek, and through increased flows below the tailrace within Lagoon Creek. The applicant must conduct studiQS to describe the extent of fish use within these affected waters. This should include surveys to enumerate adult spawning popUlations, - -juvenile studies to QQscribe rearing habitat use. and mapping of. spawning habitat. Flow stUdies of these drainages must also be done to describe the ~elative changes of the project on natura11y occurring flo~ patterns. NMFS's primary fishery concern!: regarding this: project inclUde upstream and downstream passage; provision of adequate instream.. flow ~egimes for spawning, rearing, and migration; and maintenance of water quality for anadromous fish. Each of these areas is discussed bQlow.-Both upstre.am and downstream passage must be provided • - - - project structures or operations 'Would cause delay, injury, or excessive stress to Digrating fish. Required passage facilities must be installed during project construction and must be operated -at all times that fish are present at the project. In order to satisfy the.!;;e objectiveG/ it is necessary that the applicant-develop a. proposal for any necessary fish passage facilities acceptable to NMFS as part of the license application. The proposal snould define type, location, size, method of operation, and other pertinent facility characteristics. It should reflect .. state and federal fisheries-agency input and design criteria. IDlFS -staff are available to meet 'With the applicant to discuss passage requirements, design criteria, and other aspects of fish passage :facilities. All passage facilities must be designed. ana lUaintained• to function properly throuqh the ful~ ranqe of flo\ols normally occurring during fish l1igration periods. Also, the tacili ties proposed should reflect the results of site-specific studies - conducted under the preliminary permit as well as consultation with appropriate fishery agencies. .. Adequate flow regimes and water quality are critical for anaaromous fish. Consequently. flow :r;egil1les and water quality suffi'cient for successful spawning , rearing, and migration must be estab~ished and maintained throu9h and downstrea.m of pruject area wtaere needed. It flow reduction, divarsion, or modification of flow regimes are. anticipated in the operation scenario for this project, anadromous - .. fisheries cou~d be adversely affected not only in the immediate project area but in the entire system downstream ot the facility. To address these matters, flow studies must be performed under the -preliminary permit to dstarmine tlow regimes· through thg projact that will conserve and protect stocks of anadromous fisn in the affected drainages. Specific flow regime proposals based on studies ana acceptable to NMFS must be submitted as part of the license application. . .. Adequate water quality is also essential to the continued production of salmon. possible impacts to water quality from this project may include several or all of the following: A. Construction impact~ such as siltation of spawning - gravels. Construction should proceed at times of least impact (consultation with NMFS or state biologists will identify critical periods for fish protection). B. Temperature elevation or reduction which may cause reduced fish growth or disease ... .. c. Disruption of flow patterns necessary for adult and juvenile. fish migration and survi"Val including rapid or large flow fluctuations • .. D. Lac);; of gravel accretion downstream of any diversions or impoundments due to blockage of qravel mov~ment which results in redUced spawninq habitat in the future . • • • During the term of the preliminary permit, these and any other impacts anticipated with the construction and operation of this project sho~ld be identitied and specific solutions proposed. . - Effective fish passage, flo~ ragimes, and watar quality conditions are intended to avoid losses to existing and potentjal.anadro~ous - - ~ish resources. Despite roaximum use of these mitigation methods, unavoidable losses to fish resources may occur either during or after construction .. Compensatioh in the form of fish habitat improvements., artificial production, or similar methods is required to fully replace such unavoidable losses. An initial plan which recognizes contingencies such as unanticipated construction impacts must be developed as part of tha license application. Subsequent • • refinements or modification of this plan may be necessary once thQ project begins operation and success of mitigation measures may be assessed. • We are providing the above criteria to 1255i51:. We applicant in developing the work plan for preliminary permit inve.stigations specified in Article 10.' We request the applicant provide us a copy of all draft work plans to meet preliminary permit requirements, including expected completion dates for major elements. To assist us in our review, we also request copies of any periodic progress reports as specified by Artic.le B of the preliminary permit. We are looking forward to working with your start and the applicant.. on the Old Harbor Project. Mr. Brad Smith of my staff has bean assiqned to this project and can be contacted at (907) 271-5006 . • Sincerely, • orris , aska Office Supervisor Resources Management Division cc: USFWS,ADFG Anchorage c. Y:. Walls -Alaska Village Electric cooperatlve t .Inc. Michael Strzelecki -FERC , Washington, D.C. - - • • • • • • • • • , , , ,• • • , a • • , 4 fiRer Q, 1 2 6 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Alaaka village Electric Project No. 11561-000 Cooperative, Inc. Alaska ORDER ISSUING PRELIMINARY PERMIT D ((~ I. C~o. {M o"'-<J-< I (Issued March 11/ 1996) On October 25, 1995, the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc., filed an application for preliminary permit under section 4(fl of the Federal Power Act (Act) for the proposed old Harbor Project. The project is described in the attached public notice. The purpose of any preliminary permit is to maintain priority of application for a license during the term of the permit while the permittee conducts investigations and secures data necessary to determine the feasibility of the proposed project and prepares an acceptable' application for license. A preliminary permit does-not authorize construction of any project works. This permit does require the permittee to conduct certain studies to address the technical, environmental, and economic feasibility of the proposed project, but these studies will not cause significant adverse environmental impacts. Should the permittee find the project to be feasible and file a development application, notice of the application will be published and all interested persons and agencies will have an opportunity to present their views concerning the project and the effects of its construction and operation. Issuance of this preliminary permit is therefore not a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. There were no motions to intervene filed for this project. Comments filed by interested agencies and individuals have been fully considered in determining whether to issue this permit. All comments dealing with the potential effects of actually constructing and operating the proposed project are premature at the preliminary permit stage and thus are not addressed here. The named permittee is the only party entitled to the priority of application for license afforded by this preliminary permit. In order to invoke this permit-based priority in any subsequent licensing competition, the named permittee must file an application for license as the sole applicant, thereby evidencing its intent to be the sole licensee and to hold all proprietary rights necessary to construct, operate, and maintain OC-A-3 , , the proposed project. Should any other parties intend to hold during the term of any license issued any of these proprietrt'y rights necessary for project purposes, they must be illclud(~d an joint applicants in any application for license filed. In Buch an instance, where parties other than the perlnittee are added as joint applicants for license, the joint appl ication will not be eligible for any permit-based priority. See City 91 Fayetteville, 16 FERC 1 61,209 (1981). The pirector orders: (A) A preliminary permit is issued for this project to the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc., for a period effective the first day of the month in which this permit is issued, and ending either 36 months from the effect i ve date Ot-on the date that a development application submitted by the permittee has been accepted for filing, whichever occurs f it-st. . (B) This permit is subject to the terms and conditions of the Act and related regUlations. The permit io also subject t.o articles 1 through 6, set forth in the attached Form ['-1, and the following special articles. Article 7. A liaison officer must be designated to act for the permittee in keeping appropriate federal, state, and local agencies specified in this permit informed about the progress of investigations throughout the term of the permit. In the interest of protecting and developing the natural resources and other environmental values of the project area, the permittee shall consult with the appropriate federal, regional, state, and local agencies in their fields of responsibility and expertise, shall conduct its project investigations in a manner that protects the environmental integrity of the area, and Rhall fully explore all reasonable alternatives to the project and alternative project designs, taking into account impacts on natural resources and other environmental values. These resources and values include but are not limited to the following: forests, land management and treatment, fish, wildlife, recreational and public use, flood regulation, water and air quality (including water supply, groundwater studies, waste treatment and disposal), public health and safety, archeological, historic, Indian religious and cultural sites, threatened or endangered species of flora and fauna, and scenic and aesthet ic values. The permittee shall init iate and conduct any studies necessary to determine the impact of the constt"uct i on and operation of the proposed project on these natural resources and values and to determine measures needed to protect and develop them or to provide for their mitigation or replacement, including alternative designs and operational measures, and shall. utilize the results of these studies in the preparation of the relevant exhibits or reports required to accompany any application for a license to construct and operate the project. 2 • • • • • • • • • ,I I I I In connection with studies pertaining to archeological, historic, and Indian religious and cultural sites, the permittee shall consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer for each state in which any part of the project would be located and with the National Park Service of the Department of the Interior. Article Q. At the close of each 6-month period from the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall file four copies of a report with the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, or with any other officer the Commission may designate, and shall provide a copy to any entity specified in this order to be consulted during the permit term. Proof of service on these entities shall accompany each copy of the report filed with officers of the Commission. Specifically, the report shall describe the purposes and scope of all conferences and investigations, identify participants, summarize decisions and conclusions, provide a schedule for completing remaining work, and contain copies of important correspondence and studies or summaries thereof. Each report shall include a statement summarizing the permittee's anticipated date for submitting a license or exemption application, as appropriate. The first report shall include a specific schedule, showing when study tasks will start and when they will be completed. In particular, the report shall address the following items: (11 the studies conducted during the past 6-month period (copies of studies or summaries thereof shall be furnished); (2) a summary of consultation with the agencies and copies of correspondence and meeting notes, verifying that such consultations took place during the past 6-month period; (3) an outline and summary of engineering. environmental, and other investigations to be conducted during the ensuing 6-month period to determine the feasibility of the project, as delineated by article 1; (4) a summary of the consultations with the appropriate federal, state, and interstate resource agencies, and any Indian Tribe affected by the project that will take place during the ensuing 6-month period, as outlined by articles 7 and 9; and (5) an allseosment of the feasibility of the project. The appropriate federal. state, and interstate resource agencies. and any Indian Tribe affected by the project shall be contacted, pursuant to section 4.38 of the Commission'S regulations (18 C.F.R. 4.381. Article 9. During the initial period of the permit, the permittee shall consult with the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior, the state fish and game agencies, and the National Marine Fisheries Service of the Department of Commerce, if the project affects anadromous fish, to obtain the agencies' views and recommendations on studies to be conducted during the term of the permit to assess the effect that the proposed project might have on fish and wildlife resources and the facilities or measures that may be needed to conserve and develop those resources. A copy of the report on 3 I I I I I the permittee's study shall be filed as part of the fish <tnd wildlife exhibits or reports of any subsequent applici'l' iOIl fn)' license. The permittee shall also consult with and seck t 11<' views and recommendations of any Indian Tribe or Nation with recognized treaty interests in fish and wildlife resourccn th,~t could be directly affected by the proposed project. (C) This order is issued under authority delegated to tlw Director and constitutes final agency action. RequesL [or rehearing by the Commission may be filed within 30 days [tOlll the date of issuance of this order, pursuant to 18 C F.R. 385.713, ~:t. l~'·/J,;6:5 John Clemenlo Director, Divioion of Project Review 4 I I• • • • , • • • PUBLIC NOTICE (ISSUED NOVEMBER 9, 1995) a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit b. Project No.: 11561-000 c. Date filed: October 25, 1995 d. Applicant: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. e. Name of Project: Old Harbor Project f. Location: Partially within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge (administered by the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service), on an unnamed tributary to Sitkalidak Strait, near the town of Old Harbor, on Kodiak Island, Alaska. Sections 12, 13, 18, 19, and 20 in R26W, T34S. g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. §791(al ' 825(r) h. Applicant Contact: Charles Y. Walls General Manager Alaska Village Electric Cooperative 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503-7497 (907) 561-1818 L FERC Contact: Mr. Michael Strzelecki, (202) 219-2827 j. Comment Date: January 18, 1996 k. Description of Project: The proposed Old Harbor Project would consist of: (1) a four-foot-high concrete diverSion structure with an intake on the unnamed tributary to Sitkalidak Strait; (2) a 3,293-foot-long, 16-inch-diameter HDPE pipeline; (3) an 10, 259-foot-Iong, 16-inch-diameter steel penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing one generating unit with an installed capacity of 330 kW; (5) a 4,270-foot long transmission line interconnecting with an existing transmission line in the city or Old Harbor; and (5) appurtenant facilities. No new access roads will be required to conduct the studies. 1. This notice also consists of the following standard paragraphs: A~, A7, A9, AlO, D, C, and D2. • , • • • • I • • Form P-1 (Revised ,June, I')ii'/) FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PRELIMINARY PERMIT Article 1. The Permittee shall make such engineedng i1lld other investigations, secure such data, and perform such acts as are necessary to determine the feasibi lity of the proposed pl'O ject and, if said project is found to be feasible, to prCpi'lrC i'll. application for license for the project that will be in Con[urm ance with current rules and regulations of the Commission. In carrying out the requirements of this permit the Permittee sh:-d 1 : A. Install as soon as practicable, and thereafter maintain, such stream g<tges <tnd stream-gaging sLat ions as the District Engineer of the United States Geologi cal Survey having charge of stream-gaging operations in the region shall designate as necesRary alld best adapted for the purpose of determining the Atate und flow of the stream or streams affected by the propos"d project, and shall provide for the required reading of such gages and for the adequate rating of such sta tions. The number, design, location, and time of installation of gages and stations, the rating of such stations, and the determination of the flow of the affected stream or streams, shall be made under Lhe supervision of, or in cooperation with, the Distrh:t Engineer of the United States Geological Survey having charge of stream-gaging in the region of said project; and the Permittee shall advance to said Geological Survey the amount of funds estimated to be necessary for such supervision, or cooperation for such periodR as may be mutually agreed upon. The Permittee shall, to the satisfaction of the Commission, keep accurate and sufficient records of the stage and flow of the affected stream or streams, and shall make such records available to the Commission at such times as the Com mission may prescribe. B. Sink such test pits or make such boring of other foundation explorations, and mi1ke such detailed geo logic studies and t.eRts on foundations and fill materials, as are nece9sary to fmpport pn~l imin"~y engineering designs and cost estimates. C. Begin the required investigations within 60 days • • • • • • • • • • • , ., .,I I t a .. after acceptance of the permit, and thereafter prosecute said investigations in such manner and at such rate as 1n the judgement of the Commission will ensure their completion within the period of the permit. D. Furnish with any application for license subsp. quently filed with the Commission copies of engineering and geologic reports, results of tests and analyses, and any other information secured in connection with the investigations. examinations and surveys conducted under this permit. E. Exercise appropriate measures at all times during field studies to prevent irreparable damage to the environment of the proposed project. All test sites shall be restored as closely as possible to their original condition, and to the satisfaction of the Commission'S authorized representative, or, where Federal lands are affected, to the satisfaction of the agency administering such lands. Article 2. A license will be issued for the proposed project only if in the judgement of the Commission said project will be best adapted to a comprehensive plan for the improvement or development of a waterway or waterways for the use or benefit of interstate or foreign commerce, for the improvement and utili zation of water power development, for the adequate protection, mitigation, and enhancement of fish and wildlife (including related spawning grounds and habitat), and for other beneficial public uses, including irrigation, flood control, water supply, and recreational and other purposes referred to in section 4(e). In reaching a decision on the desirability of issuing a license, the Commission will consider, among other things: A. Whether the maps, plans, and speCifications are sllch: (l) That full, practicable utilization will be made of the water, storage possibilities, and head at the site to be developed; (2) That the structures will be safe and constructed in accordance with good engineer ing practice, and (3) That all unnecessary energy losses, whether in hydraulic works or in mechanical or electrical equipment, will be avoided. B. Whether in relation to existing or probable future projects upon the same or adjacent streams, the poten tial for the fullest practicable utilization of the 2 available water, storage possibilities, and heild will be maintuined. C. Whether said project will be in general accol-d wi til the most beneficial utilization of the water for nuvi gat ion, water power, irrigation, the adeqUAte protection. mitigAtion, and enhancement of fish and wildlife. water supply, recreation, or oU]('r pllbl je uses, and for aiding flood control, reclamation, und similar developments. D_ Whether proper provision is made fol' pl'","'",nt or future electrical interconnection with other projec'-n or systems in order to take advantage of diversity of streamflow and of power demands. E. Whether the use to which the power will be devoted is, in general, in accord with the public inLen,sl. F Whether the applicant is financially able to callY out the development. G. Whether the construction, maintenance, nnd ope ..a tion of the proposed project works will illterfere "'. IJC inconsistent with the purpose for which any reserva tion, as defined in the Federal Power Act, was created or acquired. Article 3. The priority granted under the permit shall be lost if the Permittee fails to fulfill the r .. quirements of the permit, if the permit is canceled by order of the Commiosion, m if the Permittee fails, on or before the expiration date of the permit, to file with the Commission or its designated agent an application for license for the proposed project in conformity with the Commission's rules and regulations then in eftect. Article 4. The Permittee shall keep accurAte records ot al l expenditures made for the purposes authorized by the p"'rmit. together with all vouchers and other supporting data relAting to such expenditures, which records and related materials shilll he retained by the Permittee. Article 5. The permit confers no authority upon the Permittee to undertake construction of the proposed project, 01 any part thereof, or to occupy or use lands or other property o[ the United States for the purposes of construction, ulliess sped fic permission is given by the Commission for such occupancy or: use; and neither the granting of such authority nor the perform ance of construction work, whether with or without such author ity, shall be deemed to have created any equities or to have established any rights with respect to issuance of a license for the proposed project, beyond what would have been created or 3 • • • • • • • • • • , , , , , II II established had such authority not been given or such work not been performed. Article 6. The permit is not transferable and may be canceled by order of the commission upon failure of the Permittee to begin in good faith, or to prosecute diligently, the investi gations, examinations, and surveys contemplated under the permit, or to comply with any other conditions therein, or for any other good cause shown after notice and opportunity for hearing. 4 • • United States Department of the Interior -omCE OF THE SECRETAR.Y OfficI of !nv/ronmlntll Policy and Compliance , e89 C Street. Roorn 119 Anchorage, AI••a 9950 1·6126 • ER 95/845 • • Ms. Lois D. Cashell Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 rust Street, N.B . Washington, D.C. 20426 • Dear Ms. Cashen: FEB 22 ms .1 In response to your request of November 9, 1995, we have reviewed the Notice of Preliminary• Permit Application for the Old lIarbor Project (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission No. 11561-000) on Kodiak Island, Alaska. We offer the following comments for your consideration. We understand the project consists of the following: (1) a 4-foot high concrete diversion structure with an intake on the uMamed tributary to Sitkalidak Strait~ (2) a 3,293-foot long, 16· inch diameter high density polyethylene pipeline; (3) a 10.259-foot long, IS-inch diameter steel• penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing one generating unit with an installed capacity of330 kWj (5) a 4,210-foot Jong transmission line intercoMccting with an existing transmission line in the • city of Otd Harbor; and (6) appurtenant facilities . Wr.·beJieve that there are several significant problems to be addressed before a license could be• issued for construction and operation of the proposed facility. The lands covered by the licensing application include certain lands which were acquired by the United States from Old Harbor Native Corporation as part of the comprehensive federal and State of Alaska program for- restoration of the natural resources injured by the won Valdez oil spill. The purchase agreement covering those lands was executed by the parties in May 1995, resulting in the.United States and the State of Alaska acquiring these particular lands in October 1995.• The lands which the penstock would cross are subject to cenain restrictive covenants. Under these covenants, construction ofbuitdings, changes in the topography of the land, removal or• destruction ofp!ants, and manipulation or alteration of natural water courses are prohibited. Use ofthese l:mds in a maMer that is inconsistent with the maintenance ofa national wildH{c refuge• may result in the invocation of additional reversionary provisions in the deed, as required by the seller. The acquisition of these lands by the United States was also subject to a conservation easement granted to the State of Alaska by Old Harbor Native Corporation, which authorizes the• State to independently eruorce these restrictive covenants. • • - Also, sections 12 and 13 oenss, R26W are within an area the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has formally proposed for wilderness designation, under the process outlined in the Alaska ~ationa1 Interest Lands Conservation Act. That proposal is currently under review in the• Department ofthe Interior. Hydroelectric projects are not allowed on refuge lands designated as wiJderness. Proposed wilderness areas are assigned a minimal management category in the Kodiak National Wildlife Reruae Comgrehensive Conservation PlanlEnyjmnmental Im~a"-Statement. The minimal management category does not allow for hydroelectric projects. In order for the project to go forward, it would be necessary for the applicant to pursue with FWS a • land management tategory boundary change and revision of the Kodiak National WUdIife RefuiJe Comprehensjye Conservatjon Plan. A long·term project involving installed equipment on refuge property will require a right-of-way -pennil £tom the FWS's Realty Division in Anchorage. Sharon Janis, Chief, Realty Division, (U.S. Fish Ind Wildlife Service, 1011 E. Tudor Road, Anchorage, AX 99503-3635, (907) 786.3498) is• the appropriate contact We do not object to issuance ofa preliminary permit to conduct fish, wildlife, and habitat studies• within the project area, provided the stipUlations identified in the Attachment become terms and conditions ofthe preliminary permit. Representatives oCFWS t the Department, and the Alaska • Attorney General met last year with legal counsel for Old Harbor Native Corporation to begin discussions oCthe issues raised by the application (which was filed after the sale of the lands to the United States and the State of Alaska). We continue to encourage the applicant to meet with the• FWS Realty representatives as soon as possible to address land status concerns and discuss Kodiak National \YildJj~ Refuie CQm~reben$jye Conservation ptan revisions. • In addition, we urge the applicant to meet with the FWS Ecological Services Division to scope for biological resource related studies. and to consult with the fWS Regional Archeologist. The Attachment describes our trust resources in the project area, suggested studies to address those• resourccs, and stipulations to include if a preliminary permit is issued. These studies are also essential so that the determinations required by 16 U.S.C. § 3120 can be made on the effect orthe proposed project on subsistence activities on federal public lands.- Until land status and plan revision issues are satisfactorily resolved, we request that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission not considcr licensing for the proposed project. We look• C01'Ward to our continued work with you on the Old Harbor Hydroelectric project. • Sincerely, - • Attachment • 2 • • - AITACHMENT - Biological Resources Affected, Suggested Studies, and Stipulations (or PreliminaJ')' Permit (or the Proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric Proj ect • There is limited information about the fisheries resources in the project area. The lower mile of the uMamed tributary of Barling Creek, on which the proposed diversion structure is located, provides spawning habitat for pink, chum, and coho salmon. The diversion structure would be-located about 2 miles beyond the upper limit of documented anadromous fish habitat; however. the upper portions of the stream have not been surveyed on the ground for fish usc. It is likely that Dolly Varden, slimy sculpin, and possibly juvenile coho salmon occur in the vicinity of the -diversion structure. Water passing through the powerhouse would be discharged into Old Harbor Creek (local name used by the Alaska Department offish and Game for salmon escapement• surveys), which is known to support DoUy Varden and provide spawning habitat for pink, chum, and coho salmon. • • The proposed project site provides habitat 'for brown bear, Sitka black-tailed deer, and mountain goat. Bird species nesting in the area may include marbled and Kittlitz's murrclet, harlequin duck, golden eagle, and surfbird. The lower reaches of Barling Creek are frequented by brown bear, beaver, waterfowl, bald eagles, and wintering concentrations of decr. During the latter part of the summer, brown bears• concentrate in the arca to feed on returning salmon. • Bald eagles and wintering deer may be found in the vicinity of the proposed powerhouse on Old Harbor Creek. Since bald eagles are known to concentrate in areas near fish-bearing waters, we suggest that the permittee incorporate measures in the design ofthe transmission line to avoid • avian coUision and electrocution. There are several desisns for increasing the transmission line's phasc..spacing, which wiIl minimize raptor electrocution. We suggest the report entitled Sussested Practices For Raptor Protection On power Ljnes, The State Of The An In ]981 for- technical assistance in designing and constructing these facilities. Another publication, Mitiiatjni Bird Collisions with power LiDes; The State oftbe Art in 1994, provides useful information in -siting and design of power lines to reduce the potential for collision mortality. Infonnation on acquiring these reports can be obtained from the FWS Anchorage Field Office identified below. -In accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, FWS has detennined that no threatened or endangered species are present in the vicinity of the project area. Several Species of Concern are perceived to be declining; however, FWS lacks sufficient information to propose listing these as threatened or endangered. These species are: -.. Harlequin duck (Histriollicus hlstrionicus) Kittlitz's murrelet (Brachyramphus orevirostri.f) Marbled murrclet (Brachyramphu.f marmorlJl'us) • 1 - .. • We believe the proposed Old Harbor Project could have significant adverse impacts on important fish, wildlife, and habitat resources. As. result, we suggest studies be designed to provide the .. foIIowing information: • Distribution and abundance of species found in the vicinity of the project and all • project features; • Seasonal use of the project area by fish and wildlife;• • Purpose for species use of the area.; • • Mean annual and mean monthly discharge rates and monthly high and low discharge rates for the streams impacted by the project; • • Description of'how the project would affect flow rates and aquatic resources in the impacted streams; • • Designs to be used to avoid entrainment of fish in the diversion and provisions to provide upstream and downstream fish passage; • • Expected changes in water temperature and quality; • • Expected water treatment and discharge; • Provisions to be made to pass stream gravels past the diversion structure; and• • Construction and reclamation/revegetation techniques and the need to provide access for project construction and maintenance.• We believe the applicant should conduct studies to verify the quantity and quality of salmonid spawning and rearing habitat affected by the project. An instream flow study, such as Instream• Flow Incremental Methodology, should be conducted to determine flows necessary to maintain or enhance habitat supporting resident and anadromous fish populations during construction and operation. The pennittee should also prepare plans, we believe., to mitigate impacts by avoiding, -minimizing, andlor compensating for losses to fish, wildlife, and their habitats. We suggest that monitoring studies may be needed to determine the extent of project impacts, the effectiveness of-mitigation measures, and the need for additional mitigation. Prior to conducting studies, we suggest the applicant prepare a plan for FWS approval, detailing-the methods, policies, and techniques that contractors and project personnel will use to minimize bearlhuman interaction and contlict.- -4 - • - We do not object to the proposed prelimin3J)' permit, providing the following conditions are incorporated to protect fish and wildlif'e resources: -The permittee shaJl within 60 days of permit issuance, consult with the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage Field Office, 60S West 4th-Avenue, Room 0-62, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, (907) 271-2888. Consultation will Include: (1) reviewing project plans and determining what studies are needed to provide the tish and wildlife information necessary to adequately assess potential • adverse impacts upon those resources; and (2) determining appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse impacts. • The applicant shall conduct a cultural resource survey and contact the F'WS Regional Archaeologist, Chuck Diters, at (907) 786·3386. Mr. Diters will consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer, in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and 36 cn 800. The applicant should also examine the potential for the project to enhance long-term public .. recreation opportunities . It is our intent to work with the applicant to resolve concerns relating to fish and wildlif'e • resources and identify means by which resources will be protected or enhanced. Ifit is determined that the proposed project will result in adverse impacts, we will assist the applicant in modifying the project's design to alleviate or mitigate such effects.• • • - • • - • - - s • United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT ALASKA STATE OFFICE• 222 W. 7th Avenue, #13 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99513-7599 - • Mr. J. Mark Robinson Director, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission • Division of Project Compliance & Administration Mail Code: HL21.3 825 North Capitol Street, N.E. -Washington, D.C. 20426 Dear Mr. Robinson: • AA-77922 2344 (931) FEB - 8 1996 PECEIVF~ FEB 12 199r:: AVEl • This letter is to acknowledge receipt of an application for a preliminary permit filed for the proposed Old Harbor Hydropower Project No. 11561-000. The proposed project is on an unnamed creek which drains into Barling Bay on Kodiak Island, and is located near Old Harbor, Alaska. We have established BLM casefile AA-77922 for this project, and the application will be noted to the records. • A review of the status of the area, as described in the application and depicted on the copy of the Notice of Preliminary Permit Application dated November 9, 1995, has been completed. According to the most current Master Title Plats (MTP) (copies enclosed), the• area affected by the proposed project is almost entirely within the boundary of the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). Please note, however, that the MTP for T. 34 S., R. 25 W., Seward Meridian (SM), which indicates that a portion of the proposed project is • on land that has been interimly conveyed aC No. 165), does not reflect current status of that land. The land has been returned to the Federal government as a result of a 1995 agreement between the Old Harbor Native Corporation and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife • Service. The MTP is currently being updated to show the correct status. The portion of the project that is not within the Refuge boundary (within sec. 20, T. 34 S., R. 25 W., SM) has been conveyed out of Federal ownership. • If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (907) 271-3266.-Sincerely, /8/SHIRLEY J. MACKE - Shirley J. Macke Land Law Examiner-Division of Lands, Minerals, and Resources Enclosures-MTP's (2) - - 2 .. - cc: - .. .. • • • • • • .. - - - .. - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Director 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99503 (w/encl) Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge Jay R. Bellinger, Refuge Manager 1390 Buskin River Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 (w/encl) Kodiak Island Borough Jerome M. Selby, Mayor 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 (w/encl) City of Old Harbor Rick Berns, Mayor P.O. Box 109 Old Harbor, Alaska 99643 (w/encl) Old Harbor Native Corporation Emil Christiansen, President P.O. Box 71 Old Harbor, Alaska 99643 (w/encl) Tony Azuyak Old Harbor Tribal Council P.O. Box 15 Old Harbor, Alaska 99643 (w/encl) Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503-7497 (w/encl) - el:Co .... i'OiIIO::r 0Illli1i11 '1.... liI .Q::rilln .....iII:::SO., I»'1 .... liI::r III liIlD o ..... 00a.1II ... '" t::::st::1II0a.iII ........ .... 0 .... " '" - R, 1" IV Salmon Falls 1-004 Falls P-1994-004 ey Forebay, P-11560 Gulch, P-11562 Upper ~onroe, P-1517-008 2 ff:. .....~III • ill(lO~ '1.'ill 1»1» ~;iII'<.O~ .,."",III '<i .... .... 1/4/96 1/4/96 ........ :::s0 ... 0 C o ::r ..... :::s ..... III :::s llIilll.Q ..... a.... :::S'1i11lDill 0 ..... 0 .... 1» ::rill a. 41) ~z.:::: Z ID Oel ......... '100 .... < 0 iill ill..."I~ :::sa. Wc:~a.a·:3 ~ :::s .... ill.....""::r....r;~iII~a.O~q~t::........ S'.Q ill (I .... ::rlll 41)(11",,'" lII:::IodQ,.t1 Uoill ........ 0 ::r::r.... iIIllIUl ill"""" ~ ..... 0 ........ '1 '1 ..... iII:::st:liI.Q :::I" 41) ..... 00 "":::I" n 0 liI '0 z I» ~ :::s'< ... ~ c: n I~til I» 0 :::s .., ~ t:: I» t'l '1 X '<., ~ "Z Project Issue New Date North Georgia DEIS comments 1/27/96 P-2354-018 Bliss, P-1975-014 Tendering I 1/4/96 2/19/96 3/20/96 ional studies) I Tendering (additional studies) I Tendering ional studies) I Tendering (additional studies) Tendering (additional studies) Tendering (additional studies) Application for preliminary Permit for Permit I Appieation for I Seoping 11/25/95 12/18/95 12/18/95 11/9/95 11/9/95 11/9/95 ! 11/20/95 12/19/96 • 2/19/96 11/16/96 : 1/28/96 1/30/96 1/18/96 1/18/96 1/18/96 1/19/96 .... Z 0 ~ ~ ~ : 0 ~ .., .... ., Z .... 0 3: til til • OJ w \.!I A I 0.... ~ ~ ~ I 3/20/96 3/20/96 IJ 2/15/96 2/27/96 II 3/1/96 I I 1 2 / 17/ 96 ! 2/17/96 i I 12/17/96 I 2/18/96 .., to! 0 to!$! t" c: Z ~~ to! to! ~O elO<~ .,~> gto!"" ~ 5:0 .,.., 0~?C n~ 0 ....!I n > tiS en .....0 Z - - ., {II • • • It .. • • .. • .. - .. 3 - II'Project I Issue Issuance Date New Date Expires Date Flambeau DEIS DEIS Co_ents 12/8/95 2/6/96 3/7/96 Big Falls, P-2390 Pixley, P-2395 10(j) 12/4/95 2/19/96 3/20/96Lower, P-2421 crowley, P-2473 Thornapple, P-2475 Section 7 12/4/96 1/3/96 2/19/96 Upper, P-2640 Irving Dam, P-11516 Intervenor 12/15/95 2/13/96 3/14/96 Middleville, P-11120 Intervenor 12/15/95 2/13/96 3/14/96 Lower Androscoggin DEIS DEIS 12/8/95 1/22/96 2/21/96 , Gulf Island, P-22B3 Co_ents I Marcal, P-11482 10(j) 12/1/95 2/14/96 3/15/96 Section 7 12/1/95 1/2/96 2/19/96 Boyd Dam, P-11072 Intervenor 12/12/95 2/12/96 3/11/96 , Scoping 12/13/95 1/12/96 2/12/96 Co_ents Carlyle Dam, P-11214-001 Public Notice 11/20/95 1/22/96 2/22/96 Gainer Dam, P-11282-001 ' Notice Seeking , 12/18/95 1/20/96 2/20/96 Studies Inglis Lock By-Pass Public Notice 10/27/95 12/26/95 1/26/95 P-10B93-002 P-1962-000, Rock creek REA 12/29/95 2/16/96 13/18/96 Cresta Project Menominee River Basin P-2433-004, Grand Rapids P-2357-003, White Rapids P-2394-006, Chalk Hill P-2536-009, Little Quinnesec Falls P-460-001, CUshman P-19BB-007, Haas-Kings River P-11557, Coleman Ranch 3/1/96I P-1864-003. Bond Falls 4 II Issue I DEIS I DEIS DEA Application for Preliminary Permit Scoping Document I Issuance i Date Date Expires 12/1/95 1/ 16/ 9 61 2/13/96 11/30/95 11/16/96 12/15/95 11/1/95 1/ 11/ 961 12/5/95 11/31/96 ! New I Date 2/15/96 3/14/96 2/15/96 2/ 11/ 961 • - - II' ,I;, • .. .. .. I • .. I • I • • - .. • , .. ..TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR J3J RASPBERRY ROAD DEPARTltlEr\'T OF FISH AND 6AItIE ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 995111-1599 PHONE: (!JOT) 344.0541HABITAT AND RESTORA TION DIVISION - January 18 t 1996• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Attn: Secretary Lois D. Cashell 888 First Str't!et, N.E. Pcst-tt'. brand fax transmittal memo 7671 r" c:rl paees • r'" EQ(le, fI~tlp) ICo. f!>14"O?n"*6<£ /'r Dept. __ "lI' ZS"B'.21/'1 II'IVII1 J. 1. .... ~J:.cJ' ICo. tlft)frltl-/ltf,R Phona#H"l -Z "3 ~3 FlU I! "261 zyt'Y Washington~ D.C. 20426 Dear SecICtary cashel1: Re: COl\1MENTS and RECOMMENDATIOr.-TS FOR TEl{!\IIS AND COl\"DITlONS PROJECT NO. 11561-000 • PRELIMINARY PERMIT FOR OLD HARBOR HYDROPOWER The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADP&G) has reviewed the notice of application • for the Old Harbor Hydropower Project referenced above. We understand that the proposed studies are aimed at determining the feasibility of producing an electrical generating capacity near the village of Old Harbor on Kodiak Island, Alaska. • .. Preliminary project plans call for construction of a 4·foot high water diversion structure on an unnamed tributary flowing into Sitkalidak Strait. Water would be tarried via a 3 t 293-foot long, 16-inch diamet;ei' HOPE pipeline and a lO,259-foot long, 16-inch diameter steel penstock to a. powerhouse located southeast of the point of water withdrawal. After use, the water would be discharged into a completely different watershed. A single 330 kW generator would produce electricity and a 4,270-foot long transmission line would interconnect the powerhouse with the existing City of Old Harbor transmission line. At this time we have only a limited amount of infonnation relative to the fish resources that .. -may be found in the project area. The proposed water diversion structure is located near the hc::adwater5 of a tributary to Barling Creek Oocal named used by ADF&G for salmon escapement survey~). The nibutar}' is identified as anadromous fish stream number 258-52 10020-2002 (hereinafter called stream 2002). Stream 2002 enters Barling Creek: from me north about 1/a mUe upstream from Barling Creek's mouth at Barling Bay. The lower mile of stream 2002 supports spawning pink, chum 1 and coho salmon. The lower 'AI mile of Barling -Creek also provides salmon spawning habitat. The water dive:sion will occur approximately 2 miles upstream of the currently documented upper limit of anadromous fish presence in stream 2002. However, the upper reaches of the stream have not been surveyed on me ground to determine. fish habitat and fish use of the stream. Based on :ish surveys in similar - - - • - - - • • • • • • • .. - - - • Secrewy Lois D. Cashell Ja:'lUa.ry 18, 1996 types of streams found elsewhere on Kodiak Island it is likely that juvenile coho salmon rear in th~ upper reaches of the stream and it is likely that resident fish (e.g., Dolly Varden and slimy sculpin) would be found almost to the headwaters of the system. After running through the turbines, the water is proposed to be discharged into Old Harbor Creek (local named used by AD:F&G for salmon escapement surveys). Old Harbor Creek (a.k.a. Lagoon Creek) is identified as anadromous fish stream number 258-52-1001~ and is known to provide habitat for spawning pink, chum, and coho salmon as well as Dolly Varden. A small scale local effon has been made to enhance the coho salmon production in Old Harbor Creek to supplement the sport fishing opportUnity and to encouxage commercial lodge development in the community. We reconunend that any proposal to dam or divert the headwaters of stream 2002 and thereby modify the natural flow regime consider and provide for B.deq'lWZ! seasonal irutream flows during both the .reservoir filling period and the post construction ope:ation phase of the project to support: the salmon spawning. incubation, and rearing requirements in the stream reaches downstr=m of the structure. This requirement would also apply to other watelbodi.es discovered to support fish popalations :in the project area. The proposed project site is found in an area that cur:r=ntly provides habitat used by brown bear, Sitka black-tailed deer, and several species of birds including bald eagles. The lower elevations of the Barling Cr=k valley are used by watmfowl. beavers, and. concentrations of deer during the winter. The area sur:rounding the powerhouse provides habitat known to support winter concentrations of deer • To adequately assess the potential affects of the proposal on fish and wildlife resources found in the area, site specific and species specific use information must be gathered. We recommend that the studies oC the projeet's environmental impacts be designed and the relevant information collected so that the following questions can be answered. 1. What is the distribution and abundance of :fish and wildlife species found in and around the project site? Included in the area dermed as the project site should be the watershed of the areas that will be flooded by any reservoirs. the pipeline and pen$lOCk routes. the powerhouse, the transmission line facilities and appurtenant st:tuctures, the cleared powerline easements, and roads required to &cees! the facilif3' for constrUction and long-term mamteDance purposes. 2. During what time(s) of the year and where are the fish and \Vildlife species distributed in and arot:nd the project site? 3. For what purpose(s) do the fish and wildlife species use the habitats found in the project area? Include information peninent to species specific life function I • Secretary Lois D. CasheI1 -3- January 18, 1996 requirements (e.g., feeding, denning, rutting, perching, nesting, migration, spawning. etc.) and time of year the uses occur. - 4. What are the volumes of water flow including the long-term mean annual and monthly- average flow rates as well as the monthly high and low flow rates of the waterbodies in the project area and how do they relate to energy production requirements? What is the basic Vr"ater balance of input versus output of these systems~ How will the proposed project affect these flows and any fish resources found in the streams?- s. If flSh are found in the headwaters upstream of the proposed diversion, what provision(s) will be included in projeel design to prevent entrainment of the fish in the • diverted water and what provisions will be included to provide for unhindered upstream and downstream movement of ftsh past the diversion structure? • S. \Vhat changes in water tempcr8.ture and water quantity are likely to occur from any increased fe$etvoit capacities and S1I't'J8.m flow modifications? -6. After uset how win waters be t:reated and discharged? Items of coooem include the a.flect Df inc.reased water t=nperatures, stream bed and stream bank erosion/scour at point of discharge. and avoidance or attractant response in fish to any temperatUre- cl'IaDJes. .. The data gleaned from the site specific studies should be used to develop an active project mitigation program aimed rust at a.voiding then, sequentiaD.y minimizing, restoting or rehabilitating, :and finally, if nece.m.ry, replacing fish and wildlife resources and habitats that are impacted by the project. We appxecia1'e the opportuni~ to comment and would like to• participate in the planning associaled with the dl:Sign of the cavkonmental studies. In additiOll, some of the brown bear information gathc:red by ADF&G during the environmental studies for the T=-ror Lake Hydropower project may be usefUl for this project site and is available for use. Should you have any questions please contact me at either the letterhead - address or call me at (901) 267-2285. ii' Sincerely t • ,~~~A~ C. Wayne-Doleza1 7 Habitat Biologist Region n -Habitat and Restoration Division (907) 267-2285 - - • - • Secretary Lois D. Cashell -4- cc: 1. Clemens, DPR-FERC M. Strzelecki, PERC Contact-C. Walls. AVEe 1. Westlund, ADF&G R. Smith, ADF&G . -W. Donaldson, ADFIJt.G D. Prokopowich, ADFkG • L. Schwarz, ADF&G C. Estes, ADF&:G A. Rappoport. USPWS-W AES III 1. BelIinJer, Xodiak NWR R. Morris. NMPS • A. Murphy, OMBIDGC L.Freed,KPB . A. Swider.sld t DOUAG (J.;(.Uh(..e,.ltr ~ h:; rd• • • • • • • • I - - - - • • • - • • • • • - - - • - - TITLE: Rli':"4Ol0LImON STJPPOR'l1NG HYDRO ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE 1'HE ELECTRI(~ NEEDS OF OI.D lIARBOR WHF.REAS: Electricity is one of the most widel), used sources of energy for re:!lidential and commercial purp08CS. WHEREAS: The prodution of eleetdcity io Old Harbor is 100% by diesel generation. WHEREAS: The eoIU i .. volved in tile continued production of power by diesel geaerato1'll are projected to i-creale, d.e to environmental n.oguJation and ruel eosts ill the Deaf future. WHEREAS: A fealible aite for tile development uf a Bydro--electrie plant exi1Jt3 near Old Harbor. WHEREAS: Thia utilizatioD of Hydro power ror electricity IIlk'S aD rt"BelVable rfflource to provide for JlR environmentally clean ..and lellS el.peD"ive method of produdlll!! electricity. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Old Harbor is in support of' the Alaska Village F;leetrial Co--operatlve', efl'Orb to proceed with the permittin~ seeuring of' funding, ud the development of a lIydro-elearic plant to provide the electrital DeedS uc the coDlBlunity of Old Harbor. PAST AND APPROVED by the City of Old ""rho ... this s>h. day or November", 1995. Riek Bema, Mayor p.o. Bolt 10') Old Harbor, Alaska 99643 aTY OF THE TIIREE SAINTS (907) 286·2203 OR 286-2204 FAX: 2)!1l-227R RESOLUTION 95-..11 DYDRO-PROJ.ECT RFCF.lVFO Of of l;j 199!:> AVEC • - RESc.H,unON 95~t6-IIYDRO-PROJECT • THL.E: RF.SOLUTlON SUPPORTING J IYDRO ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE THE ELECTRIC NEEDS OF TIm NA'lTvE VIl.LAGE or: . ' OLD llARBOR • WHEREAS: Electricity is the only source ofenergy lor rcsic1entint Ilnd commercial purposes, .. WHEREAS: The production of electricity in Old Harbor is lO()G/a by diesel generation, • WHEREAS: The l:·osts involvcll ill the c(mlinuco proouction of )lOWer by diesel generators arc I'{Ojccled to i...crca~t:!. due to environmental regulalion and ruel costS 111 the nenr future. • WHEREAS: A teasible site for the development ofa Hydro-electric plant exists ncar Old ~1'\rbor, .. • WHEREAS: This uti1i:r,stlon of Hydro power for eJec..1ricity uses a renewal resource to provide for an environmentally clean, and less expensive method of producing electricity_ NOW THEREFORE BE 11' RESOLVED, the Old llarbor Tribal Council is in support of the Alaska Village Electric Covperative's eflul1 to proceed with Ule permitting., securing • of funding. and the dt."Vclopmcnt of a Hydro-EI«tric plant 'to provide the clecttical needs ofthc Native Village of Old Harbor. • PAST AND APPROVED by the Native Vil.lage of Old Harbor this 7fI,-o..1.y of ~...embcr. 1995. -"-7~ X1. ~~~, Tony Azuyak, Sr., ·friba?;resident Old Hamor Tribal Council -AttJ:st:~ ~~ trlIy Christiansen, Tribal ClerK Old Harbor Tribal Council - - \• • - • • • • • • • • • • • • • I I Ii a • • UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COKMISS(ON NOTICE OF PRELIMINARY PERMIT APPLIC,\TION (December 7, 1995) Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. Type of Application: preliminary Permit b. project No.: 11561-000 c. Date filed: October 25, 1995 d. Applicant: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. e. Name of Project: Old Harbor Project f. Location: Partially within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge (administered by the U.S Fish and Wildlife service), on an unnamed tributary to Sitkalidak strait, near the town of Old Harbor, on Kodiak Island, Alaska. Sections 12, 13, 18, 19, and 20 in R26W, T34S. g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. S791(a) -825(r) h. Applicant Contact: Charles Y. Walls General Manager Alaska Village Electric cooperative 4831 Eagle street Anchorage, Alaska 9950J-7497 (907) 561-1818 i. FERC Contact: Mr. Michael strzelecki, (2021 219-2827 j. Comment Date: February 16, 1996 k. Description of Project: The proposed old H,lrbor Project would consist of: (1) a four-foot-high conc~ete diversion structure with an intake on the unnamed tributary to Sitkalidak Strait; (2) a 3,293-foot-long, 16-inch-diameter HOPE pipeline; (3) an 10,259-foot-long, 16-inch-diameter steel penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing one generating n::-I\-~'; Project No. 11561-000 - 2 unit with an installed capacity of 330 kWj (5) a 4,270-foot long transmission line interconnecting with an existing transmission line in the city of old Harbor; and (5) appurtenant facilities. No new access roads will be required to conduct the stUdies. 1. This notice also consists of the following standard paragraphs: A5, A7, A9, A10, B, C, and 02. A5. Preliminary Permit --Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CrR 4.30(b) and 4.36. A7. Preliminary Permit --Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CrR 4.30(b) and 4.36. A9. Notice of intent --A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. AIO. proposed Scope of Studies under Permit --A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a stUdy of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. B. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene --Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in • • • • • • • I I I I I I project No. 11561-000 - 3 accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214, In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will .!onsider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the commi 's Rules may become a party to the proceeding, Any comments, ~s, or motions to intervene must be received on or befo )ecified comment date for the particular application. C. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents -,ings must bear in all capital letters the title "CO-~OTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION", "COMPET. ,CATION", "PROTEST", "MOTION TO INTERVENE", as applicable, che Project Number of the particular application to Which thn filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed b\' providing the original and the number of copies provided by thn Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First street, N.E., Washington, !l.C. 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Project Review, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the aboVe-mentioned address. A copy of any notice 0,' intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specif:.ed in the particular application. 02. Agency Comments --Federal, state, and loca. agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies dire<:tly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments tlithin the time specified for filing comments, it will be presum~d to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Lois D. Cashell Secretary • I I z o (iicn :i ::i 01,11ON >3 a: N o. S~ :::l • e"ZLLlg a:e" >ze,, a: XLLl cnffi; .J cr ffi o ~ • cn! cnw ~!!! (iiI!! :::l~ma: cl~ ulZ ~~ z iii IL • ~- -::::_J .-::::. ',j' :~ 1-; . :~': :.".; :3':= ".(: Li.l ;, '; :t:: O:~ ::::::: Ld <)1.-.:~n => :...: ::r <i_ c~ !)" -:,i, <':w 'i'": <~..: ;'-:~ ~J8~~~ ~~~ ~~~G ~~ ~ ~32~m I '-'iIi '-11 :;\~~ .".... "("..,:. I·':· I ...:. IS, I.';'.T'.;," • • • • • • • • • • • , , , ,I I I a UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION HOTIC. OP .RELIMIH~Y PERMIT APPLICATIOH (November 9, 1995) Take notice that the following hydroelectr 1 application has been filed with the Commission and is available 'or public inspection: a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit b. Project No.: 11561-000 c. Date filed: October 25, 1995 d. Applicant: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. e. Name of project: Old Harbor project f. Location: Partially within the Kodiak NaUonal tHldllfe Refuge (administered by the U.S Fish and wildlife Service), on an unnamed tributary to sitkalidak strait, near the town of Old Harbor, on Kodiak Island, Alaska. sections 12, ll, 18, 19, and 20 in R26W, T34S. g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 5791(a) -825(r) h. Applicant Contact: Charles Y. walls General Managar Alaska Village Electric Cooperative 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503-7491 (907) 561-1818 i. FERC Contact: Mr. Michael Strzelecki, (202) 219-2827 j. Comment Date: January 18, 1996 k. Description of Project: The proposed Old Harbor project would consist of: (1) a four-foot-high concrete diversion structure with an intake on the unnamed tributary to sitkalidak strait; (2) a 3,293-foot-Iong, 16-inch-diameter HOPE pipeline: (3) an 10,259-foot-Iong, 16-inch-diameter steel penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing one generating unit with an installed capacity of 330 kW; (5) a 4,270-foot IJC-A-12 project No. 11561-000 - 2 long transmission line interconnecting with an existing transmission line in the city of old Harbor; and (5) appurtenant facilities. No new access roads will be required to conduct the studies. 1. This notice also consists of the following standard paragraphs: A5, A7, A9, AlO, B, C, and D2. A5. Preliminary Permit --Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must sUbmit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.l0(b) and 4.36. A7. Preliminary Permit --Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 eFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. A9. Notice of intent --A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. AlO. Proposed Scope of Studies under Permit --A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. B. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene --Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and I 1 I I I Ii <til. /1'• 1&....... 'w. I .. • • • • • • • "''' . .. •F?o/tet BOUI'H:/a,y J.1o.p • project No. 11561-000 - 3 Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determininq the appropriate action to take, the Commies ion will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. C. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents --Any filinqs must bear in all capital letters the title "COMMENTS", "NOTICE OP INTENT TO PILE COMPETING APPLICATION", IICOMPETItIG APPLICATION", "PROTEST", "MOTION TO INTERVENE", as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Pederal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of project Review, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the . above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. D2. Agency Comments --Pederal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Lois D. CasheH Secretary u . to'f:...., -i> <S>~ v \ \) \ ~ ..,~ 'f:.. to ~ !'~~4-C' \ ~ S 1 S • OLD HARBOR HYDROPOWER -4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503.7497 Phone: (907) 561·1818 October 18, 1995 SECRETARY FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION • 825 North Capitol Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426 - Dear Sirs: Enclosed for filing is an Application by Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) • for a preliminary permit in accordance with Part I of the Federal Power Act. The Old Harbor Hydropower Project is a proposed hydroelectric project on an unnamed creek • which drains into Barling Bay on Kodiak Island, Alaska. The nearest community is Old Harbor, located approximately 2 miles to the South. • Sincerely yours, • Charles Y. Walls, General Manager Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. • Enclosures: Original and fourteen copies. 1. Initial Statement, 1 page. • 2. Exhibit 1 -Project Description and Land Description, 3 pages. 3. Exhibit 2 -Description of Proposed Studies, 2 pages. 4. Exhibit 3 -Costs, Financing, and Marketing, 1 page. 5. Exhibit 4 -Project Map and Land Description Map, 2 drawings. cc: '. • Regional Director, Arthur C. Martin Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Portland Regional Office 1120 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 1340 Portland, Oregon 97204 Refuge Manager, Jay R. Bellinger - Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge 1390 Buskin River Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 - Mayor, Jerome M. Selby-Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 - - - Mayor, Rick Berns City of Old Harbor P.O. Box 109 Old Harbor, Alaska 99643 President, Emil Christiansen Old Harbor Native Corporation P.O. Box 71 Old Harbor, Alaska 99643 Tony Azuyak Old Harbor Tribal Council P.O. Box 15 Old Harbor, Alaska 99643 • Draft Environmental Assessment Old Harbor Project, FERC #11690-000 <II - <II • • • • • • .. .. • .. - - APPENDIXD • - • United States Department of the Interior -OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance 1 6S9 C Street, Room 119 -Anchorage, Alaska 99601-5128 ER99/13 March 11, 1999 Mr. Dan Hertrich .. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc . RECEIVED 1503 West 33rd Avenue ..~: ?hs lot" Anchorage, Alaska 99503 • Re: PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ON DRAFT llCENSE APPllCATION AND PRELIMINARY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, Alaska Village Electric• Cooperative, Inc., Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11561 ' Dear Mr. Hertrich:• In response to your notice ofDecember 31, 1998, we reviewed the Notice ofDraft License Application and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for a minor unconstructed• project located partially on the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, on Mountain Creek, a tributary to the East Fork ofBarling Creek, and Lagoon Creek near Old Harbor, Alaska. We offer the following comments for your consideration. We request that these issues be addressed prior to • preparation of a final EA. • General Comments We believe that revisions should be made to ensure that the Final EA contains a full disclosure of environmental effects, and that alternatives designed to minimize environmental effects are considered. This will help to ensure that the consequences of this project are properly considered in the decision making and public review process . .. Definitive statements are represented in the Draft EA as fact without any supporting logic or rationale for their determinations, or data supporting their analyses. We recommend this be corrected in the Final EA. Additionally, we believe that the limitations offield data noted in-specialists' reports should be identified in the body ofthe Final EA. Specific examples are noted below.-Sufficient information needs to be provided for people unfamiliar with the project site to -adequately understand the resources being evaluated, or the logic used to arrive at the various conclusions. The EA should be written to allow the general public to fully understand the proposed actions, a reasonable array of alternatives, the expected environmental consequences, -and the logic and rationale used to determine these consequences, without referring to other documents. We believe it is not sufficient to simply say that the proposed project is not expected - - III .. to affect a resource-a description of how the specialist arrived at that conclusion, as well as a-document or reference of supporting information, should be incorporated. -We suggest the relative importance of the Barling and Lagoon Creek fisheries be put into perspective with tables and data, in addition to text. The conclusions may be the same but the reader needs to be able to clearly identify the differences.-The proposed project should, we believe, be consistent with the management plan for the area and with community interest. We also suggest the licensee provide the appropriate enhancement of public recreation opportunities. Specific Comments• Initial Statement The land ownership in the proposed project area, as described in this section, needs to be completed. Although the project is located within the boundaries of the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge and all of the subsurface estate is owned by the United States, the project affects surface estates owned both by the U.S. as part of the Kodiak Refuge, and by the Old Harbor Native Corporation. Master Title Plats accurately describing the land status of the area proposed for the project can be obtained from the Bureau ofLand Management. Additionally, before this project can be developed on Refuge lands, the applicant must obtain a right-of-way permit from the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).• • The table shown under outline bullet #8, titled "Lands ofthe United States affected (shown on Exhibit G)," does not clearly describe the status ofFederal lands affected by this project. We suggest the table be modified to clarify the land ownership and conservation easement status as follows: • Under ownership, all lands currently listed as KNWR should be listed as owned by the United States. If additional clarification is desired, these lands can also be identified as • administered by the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge. Several different conservation easements affect various parcels in the project area. A note should be added to the key for this table identifying the specific conservation easement -described. The package we received did not contain the map identified as "Exhibit G." The map -identified as C-l appears to have some of the information described in "Exhibit G," but the -information presented is difficult to interpret. It is unclear which portions of the land were considered Kodiak National Wtldlife Refuge and which were Old Harbor Native Corporation. We suggest clarifying this by outlining and labeling all land ownerships in - the vicinity of the project. - - - 2 • Attached Maps and Figures We believe including a better vicinity map and map showing the land• ownership over the entire project site would be helpful. We suggest these maps be inserted early in the document. Use of various line types for outlines of polygons, color or high quality shading, and more complete labeling would make these maps easier to read.• Exhibit E -Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment for Hydropower License Old Harbor Project- 3. Proposed Action and Alternatives The only alternatives presented are the applicant's proposal and the no action alternative. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process mandates• that a reasonable number of alternatives be evaluated. We suggest that other alternatives be evaluated, such as different sites, different project sizes, or storage projects, be discussed and the• rationale for their rejection explained. • 3. I. I PrQject Description We believe that a more detailed project description is needed to assess project impacts. We suggest including, for example: I) describe if the pipeline will be buried between the diversion structure and the powerhouse; 2) describe the width of the construction right of way needed; 3) and describe the dimensions ofthe access road to the powerhouse and the types of stream crossings proposed, etc. 3.1.3 Proposed Environmental Measures The Draft EA states: "Environmental investigations reveal that Mountain Creek is at best a marginal fishery habitat. Lagoon Creek is a much more viable fishery habitat." This is a strong statement considering the limited fisheries studies that have been conducted. We believe this sentence should simply state that Mountain Creek appears • to provide some rearing habitat for juvenile coho salmon, rather than to broadly categorize it as marginal fishery habitat . • Unauthorized use of All-Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) on the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge is one of our most significant concerns. ATV access can allow for an increased take ofwildlife, such as brown bear and deer. ATV trails in alpine tundra areas are particularly destructive and can cause soil compaction, elimination ofvegetation, rutting, erosion, destruction of steam banks, and long term scars upon the land, which in turn degrade fish and wildlife habitat. We recommend the Final EA discuss in more detail how access to Project lands will be prohibited, what steps will be• taken to monitor compliance with restrictions on access, and, in the event ATVs continue to access Project lands, what additional actions could be taken to restrict access.-The Draft EA states: "A tailrace barrier will be constructed that will prevent migrating fish from -entering the tailrace." We suggest the document describe what size, species, and life stage offish would be prevented from entry by the tailrace barrier. -4.6 Section 18 Fishway Prescription The Section 18 Fishway Prescription will be determined by the fisheries agencies, not the project applicant-we suggest this be corrected. - 3 - - 5.1 General Description of the Lagoon and Barling Bay Drainage Area We recommend that this• section include a description of the eagle nests present in the vicinity ofthe access road and powerhouse, including the known history of nest use. It should also include approximate distances between the nest sites and the access road and powerhouse.- Furthermore, we suggest that this section also contain a general description ofthe fish populations and habitat present in Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek.• 5.3 Issues Not Addressed The Draft EA states, "Water quality issues are not ofa concern with• this Project." However, there are several letters in our correspondence files indicating that water quality is of concern to various agency representatives, most notably from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (see letter dated July 2, 1997). We suggest the Final EA• describe how the project will affect water quality. For example, will the project alter factors such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, and others identified in agency letters, and ifnot, why? We have particular concerns regarding the effect the project may have on dissolved gases in the water • and the potential for the project to lower the water temperature in Lagoon Creek. In Table 2, we note that the water temperature at the intake is 10 degrees colder than the temperature at the powerhouse. Ifwater temperatures in Lagoon Creek are substantially reduced, it could affect fish• spawning, incubation, and rearing in the stream. We recommend including a description of the likely temperature differential between Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek, the temperature differential at the powerhouse, and the distance ( stream miles) it would take for the discharged • • waters to reach the normal ambient temperatures ofLagoon Creek. Ifthere would be a temperature difference between the powerhouse discharge waters and Lagoon Creek, we suggest describing the impacts of this temperature difference on the fish resources ofLagoon Creek. 5.3.2 Vegetation Disturbance We believe there should be a discussion regarding why this issue was not addressed. There is a discussion ofthe short-term physical changes that construction of• the pipeline will have on vegetation (elimination ofvegetation in a corridor approximately 50' wide along the length of the pipeline), but no evaluation of long-term impacts at this site. It appears that the statement "It is estimated that in 2 years grasses will be fully re-established in the disturbed area." is expected to adequately address these effects. However, this assumes that revegetation ofgrasses (native or exotic species) of any sort along the corridor will function as ... recovered habitat. The description ofvegetation along the proposed pipeline route varies from grasslmossllichen environment, to willow/alder, dense alder thickets, and Kenai birch. From a soil stability standpoint, revegetation with grass may be suitable. This issue, however, appears to• focus on the vegetative community. Ifthe vegetation is changed and not expected to fully recover, we believe this should be identified. Furthermore, we suggest that the long-term effects on vegetation should be identified. Ifthe alteration ofvegetation on 18 acres is not considered ... significant, the document should state this and explain the rationale for this determination. In addition, we suggest the document include a discussion of measures to replant vegetation for -soil stabilization. It is likely that the FWS will require revegetation of the construction right of way with a mixture of native grasses and forbs. This mitigation measure should be discussed. - 4 • ... • 5.3.5 Threatened or Endangered Species "The species of concern that could potentially be in the-Project area (Harlequin Duck, Kittlitz's Murrelet, and Marbled Murrelet) were not found either. Therefore, this analysis will not consider impacts to those species." Since these species are not listed, we suggest this discussion should be moved to section "5.3.6, Impacts to Birds." The-above statement is based on the fact that these species were not located during the 3 days when general bird surveys were conducted at the site (1 day August 1996 and 2 days June 1998). There is insufficient data to conclude that these species do not use this habitat at some time. We• suggest the document discuss whether or not habitat that would support these species of concern is present in the project area. After walking the project site from the powerhouse to the diversion (June 20, 1998, site visit by FWS biologist Gary Wheeler), we concluded that habitat likely to support marbled or Kittlitz's murrelet is not present in the project area. However, habitat which may support nesting harlequin ducks is present on Lagoon Creek. We believe that this further• analysis of bird impacts should be considered in the Final EA 5.3.6 Itnpacts to Birds We suggest consideration of habitat alteration and impacts to neotropical • migrant birds as a result ofthe project pipeline and transmission corridor be recognized and described. While no neotropical species of concern were identified, these avian species may lose the use ofa variety of habitats for nesting and foraging. 5.3.7 Wetlands Wetlands are generally highly productive habitats for fish and wildlife. Consequently, we believe that the applicant should avoid wetlands whenever possible. In.. addition, we suggest the document address whether or not the penstock will be routed through the floodplain ofLagoon Creek. Ifthe penstock is planned to be routed though the floodplain, we would be concerned about destabilization and removal of floodplain vegetation, as well as the• potential for damage to the penstock from channel movement and changes within the floodplain. 5.4.1.1 Geology and Soil Resource Issues -Mitigation We recommend clarifying which fish species and life stages will not be able to pass through the grating, and suggest including a discussion ofwhether tailrace velocities will impede fish from migrating upstream past the tailrace • structure. In areas where there will be soil disturbance on steeper slopes, we encourage the use of straw or • coconut fiber matting to stabilize soils until vegetation can take hold. Stream banks that must be disturbed for construction should be restored using bioengineering techniques. We suggest -discussing these mitigation efforts in the Final EA 5.4.2.1 Mountain Creek Fishery The discussion offish resources in Mountain Creek focuses solely on spawning habitat for salmon. However, it is stated that juvenile Coho salmon were identified in isolated pools within Mountain Creek on several occasions. While spawning habitat - has historically been the focus offish habitat considerations, the importance of rearing habitat for juvenile fish is also very significant. IfMountain Creek provides important rearing habitat or low velocity refugia for juvenile fish during key times (such as during high flow periods in other - streams), Mountain Creek may have important values for fish habitat. Juvenile fish are obviously- 5 • - • .. using Mountain Creek during some life stages. Ifall their habitat needs are provided by Barling Creek, it would be unlikely that they would be using this area in significant numbers. The value of this stream should be evaluated for all life stages, not just spawning habitat. Mountain Creek may, in fact, be of little value as fish habitat, but we believe the rationale for this conclusion needs• to be fully documented in the Final EA. The Draft EA asserts that "regardless of where Mountain Creek empties into Barling Creek,-Barling Creek fish do not generally benefit from the waters ofthe Mountain Creek basin since the water usually goes subterranean well before it reaches the mouth." We believe that this assertion • • cannot be made without a better understanding of the hydrology ofthe stream. Water flowing subsurface during a portion of its travel is not necessarily lost from the system. On the contrary, it seems likely that the water flowing out ofMountain Creek is directly contributing to Barling Creek. Ifthere is a substantial portion of water flowing subsurface into Barling Creek and this water is removed, it could substantially lower the water table, in turn reducing the level of Barling Creek. This could dewater portions ofBarling Creek, rendering it unusable or impassable to fish• during parts of the year. In light this, we believe that the conclusion that removal of water from Mountain Creek would not affect the Barling Creek fishery is questionable without additional evidence and analysis, and should be further discussed. We suggest that tables be included showing when surveys were conducted and the historical abundance of spawners in Barling Creek and Mountain Creek. These tables would help represent• the net effect of dewatering Mountain Creek on Barling Creek. We also recommend including a table describing fish harvest in Alaska Department ofFish and Game statistical area 258-52. Although not all fish harvested from this area are from Barling Creek, it will give some• perspective to the fishery. 5.4.2.2 Lagoon Creek Fishery The Draft EA states that "receiving up to 13 cfs from Mountain• Creek will probably draw more salmon into the mid-section ofLagoon Creek, which is currently underutilized because it dries up at times." We believe that this statement makes the following • questionable assumptions: That providing an additional 13 cfs to this stream will not affect existing spawning habitat • in portions of the stream currently suitable for spawning. The suitability of spawning habitat is based on a variety of factors including substrate size, substrate consolidation, water velocity and oxygenation. Doubling the average annual flow rate to this stream as proposed by the project would undoubtably affect all ofthese factors in Lagoon Creek. Existing spawning habitat may become less suitable, or the additional flow may alter the substrate regime in the creek. Stream channels self-regulate their size based on the -substrate and the amount of discharge. The document should discuss the ability of Lagoon Creek to carry the additional 13 cfs without altering its channel and evaluate these effects on existing habitat. (Also refer to our comments above regarding water -temperatures under Section 5.3.1.) - 6 - .. • That by increasing the water in the stream, the dry portion ofthe streambed will become suitable spawning habitat. This statement makes three assumptions. First, it assumes that an additional 13 cfs would raise the water table enough to exceed subsurface flow capacity. Second, it assumes that because water is present, the hydrologic conditions and-substrate available would be suitable for spawning. Third, it assumes that increasing the aVailability of spawning habitat would result in an increase of fish numbers. Without identifying the limiting factor for fish populations in Lagoon Creek, we believe these-assumptions are invalid. Ifspawning habitat is known to be the limiting factor for salmon, we suggest this be documented, along with the rationale for reaching this conclusion. If not, the assumption that providing additional water is a benefit to the Lagoon Creek• salmon fishery is unsubstantiated . • That increasing water depth in the lower portions ofLagoon Creek would improve habitat for salmon. We believe the previous discussion above also applies to this assumption. The Draft EA provides no rationale for these assumptions, and references no supporting data. Measuring the cross sections ofthe dry creek bed and extrapolating "potential spawning habitat value" to this area is, we believe, a questionable approach due to the extensive number of ecological variables which likely have not been evaluated for these streams. Ifthis project is implemented, these assumptions should be evaluated through careful monitoring of suitable • habitat and the fisheries populations using the entire stream. 5.4.2.4 Monitoring Plans The Draft EA suggests that monitoring fish habitat affected by this project is unnecessary because any effects to fisheries would be positive. However, as discussed in the comments above, we believe this conclusion is not supported by the current evaluation. Furthermore, the Draft EA states that "Through visual inspection, stream gauging and fish studies, it has been concluded that Mountain Creek does not sustain a fish population." We believ• this statement to be inaccurate, considering the presence ofjuvenile Coho noted in the field reports. In light of earlier comments, Mountain Creek may in fact provide habitat values to fish using Barling Creek, and monitoring may be appropriate. Additionally, substantially changing the water flow regime and temperature may be either beneficial or detrimental to the existing Lagoon Creek fishery. A thorough monitoring plan to insure that the existing fishery is not negatively -impacted should be considered in the Final EA. 5.4.3 Terrestrial Resource Issues The bald eagle territory in the project area consists ofa -minimum ofthree historic nest sites, all within a small area (-.5 km). Early spring, prior to May 15, appears to be the period when Kodiak-nesting bald eagles are the most vulnerable to disturbance. Pairs will readily abandon a nest site when disturbed during this period.-Disturbance during incubation (generally after May 15) and the early hatching period (up to July 1) can cause nest failure, although the adults will usually continue to occupy the territory. After July 1, fledglings are not as susceptible to exposure and can tolerate minimal disturbance.-However, minimal disturbance does not include direct helicopter overflights for setting - 7 • • • transmission line poles. Therefore, activity around a nest in April or earlier can often be more• detrimental than later in the season. We suggest the Final EA discuss these considerations. -5.4.5 Land Ownership We suggest the first sentence be modified to read "The majority of the Project is located within the boundaries of the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge." The second sentence also needs to be corrected. The lands were not "conveyed ... via a -conservation agreement;" we recommend this be revised to read "Part of the lands that the Project would occupy were recently sold by the Old Harbor Native Corporation to the United States for• inclusion as part of the Kodiak National WIldlife Refuge, subject to a conservation easement held by the State of Alaska. II • 5.4.5.1 Mitigation The construction and operation of the proposed project is contingent upon obtaining a Right-of-Way permit from the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, through the Kodiak Refuge. Issuance of Right-of-Way permits is governed by regulations at 50 CPR 29 and 43 CPR• 36. We suggest this be clarified in the Final EA. We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft License Application and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment for this project. Please contact Gary Wheeler, Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage Field Office, at (907) 271-2780, ifyou have any questions .. regarding these comments. Please contact Paul Hunter, National Park Service, at (907) 264-5431, ifyou have any questions pertaining to recreation opportunities. Sincerely,• - ... cc. David P. Boergers, Secretary FERC - - - - 8 - - UNITED STA"rES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service .. 222 W. 7th Avenue, #43 Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7577 -January 27, 1999 Daniel Hertrich.. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 33 rd1503 W. Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, AK 99503.. RE: -Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project -Preliminary Comments and Recommendations .. • -FERC License Number 11561-000 -Notice of Draft License Application, Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA) , and Soliciting Preliminary Terms, Conditions, and Recommendations . • Dear Mr. Hertrich: The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has reviewed the Draft License Application, Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA), submitted by Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. for the proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 11561-000). Our comments and recommendations are presented below. These preliminary recommendations are offered for the protection, mitigation, and enhancement of fish and wildlife resources as provided for under Section 10 (j) of the Federal Power Act. .. Final recommendations for terms and conditions will be presented in our comments on the FERC EA and application. Because we are making recommendations and implementation of these recommendations by the applicant have not been finalized, we may have additional concerns and recommendations which we are unable to identify at this time. .. -3.1.1. Project Description Detailed construction plans should be included in the document. Include bridge plans, powerhouse plans, road/transmission line location, culvert locations, etc., etc. 3.1.2. Project Operation.. The document states, "AVEC proposes to use the natural flow of the East Fork of Mountain Creek to generate power." The statement implies that East Fork and Mountain Creek are -relatively unaffected by the use of natural flow. These creeks will be significantly altered. Low flows in East Fork often are lower than the 13 cfs that will be diverted, so at times 100% of.. the flow will be removed from East Fork. Since the East Fork makes up 40-50% of the flow in Mountain Creek, Mountain Creek .--~~"''''\• §~~ ~. ; .; ~,-" '-;'-"'''~'''t'IAf''' Y ,,;;."~" .. • will also be affected. A more appropriate sentence would be, ~AVEC proposes to divert the East Fork of Mountain Creek to generate power." 5.3.2. Vegetation Disturbance It is stated that vegetation grows very rapidly in the Project area and it is estimated that in two years grasses will be fully.. re-established in the disturbed areas. Although it is expected that disturbed areas will naturally revegetate, a detailed monitoring and revegetation plan should be included in the document. It should have short and long term monitoring and • definitions of success. If natural revegetation does not occur within two years, planting should be done. The revegetation plan should include planting densities, use native plant species, and• outline other erosion control measures that may be needed. 5.3.7. Wetlands• Please include wetlands acres impacted. 5.4.1. Geology and Soil Resource Issues• Buried line installation should be included in this section. The document should contain location and construction specifics. The stream crossing should be addressed. Directional boring is the • preferred method of laying the cable under the stream. A revegetation and monitoring plan should be included in the mitigation section. • 5.4.1.1. Mitigation 1. Include the culvert diameter, calculated tailrace velocities, .. the size of substrate that will be moved, the amount of expected erosion and the size of the scour pond. 2. What will be done with extra soil when the pipeline is .. buried? 5.4.2.1. Mountain Creek Fishery.. The document states, ~Note that, regardless of where Mountain Creek empties into Barling Creek, Barling Creek fish do not generally benefit from the waters of the Mountain Creek basin .. since the water usually goes subterranean well before it reaches the mouth." Although the water may be subsurface it still contributes to the estuary, altering salinity and perhaps.. contributing to intergravel flows and intertidal spawning, so stating that there are no benefits to Barling Creek fish is an erroneous statement. The document states, ~It is also concluded that Mountain Creek does not have a fishery to impact." Surveys have documented juvenile fish use of Mountain Creek. The fish using the creek have a use for that habitat during a particular life stage . .. .. Please restate as, "Mountain Creek contains marginal fishery habitat and doesn't contribute significantly to fisheries production.n .. 5.4.2.2. Lagoon Creek Fishery The applicant states, "Lagoon Creek has a total measured useful spawning area in the mid-section of 92,250 sq. ft capable of .. supporting 17,140 salmon if dependable, consistent flows are provided from the project year round. n This implies that the project will provide this flow. Does the applicant have the data to support this? In actuality, 13 cfs may help to expand a• certain percentage of the available dry habitat. Please include the data and calculations that predict the amount of increased spawning and incubation habitats and the resultant increase in• fishery production. The average flow in Lagoon Creek is stated to be 13.4 cfs. The• proposed project will add an additional 13 cfs when available from East Fork. Does the applicant anticipate any erosion caused by almost doubling the average flow and raising peak flows by 13 cfs? There are already gabions in the river at the road crossing where bank erosion is a problem. Please include expected additional erosion estimates and design or mitigation measures to alleviate bank erosion and down cutting. The analysis should include probable impacts to bank stability and fish habitat .. 5.4.2.2.1. Mitigation• Although the applicant feels that the project is likely an enhancement to the Lagoon Creek fishery, this needs to be verified through monitoring (see section 5.4.2.4). If the• project does not prove to benefit fisheries, or in fact negatively impacts fisheries (perhaps through erosion) a contingency mitigation plan should be developed and included in • the document that clearly outlines the applicant's responsibilities throughout the life of the project. Such responsibilities may include flow alteration, flume redesign,.. stream bank rehabilitation and erosion control . 5.4.2.3.1 Mitigation Meet all Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) timing restrictions for preventive or routine maintenance and construction activities. 5.4.2.4. Issue -Monitoring Plans We agree that monitoring is needed on Lagoon Creek . .. 5.4.2.4.1. Mitigation The analysis states the Lagoon Creek fish resource may be enhanced by the Project. To verify this, the applicant should• develop a detailed monitoring plan on Lagoon Creek that should: .. • 1. Document changes in surface flow through the dry section during spawning and incubation during years one through five -of project operation. 2. Verify increased fish production in Lagoon Creek by-conducting spawning surveys during years one through five of project operation during appropriate times for pink, chum and coho salmon. Separate the formerly "dry sectionH as a• separate section with discreet numbers. 3. Document changes in stream morphology and bank stability• by redoing cross sections during years three and five of project operation. • 4. A stream gage should be operated in Lagoon Creek for a minimum of five years of project operation. • Monitoring may point out the need for mitigation in Lagoon Creek (Section 5.4.2.2.1), or the need for redirected, or more specific monitoring. Monitoring results should be sent to the NMFS for• review in a timely manner for comments and recommendations. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)• The Environmental Assessment should also include an Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) assessment as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) (16 U.S.C. 1801• et seq.). Thank you for the opportunity to comment.• Sincerely, ~\ '---, ,• ~~'~ - J{Jne .L ~Hanso: Field Office Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division.. NMFS Contact: Daniel J. Vos • cc: USFWS, EPA, ADGC, ADFG, ADEC -Anchorage FERC .. - - - .. .. Draft Environmental Assessment Old Harbor Project, FERC #11690-000 - • .. EXHIBIT F & G• • .. .. .. .. .. - - - .. - - • Exhibits F & G are 24"x36" drawings that are not attached to this document. They have • been sent separately. • • • • • - - .. • - • • • -