aesthetics management plan 2012 annual … · 2015-02-17 · 3.0 activity report ... • usda-fs...

`

BAK SA 302 Annual Report 2012.Docx PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Doc ID: BAK.2014.0430.0679.PSE.FERC-DC April 2014

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ARTICLE 302

AESTHETICS MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012 ANNUAL REPORT

REPORTING PERIOD JANUARY 1 – DECEMBER 31, 2012

BAKER RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC No. 2150

April 2014

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report CONTENTS

BAK SA 302 Annual Report 2012.Docx PUGET SOUND ENERGY April 2014 Doc ID: BAK.2014.0430.0679.PSE.FERC-DC Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page ii

CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Activity Report ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1

3.1 Principal Management Activities ...................................................................................................................................... 1 3.2 Design and Planning Activities ......................................................................................................................................... 3

3.3 Modifications to or Deviations from Planned Activities ..................................................................................................... 3

4.0 Accounting ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 4.1 Funding and Expenditures Prescribed by SA 302 ............................................................................................................ 3

4.2 Additional PSE Expenditures for SA 302 ......................................................................................................................... 4

5.0 Reviewer Comments and PSE Responses ........................................................................................................................... 4 5.1 Distribution List ................................................................................................................................................................. 4

5.2 E-mail Correspondence sent to Recreation Resources Group ........................................................................................ 5 5.3 Summary of Reviewer Replies ......................................................................................................................................... 5

Appendix A: Lower Baker Landscaping Photographs ................................................................................................................ 6

Appendix B: Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan ............................................................................................................... 8

List of Tables Table 1. Funding and expenditures prescribed by SA 302 for the reporting period. ........................................................................ 3

List of Figures Figure 1. E-mail from PSE accompanying the draft Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report. ....................................... 5

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report Executive Summary

BAK SA 302 Annual Report 2012.Docx PUGET SOUND ENERGY April 2014 Doc ID: BAK.2014.0430.0679.PSE.FERC-DC Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 1

1.0 Executive Summary This annual report reviews the actions taken in 2012 to implement the Aesthetics Management Plan, pursuant to requirements in settlement agreement article 302 (SA 302) of the Baker River Hydroelectric Project license. This report was prepared by Puget Sound Energy and reviewed by the Recreation Resources Group (RRG), specifically the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USDA-FS).

This report summarizes the activities conducted in 2012 in accordance with SA 302, including:

• Completion of the Aesthetic Resources Implementation Plan (ARIP). • Landscape planting at the Lower Baker operations and visitor center. • Funding of USDA-FS vegetation management activities at non-Project facilities in

the vicinity of Baker Lake pursuant to SA 302. • USDA-FS purchase of plant materials and seasonal staff to maintain plant stock for

Swift Creek and Bayview Campground revegetation projects.

2.0 Introduction This annual report has been prepared pursuant to the Order on Offer of Settlement, Issuing New License and Dismissing Amendment Application as Moot dated October 17, 2008 (the license). License settlement agreement article (SA) 302, “Aesthetics Management Plan,” sets forth the requirements for the Aesthetics Management Plan (the Plan), which in turn sets the requirements for this annual report.

This annual report summarizes the activities conducted under SA 302 in 2012, including management, monitoring, design, planning, and acquisition-related activities; special consultations; documents prepared; modifications to or deviations from planned activities; issues and resolution; accounting; and proposed changes to the Aesthetics Management Plan.

3.0 Activity Report 3.1 Principal Management Activities

PSE, in consultation with the Recreation Resources Group (RRG) and specifically the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USDA-FS), completed the Aesthetics Management Plan (AMP). The AMP was sent for formal 30-day agency review on March 30, 2010. PSE filed the AMP with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on June 30, 2010. On September 22, 2010, the FERC issued its “Order Approving Aesthetics Management Plan.”

PSE completed the Aesthetic Resources Implementation Plan (ARIP) in consultation with the Cultural Resource Advisory Group (CRAG), the Terrestrial Resource Implementation Group (TRIG), the RRG, and the USDA-FS. This ARIP includes a list of local native plants, a list of paint colors and materials that can be used when constructing or painting project facilities, and a project schedule. The ARIP will provide aesthetic guidance to the RRG and other resource groups as projects are being planned or implemented.

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report Activity Report


In January 2012, a landscape plan was completed for the Lower Baker compound. The plan was designed to be constructed in three phases of work. Phase I and Phase II both involve roadside plantings, while Phase III is a building area planting. In October 2012, PSE completed Phases I and II, contracting EarthCorps to purchase and plant landscaping vegetation along the roadside near the Lower Baker visitor center, business office, and parking area. The scope of work included:

• Soil Preparation

o Removal of existing bark and trees, stripping planting areas of grass and extraneous matter 2 inches in size or larger, grading of area to uniform slopes, and application of compost.

• Mulching

o Spreading mulch in all planting beds.

• Planting

o Staging and installing plants according to the plan, to the degree that suitable plants for the soil and location were available for purchase.

Plants used for the first two phases of construction are:

• Red-flowering currant – Ribes sanguineum • Dwarf redtwig dogwood – Cornus sericea ‘Kelseyi’ • Crimson pigmy barberry – Berberis thunbergii • Snowberry – Symphoricarpos albus • Magic carpet spirea – Spiraea japonica ‘Walbuma’ • Goldmound spirea – Spiraea japonica ‘Goldmound’ • Salal – Gaultheria shallon • Creeping mahonia – Mahonia repens

Phases I and II did not include any planting near the building area, as shown in drawings L-1 and L-2, dated January 2012. Because the planting area was slightly smaller than estimated, plant quantities were less than indicated on the plan. Some plant species were not used, due to site conditions and the availability of plants. See Section 6.2 of the Aesthetics Resources Implementation Plan (ARIP), “Allowances for Modifications or Deviation to Landscaping-Screening Plans.”

In 2012, PSE provided $26,380.04 to the USDA-FS as required by SA 302, for year four of the license (beginning October 17, 2010). USDA-FS actions included the purchase of plant materials for Swift Creek Campground and Bayview revegetation projects, and labor to maintain the plants in holding beds. At the Swift Creek Campground, implementation of the planting plan continued by adding soil, weeding, and maintaining the landscaping in the parking islands, through the growing season. The USDA-FS required funding provided for recreation staff, seven seasonal field technicians and materials to complete this activity.

A total of three Recreation Resource Group (RRG) and law enforcement planning meetings were held in 2012.

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report Accounting


3.2 Design and Planning Activities On September 22, 2010, the FERC issued its Order Approving Aesthetics Management Plan to PSE (FERC, 2010). FERC staff concluded that PSE’s proposal to develop the Aesthetics Resources Implementation Plan, in consultation with the CRAG, TRIG, RRG, WDFW, and USDA-FS will adequately address agency concerns.

On June 29, 2012, the review draft of the Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan (ARIP) was sent to the RRG, CRAG, TRIG, RRG, WDFW, and USDA-FS for 30-day review. No reviewers submitted comments, and the ARIP was finalized in December 2012.

3.3 Modifications to or Deviations from Planned Activities Because the planting area was slightly smaller than estimated, plant quantities were less than indicated on the specific plan. Some plant species were not used, due to site conditions and the availability of plants. See section 6.2 of the ARIP, “Allowances for Modifications or Deviation to Landscaping-Screening Plans.”

4.0 Accounting Puget Sound Energy, pursuant to settlement agreement articles 102, 201, 301, 501, and 602, is required to provide an annual summary of expenditures made during the preceding year, as well as an accounting of funding expenditures, any interest earned, disbursements mad as required by any article, and adjustments for inflation. This section provides and accounting of all expenditures made between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2012, including pre-license expenditures such as costs incurred for early land acquisition efforts.

All disbursement adjustments and relevant calculations were determined using the guidelines provided in settlement agreement article 602.

4.1 Funding and Expenditures Prescribed by SA 302 Table 1. Funding and expenditures prescribed by SA 302 for the reporting period.

SA 302 Credit Debit Explanation 2011 total remaining balance 1,507 Deposit to required fund 4,000 For PSE actions for year 4 as specified in

appendix A-5 of the settlement agreement Escalation 506 Required payment to USDA-FS 20,000

Escalation 1,874 Amount paid to USDA-FS 21,874

Total expenditures against required funds

21,874

Total remaining balance 6,013.00 .

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report Reviewer Comments and PSE Responses


4.2 Additional PSE Expenditures for SA 302 Because the drainage and parking area at Lower Baker had been redesigned, there was a need to reinstall landscaping at the Lower Baker business office and parking area near the visitor center. Phase I and II of the Lower Baker Compound Landscaping plan were implemented, as indicated in section 3.1 “Principal Management Activities.” PSE spent $18,519 for Phase I and II work.

The total expenditure of all funds for SA 302 during the reporting period was $40,393.

5.0 Reviewer Comments and PSE Responses 5.1 Distribution List

Table 2. Recreation Resources Group- Aesthetics Management Plan Reviewers

Name Organization Address Email Address Ann Dunphy U.S. Forest Service 810 SR 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected] Greta Movassaghi U.S. Forest Service 810 SR 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected] Carol Gladsjo U.S. Forest Service 1405 Emens St, Darrington, WA 98241 [email protected] Scott Schuyler Upper Skagit Indian Tribe 25944 Community Plaza, Sedro

Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected]

Doreen Maloney Upper Skagit Indian Tribe 25944 Community Plaza, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284

None provided

Norma Joseph Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe 5318 Chief Brown Ln, Darrington, WA 98241

[email protected]

Stan Walsh Sauk-Suiattle/Swinomish Indian Tribes

PO Box 368 LaConner, WA 98257 [email protected]

Brock Applegate Washington Dept Fish & Wildlife

PO Box 1100, LaConner, WA 98257 [email protected]

LouEllyn Jones US Fish & Wildlife Services 510 Desmond Dr, Lacey, WA 98503 [email protected] Patrick Goldsworthy

North Cascades Conservation Council

PO Box 95980, Seattle, WA 98145-2980 [email protected]

Corrina Koenig Town of Concrete PO Box 39, Concrete, WA 98237 [email protected] Brian Adams Skagit County Parks &

Recreation 315 S 3rd St, Mount Vernon, WA 98273 [email protected]

Steve McLellan Recreation Conservation Office

1111 Washington State Natural Resources Bldg Second Floor (eastwing) Olympia, WA 98504

[email protected]

JoAnn Gustafson WA Depart of Natural Resources

919 N Township, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284

[email protected]

Saul Weisberg North Cascades Inc 810 SR 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected] Jeff Giesen North Cascades Inc 810 SR 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected]

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report Reviewer Comments and PSE Responses


5.2 E-mail Correspondence sent to Recreation Resources Group From: Garland, Pamela K Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 2:46 PM To: Andrea Fichter ([email protected]); Brian Adams; Brock Applegate ([email protected]); Carol Gladsjo ([email protected]); Charles Beall ([email protected]); Corrina Koenig; Dunphy, Ann; Flynn, Tom; Garland, Pamela K; Goldsworthy, Patrick; Hawkins, David; [email protected]; [email protected]; Nona Snell ([email protected]); Norma Joseph ([email protected]); Uloth, Erin -FS Cc: Dubreuil, Elizabeth; Fuchs, Tony; Edwards, Haley; Hackbart, Alice; Aspelund, Arnie Subject: SA 302 -2012 Annual Report-Review Draft Importance: High Attachments: BAK SA 302 Annual Report 2012 - RevDraft.pdf RRG Members: PSE is forwarding the draft 2012 Annual Report SA 302-Aesthetics Management Plan to the Recreation Resources Group, for 30-day review period. Please send comments to me by email by September 1, 2013.

Figure 1. E-mail from PSE accompanying the draft Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report.

5.3 Summary of Reviewer Replies There were no reviewer comments for the reporting period.

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report Appendix A: Lower Baker Landscaping Photographs


Appendix A: Lower Baker Landscaping Photographs

Lower Baker landscaping, Phase I and II, December, 2012

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report Appendix A: Lower Baker Landscaping Photographs


Lower Baker landscaping, Phase I and II, July 2013.

Aesthetics Management Plan 2012 Annual Report Appendix B: Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan


Appendix B: Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan

BAK SA 302 ARIP.Doc PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Doc ID: BAK.2012.1210.0709.PSE.RRG 11 December 2012

AESTHETIC RESOURCE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ARTICLE 302 BAKER RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT

FERC No. 2150

December 2012

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan CONTENTS

BAK SA 302 ARIP.Doc PUGET SOUND ENERGY 11 December 2012 Doc ID: BAK.2012.1210.0709.PSE.RRG Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page ii

CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Basis for Plan............................................................................................................................................................................ 2

3.1 Basis for Plan ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Relationship to Other Articles........................................................................................................................................... 3

4.0 Goals.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 4.1 Key Elements of the ARIP................................................................................................................................................ 3

5.0 Regulatory Reference and Definitions.................................................................................................................................... 4 5.1 Federal Authority Reference ............................................................................................................................................ 4 5.2 WA State Authority ........................................................................................................................................................... 4

6.0 Plan Implementation................................................................................................................................................................. 4 6.1 Plan Area.......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 6.2 Allowances for Modifications or Deviations to Landscaping-Screening Plans ................................................................. 4 6.3 Rationale .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 6.4 Funding ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5 6.5 Development and Modification of the Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan ............................................................. 5 6.6 Procedures, Standards, and Criteria ................................................................................................................................ 6 6.7 Schedule .......................................................................................................................................................................... 7

7.0 Supporting Documents ............................................................................................................................................................ 7 7.1 Local Native Plant-Vegetation List ................................................................................................................................... 7 7.2 USDA-FS Color Palette and Materials List for Project Facilities at Upper Baker ............................................................. 8 7.3 Considerations for Historic Properties.............................................................................................................................. 8 7.4 Upper Baker Screening Plan............................................................................................................................................ 9 7.5 Lower Baker Visitor Center and Parking Area Landscaping Plan .................................................................................... 9

8.0 Reporting................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 9.0 Agency review Comments and Responses............................................................................................................................ 9

9.1 Distribution List................................................................................................................................................................. 9 9.2 Cover Message .............................................................................................................................................................. 12 9.3 Summary of Reviewer Replies ....................................................................................................................................... 12

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan List of Tables

BAK SA 302 ARIP.Doc PUGET SOUND ENERGY 11 December 2012 Doc ID: BAK.2012.1210.0709.PSE.RRG Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page iii

List of Tables Table 1. Local native plant-vegetation list........................................................................................................................................ 7 Table 2. USDA-FS approved palette and material list for Upper Baker facilities. ............................................................................ 8 Table 3. Cultural Resources Advisory Group reviewers. ................................................................................................................. 9 Table 4. Terrestrial Resource Implementation Group reviewers. .................................................................................................. 10 Table 5. Recreation Resources Group reviewers. ......................................................................................................................... 11

List of Figures Figure 1. E-mail message from PSE accompanying the draft Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan. .................................... 12

BAK SA 302 ARIP.Doc PUGET SOUND ENERGY 11 December 2012 Doc ID: BAK.2012.1210.0709.PSE.RRG Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 1

1.0 Executive Summary Puget Sound Energy (PSE) has developed a plan to manage aesthetic resources at the Baker River Hydroelectric Project, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Project No. 2150, during the term of the new FERC license. The Aesthetics Management Plan (AMP) was developed in consultation with the Recreation Resource Group (RRG) and specifically the USDA Forest Service (USDA-FS) pursuant to settlement agreement article 302 (SA 302), “Aesthetics Management,” as described in the new FERC license. The AMP documents PSE’s commitments in the Baker River Hydroelectric Project Relicensing Comprehensive Settlement Agreement (the settlement agreement) effective November 30, 2004. The AMP specifies several aesthetic improvements to existing project-related facilities as well as funding for identified USDA-FS aesthetic enhancements at the project. Reporting related to implementation of the AMP is described separately pursuant to SA 301, “Recreation Management Report.”

In the AMP, PSE proposed to develop an Aesthetics Resource Implementation Plan (ARIP) in consultation with the CRAG, TRIG, RRG, Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, and USDA-Forest Service. On September 22, 2010, FERC issued an Order Approving Aesthetics Management Plan for the Baker River Project. The FERC concluded that PSE’s proposal to develop an Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan, in consultation with listed agencies and resource groups should adequately address the intent of the AMP and any agency concerns.

2.0 Introduction This Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan (ARIP) has been prepared in support of the Aesthetics Management Plan (AMP) for the Baker River Hydroelectric Project (Baker River Project), FERC No. 2150. The ARIP describes, in detail, actions that Puget Sound Energy (PSE) will implement to meet its requirements under license Settlement Agreement Article 302, “Aesthetics Management Plan.”

The ARIP was prepared in consultation with the Baker River Project Recreation Resources Group (RRG), Cultural Resources Advisory Group (CRAG), Terrestrial Resources Implementation Group (TRIG), USDA-Forest Service, and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife.

The AMP identifies the following project facilities and actions for aesthetics-related improvements.

Paint the pump station near West Pass Dike. Plant native vegetation to provide aesthetic screening of the Upper Baker operations

complex. Paint the Lower Baker powerhouse crane a neutral earth-tone color during the next

scheduled painting cycle. Develop a landscaping plan, including native vegetation, around visitor’s center and

the associated parking area.

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Basis for Plan


Additionally, the AMP identifies several areas where the USDA-FS, with funding from PSE, will be responsible for vegetation management. These areas include:

Panorama Point. Horseshoe Cove. Shannon Creek. Bayview Campground. Maple Grove Campground. Two to four undefined locations between USDA-FS developed sites/viewpoints and

Baker Lake.

3.0 Basis for Plan 3.1 Basis for Plan

SA 302 was developed so that the following actions could be completed to reduce the visual effects of selected Project facilities.

Lower Baker River Operations Complex and LB Dam powerhouse

o Paint the existing Lower Baker powerhouse crane, a neutral earth-tone color during the next normal painting cycle.

o Develop a landscaping plan for Lower Baker business center complex and visitor center.

o Plant landscaping in the area near the visitor’s center and associated parking area at Lower Baker.

Upper Baker off-peak pump discharge facility

o Paint the pump station in neutral earth-tone colors o Plant native vegetation to screen the off-peak pump facility from the West Pass

Dike boat launch area. Landscaping plans were developed and approved by the RRG, CRAG, and USDA-Forest Service on November 16, 2010.

Upper Baker Operation and Maintenance Yards near Kulshan Campground and USFS 1106 Road.

o Develop a list of local native plants species that may be used for landscaping. o Plant native vegetation to screen the yards, buildings, and fence of the Upper

Baker Operations and Maintenance yards in accordance with the plan for Upper Baker operations and maintenance yards and off-peak pump station. Landscaping plans were developed and approved by the RRG, CRAG, and USDA-Forest Service. Aesthetics Screening plans, Upper Baker Project, No. L-1, L-2, and L-3; completed and approved on November 16, 2010 are located in Section 7.0, Supplemental Documentation.

o Develop a list of approved exterior colors and materials that may be used for selected Project facilities.

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Goals


3.2 Relationship to Other Articles SA 302 was incorporated into the license along with the other proposed articles of the settlement agreement. In addition to incorporating the settlement agreement articles, the license is subject to conditions submitted by:

SA 201, “Programmatic Agreement.” Under the conditions of SA 201, PSE will implement the “Programmatic Agreement Between the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer for Managing Historic Properties that May be Affected by a License Issuing to Puget Sound Energy for the Continued Operation of the Baker River Hydroelectric Project in Skagit and Whatcom Counties, Washington – FERC Project No. P-2150,” including the Historic Properties Management Plan (HPMP).

SA 301, “Recreation Management Report.” Under the conditions of SA 301, PSE will provide an annual report to the parties per the schedule in SA 301 for a 60- day review period, including a description of how PSE, agencies, and tribes coordinated the implementation of SA 302. Activities conducted during the previous 12 months (January 1–December 31) and the status of development or implementation of measures will be summarized in each annual report.

4.0 Goals The goal of the ARIP is to improve aesthetic resources and the aesthetic environment by visually enhancing selected Project facilities and other sites (that were identified during the settlement agreement process) via landscaping, painting, enhancing views of the reservoir, and improving facilities to reduce visual effects of the project.

4.1 Key Elements of the ARIP Implementation Schedule List of local native plants species that may be used for landscaping List of approved exterior colors and materials for selected Project facilities. Screening and vegetation plan for Upper Baker operations and maintenance yard. Screening and vegetation plan for Upper Baker pump station, near West Pass Dike

boat launch area. Landscaping and vegetation Plan for the Lower Baker operations complex. Annual reporting procedures for SA 302.

A minimum of 30 days will be provided for the RRG, CRAG, TRIG, USDA-FS and WDFW members to comment and to make recommendations on the ARIP. The plan will include:

Documentation of consultation and copies of comments and recommendations on the completed plan components.

Documentation of approval or documentation of the status of the review by the USDA-FS, RRG, CRAG, and TRIG.

Specific descriptions of how the other consulted parties’ comments are accommodated by the plan.

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Regulatory Reference and Definitions


If PSE does not accept a recommendation, the documentation shall include PSE’s reasons, based on project-specific information.

5.0 Regulatory Reference and Definitions The ARIP has been developed and will be implemented in a manner consistent with applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations. If conflicts exist between the objectives or management guidelines of the ARIP and any applicable law or regulations, the objectives and guidelines will be followed to the extent possible while still complying with the law or regulation.

5.1 Federal Authority Reference The ARIP is prepared according to the directives of the license and is consistent with the US Department of Agriculture, US Forest Service, Section 4(e) Terms and Conditions, filed November 7, 2006.

5.2 WA State Authority The license incorporates recommendations by the WDFW.

6.0 Plan Implementation This plan outlines specific components of the ARIP, as defined in SA 302.

6.1 Plan Area The plan area for the ARIP is defined by specific locations identified in SA 302. In particular, SA 302 describes the following project facilities and actions for aesthetics-related improvements.

Pump station near West Pass Dike (Kulshan) boat launch — paint and vegetation screening.

Upper Baker operations & maintenance yard — vegetation screening. Lower Baker visitor center and parking lot — landscaping. Lower Baker powerhouse crane — paint in neutral color during next painting cycle.

Additionally, SA 302 also identifies several areas where the USDA-FS, with funding from PSE, will be responsible for vegetation management. These areas include:

Panorama Point. Horseshoe Cove. Shannon Creek. Bayview Campground. Maple Grove Campground. Two to four undefined locations between USDA-FS developed sites/viewpoints and Baker Lake.

6.2 Allowances for Modifications or Deviations to Landscaping-Screening Plans Modifications or deviations to landscaping and screening plans may be necessary upon implementation. Factors such as planting site conditions, plant availability, and quantities

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Plan Implementation


of plants needed could deviate slightly from the specific plans, dependent upon time of implementation and site conditions that may have changed since plans were approved. The required screening locations will remain unchanged; however, some of the details of the plans may differ. The landscape plans will provide a guideline, with the goal to remain “improve aesthetic resources and the aesthetic environment by visually enhancing selected Project facilities and other sites (that were identified during the settlement agreement process) via landscaping, painting, enhancing views of the reservoir, and improving facilities to reduce visual effects of the project,” and in accordance with the Aesthetics Management Plan (AMP).

6.3 Rationale Several recreation- and aesthetics-related studies were completed in 2003 and 2004 as components of the project relicensing effort. Pertinent information from the aesthetics studies and the resulting proposed visual resource protection, mitigation, and enhancement measures were included in the license application that PSE submitted to the FERC in January 2005. The aesthetics studies and license application indicated that visitors primarily view the project from shoreline recreation sites and facilities, as well as from roads. Visitors value the scenic quality of the project area and surrounding Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest (MBSNF); however, visitors to the MBSNF often feel that certain project facilities detract from the scenic value of visual and aesthetic resources within the project area. Specifically, four project facilities may detract from the scenic integrity of project area viewsheds. These facilities include the West Pass Dike (and nearby off-peak pump discharge pump station), the Upper Baker operations and maintenance yards, the crane at the Lower Baker Dam, and the Lower Baker River operations complex. The Upper Baker Dam and associated facilities also have a strong influence on the aesthetic/visual environment; however, these facilities are not visible to many viewers because of the steep, twisting valley. The license application included recommendations for aesthetics-related improvements and enhancements at these project facilities, as well as funding to the USDA-FS for campgrounds and other use areas. These recommendations included vegetation management (both planting and removing), landscaping, screening, defining/hardening sites, painting or replacing jersey barriers with more natural-appearing structures as needed, and measures to reduce visual impacts and to create or maintain desirable viewsheds at the project.

6.4 Funding PSE will provide funding to the USDA-FS in an amount not to exceed that shown in the Recreation Implementation Schedule required by SA 301. The funds will be used to implement the following actions for non-Project facilities in the vicinity of Baker Lake: 1) vegetation management at Panorama Point, Horseshow Cove, Shannon Creek, Bayview Campground, and Maple Grove Campground; and 2) vegetation management between USDA-FS developed sites and/or viewpoints, and Baker Lake in two to four location averaging less than one-fourth of an acre in size.

6.5 Development and Modification of the Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan PSE has prepared the ARIP in consultation with the RRG, CRAG, TRIG, USDA-FS, and WDFW. Consulted parties will be provided a minimum of 30 days to comment and

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Plan Implementation


make recommendations. Documentation of consultation and copies of comments and recommendations on the ARIP after it is prepared and provided to the consulted parties will be included in the ARIP, along with descriptions of how the comments are accommodated by the plan. PSE will identify any such recommendation not adopted in the plan, and will provide the reasons for not adopting them. If material modifications to the ARIP are required in the future, such changes will be made following the decision-making process outlined in SA 601, “Baker River Coordinating Committee.” PSE will summarize any decision-making activities regarding the ARIP in the annual report. Modifications to the ARIP will be presented to the RRG, and after approval by the CRAG, TRIG, and USDA-FS will be incorporated into the ARIP.

6.6 Procedures, Standards, and Criteria The ARIP will be implemented to SA 302 requirements, in a manner that minimizes any detrimental effects on other environmental resources. The ARIP will not require PSE to implement any action in a manner that would prevent safe operation of the Project and associated facilities or interfere with dike and road maintenance.

Upper Baker Screening –Only local native vegetation will be used to screen yards, buildings, and fence of the Upper Baker Operations and Maintenance Yards from the Kulshan Campground and Forest Service Road 1106 and near the pump station located near West Pass Dike boat launch area, see list of native plants in Section 7.0, Supplemental Documentation. Aesthetics Screening plans, Upper Baker Project, No. L-1, L-2, and L-3; completed and approved on November 16, 2011 are located in Section 7.0, Supplemental Documentation. PSE’s botanist will be assisting with project implementation. A contractor may be hired to plant vegetation. Vegetation shall not be planted as to interfere with security cameras, gates, power lines, nor shall it conflict with the need to do visual inspections of West Pass Dike or Depression Dike.

Upper Baker-Paint pump station a neutral color. This pump station has been painted a neutral color and may be refreshed during the next maintenance paint cycle.

Lower Baker Visitor Center Complex-Landscaping at Lower Baker Visitor Complex and parking area will include native vegetation and will be completed in three phases. A landscaping design and plan was completed in early 2012 by Van De Vanter Group. Near-term implementation activities consist of planting some vegetation along East Main Street, above the parking area of the LB Visitor’s Center in fall 2012. PSE’s botanist will be assisting with project implementation. A contractor may be hired to plant vegetation. Vegetation shall not be planted as to interfere with security cameras, gates, or power lines. Landscaping Plan for Lower Baker Compound, dated 01-23-2012, located in Section 7.0, “Supplemental Documents.”

Lower Baker Powerhouse-Paint Powerhouse crane. The Powerhouse crane will be painted an earth-tone color during the next maintenance paint cycle for that facility.

PSE, in consultation with the RRG, TRIG, CRAG and specifically the USDA-FS, will develop and maintain a list of native vegetation, and exterior paint colors. Native Vegetation List and color/materials information located in Section 7.0, “Supplemental Documents.”

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Supporting Documents


Locates for existing underground utilities will be completed prior to construction. Existing tree roots will not be disturbed. Compost used for roadside planting areas will meet requirements of Washington State Dept. of Transportation (WSDOT) US Composting Council “Compost Technical Data Sheet for Washington State DOT Projects.” Landscape Specifications are described on plans. All ground disturbing plans will be provided to the CRAG for review, prior to implementation actions.

6.7 Schedule Specific actions within the ARIP will be implemented according to the schedule provided in Appendix A-5 of the license, “Recreation Implementation Schedule,” and in consultation with the RRG, TRIG, CRAG, and specifically the USDA-FS. PSE will submit a proposed schedule of activities for the next 12 months during each fall RRG meeting. Any consultation results will be recorded in the annual SA 302 report and to the RRG for a minimum 30 day review.

7.0 Supporting Documents This section includes supplemental documents related to the ARIP.

7.1 Local Native Plant-Vegetation List Table 1. Local native plant-vegetation list.

Vegetation Type Common Name Genus Species Preferred Size Tree Doug Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii (2+0) Tree Black Cottonwood Populus balsamifera ssp.

trichocarpa

Tree Western Red Cedar Thuja plicata (2+0) Tree Western Flowering Dogwood Cornus nuttallii Tree Western Hemlock Tsuga heterophylla (2+0) Shrub Sitka Willow Salix sitchensis live stakes Shrub Scouler’s Willow Salix scouleriana live stakes Shrub Vine Maple Acer circinatum 2-gallon or salvage Shrub Red-Stem Dogwood Cornus stolonifera live stakes Shrub Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis 6” pot Shrub Thimbleberry Rubus parviflorus 6”pot Shrub Red Elderberry Sambucus racemosa gallon Shrub Low Oregon Grape Mahonia nervosa 6” pot Shrub Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus 6” pot Shrub Ocean Spray Holodiscus discolor 6” pot Shrub Kinickinick Arctostaphylos uva-ursi 4” pot Shrub Red Huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium gallon Shrub Oval-leaved Blueberry Vaccinium ovalifolium gallon Shrub Fool’s Huckleberry Menziesia ferruginea gallon

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Supporting Documents


Vegetation Type Common Name Genus Species Preferred Size Shrub Salal Gaultheria shallon 6” pot Fern Sword Polystichum munitum salvage Fern Deer Blechnum spicant salvage Herb Big Leaf Avens Geum macrophyllum seed Herb Piggy Back Plant Tolmeia menziesii seed Herb Woodland Strawberry Frageria vesca 4” pot Sedge Lakeshore Sedge Carex lenticularis seed Sedge Beaked Sedge Carex utriculata seed Grass Bluejoint Redgrass Reedgrass Calamagrostis

canadensis seed

Grass Tall Mannagrass Glyceria elata seed Grass Reed Mannagrass Glyceria grandis seed Rush Daggerleaf Rush Juncus ensifolius seed Rush Toad Rush Juncus bufonius seed Sedge Woolly Sedge Scirpus cyperinus seed Rush Small Flowered Bulrush Scirpus microcarpus seed

7.2 USDA-FS Color Palette and Materials List for Project Facilities at Upper Baker Table 2. USDA-FS approved palette and material list for Upper Baker facilities.

Facility Name Type of Material/Paint Color Upper Baker Shop AEP Span (Upper metal walls) Sierra Tan Dura Tech 5000 (Lower metal walls) Cool Weathered Copper Zincalume-(metal roof) Forest Green Spane Building Metal Roof-No sides (covered Pole) Light Stone Wood Shop Metal-Sides and roof Light Stone Dam Buildings Wasser paint Washington Grey Dam Crane Wasser paint Washington Grey FSC Non-corrosive paint-pumps/tanks Devoe FSC Paint-Deck and freeboard area Spruce

7.3 Considerations for Historic Properties When considering or choosing colors for historic properties, colors that are compatible to the characteristic of that specific district would be selected. It could mean similar of differentiating colors, depending upon the circumstances. The Secretary of Interior Standards that the CRAG would follow in that selection process is located at the following quick link: (http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/rehab/rehab_standards.htm). This link provides a simple overview of ways to avoid effects to historic properties and is one of the resources used to guide decisions at Baker River. This does not speak to colors specifically, but may be used to guide decisions.

http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/rehab/rehab_standards.htm�

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Reporting


7.4 Upper Baker Screening Plan See the supporting documents accompanying this review draft.

7.5 Lower Baker Visitor Center and Parking Area Landscaping Plan See the supporting documents accompanying this review draft.

8.0 Reporting A draft ARIP will be issued to the RRG, TRIG, CRAG, and specifically the USDA-FS for 30-day review and comment. Subsequently the ARIP, with comments, will be included in the annual recreation management report as required by SA 301. The recreation management report will include a summary of license implementation actions and measures, funding and expenditures, potential revisions to the implementation schedule, and other components. PSE is required to allow the RRG and USDA-FS at least 60 days to comment on a draft version of the Recreation Management Report before filing it with the FERC.

9.0 Agency review Comments and Responses 9.1 Distribution List

Table 3. Cultural Resources Advisory Group reviewers.

Name Organization Address Email Address Kara Kanaby Corps of Engineers Environmental Resources Section

Seattle District, US Army Corps of Engineers PO Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755

[email protected]

Rob Whitlam Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation

Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation PO Box 48383 Olympia, WA 98504-8384

[email protected]

Jan Hollenbeck U.S. Forest Service Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Nat’l Forest 2930 Wetmore Ave., Suite 3A Everett, WA 98201

[email protected]

Bob Mierendorf National Park Service North Cascades National Park 7280 Ranger Station Rd Marblemount, WA 98267

[email protected]

Elizabeth Dubreuil Puget Sound Energy Puget Sound Energy PO Box 97034, PSE 09S Bellevue, WA 98009-9734

[email protected]

Norma Joseph Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe 5318 Chief Brown Lane Darrington, WA 98241

[email protected]

Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan Agency review Comments and Responses


Name Organization Address Email Address Larry Campbell Swinomish Indian Tribal

Community SITC Cultural Resource Protection Office 11430 Moorage Way LaConner, WA 98257-8707

[email protected]

Scott Schuyler Upper Skagit Indian Tribe Upper Skagit Indian Tribe 25944 Community Plaza Sedro-Woolley, WA 98284

[email protected]

Table 4. Terrestrial Resource Implementation Group reviewers.

Name Organization Address Email Address Robert Kuntz National Park Service 619 State Route 20

Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected]

Mignonne Bivin National Park Service 7280 Ranger Station Rd Marblemount, WA 98267

[email protected]

Patrick Goldsworthy


2514 Crestmont Pl W Seattle, WA 98199-3716

[email protected]

Tony Fuchs Puget Sound Energy PO Box 97034, PSE09S Belevue, WA 98009

[email protected]

Bill Richardson Rocky Mountain Elk foundation

24550 Ervin Road Philomath, OR 98370

[email protected]

Michael Wolten Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe 5318 Chief Brown Ln Darrington, WA 98241

[email protected]

Kara Symonds Skagit County Public Works

1800 Continental Pl Mount Vernon, WA 98273-5625

[email protected]

William Rogers Skagit County Noxious Weed Control Board

11768 Westar Lane, Suite A Burlington, WA 98233

[email protected]

Todd Wilbur Swinomish Indian Tribe PO Box 369 LaConner, WA 98233

[email protected]

Stan Walsh Swinomish Indian Tribe PO Box 369 LaConner, WA 98233

[email protected]

Len Barson The Nature Conservancy 1917 First Ave Seattle, WA 98101

[email protected]

Cathy Baker The Nature Conservancy 1917 First Ave Seattle, WA 98101

[email protected]

Scott Schuyler Upper Skagit Indian Tribe 25944 Community Plaza Sedro Woolley, WA 98284

[email protected]

Jon-Paul Shannahan

Upper Skagit Indian Tribe 25944 Community Plaza Sedro Woolley, WA 98284

[email protected]

LouEllyn Jones US Fish & Wildlife 510 Desmond Dr., SE, Suite 102 Lacey, WA 98503

[email protected]

Theresa Mathis US Forest Service 810 SR 20 Sedro Woolley, WA 98284

[email protected]



Name Organization Address Email Address Jon Vanderheyden

US Forest Service 810 SR 20 Sedro Woolley, WA 98284

[email protected]

Brock Applegate WA Dept Fish & Wildlife PO Box 1100 LaConner, WA 98257

[email protected]

Chris Danilson WA Dept. Fish & Wildlife PO Box LaConner, WA 98257

[email protected]

Table 5. Recreation Resources Group reviewers.

Name Organization Address Email Address Ann Dunphy U.S. Forest Service 810 SR 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected] Greta Movassaghi U.S. Forest Service 810 SR 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected] Carol Gladsjo U.S. Forest Service 1405 Emens St, Darrington, WA 98241 [email protected] Scott Schuyler Upper Skagit Indian Tribe 25944 Community Plaza, Sedro

Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected]

Doreen Maloney Upper Skagit Indian Tribe 25944 Community Plaza, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284

None provided

Norma Joseph Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe 5318 Chief Brown Ln, Darrington, WA 98241

[email protected]

Stan Walsh Sauk-Suiattle/Swinomish Indian Tribes

PO Box 368 LaConner, WA 98257 [email protected]

Brock Applegate Washington Dept Fish & Wildlife

PO Box 1100, LaConner, WA 98257 [email protected]

LouEllyn Jones US Fish & Wildlife Services 510 Desmond Dr, Lacey, WA 98503 [email protected] Patrick Goldsworthy


PO Box 95980, Seattle, WA 98145-2980 [email protected]

Corrina Koenig Town of Concrete PO Box 39, Concrete, WA 98237 [email protected] Brian Adams Skagit County Parks &

Recreation 315 S 3rd St, Mount Vernon, WA 98273 [email protected]

Steve McLellan Recreation Conservation Office

1111 Washington State Natural Resources Bldg Second Floor (eastwing) Olympia, WA 98504

[email protected]

JoAnn Gustafson WA Depart of Natural Resources

919 N Township, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284

[email protected]

Saul Weisberg North Cascades Inc 810 SR 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected] Jeff Giesen North Cascades Inc 810 SR 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284 [email protected]



9.2 Cover Message

From: Garland, Pamela K Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 8:10 PM To: Dubreuil, Elizabeth; Fuchs, Tony; Edwards, Haley; Heller, Scott W; 'Andrea Fichter'; 'Beall, Charles'; Brian Adams; Brock Applegate ([email protected]); Carleton, Ruth A; Carol Gladsjo; Corrina Koenig; Dunphy, Ann; 'Feldmann, Cary'; Garland, Pamela K; Giesen, Jeff; Goldsworthy, Patrick; Greta Movassaghi; Hawkins, David; JoAnn Gustafson ([email protected]); 'Jones, Lou Ellyn'; 'Joseph, Norma'; Lynda Kupfer; Scott Schuyler ([email protected]); Steve McLellan ([email protected]); 'Thomas Decateau'; Walsh, Stan; Weisburg, Saul; Wetherbee, Paul K; 'Wiltse, Lyn' Cc: Sibley, Hillary D; Carleton, Ruth A; Hunting, Andrew Subject: Aesthetics Resource Implementation Plan (ARIP) review-RRG-CRAG-TRIG Importance: High Attachments: ARIP review draft.pdf RRG, CRAG and TRIG Reviewers, PSE is forwarding the review draft of the Aesthetics Resource Implementation Plan (ARIP) for Settlement Article 302-Aesthetics Management Plan, to the Recreation Resources Group, Cultural Resources Advisory Group, and the Terrestrial Resources Group representatives for the "30-day" review period and seeks comments and suggestions. We are asking that comments be sent to me via e-mail by July 30, 2012. Supplemental documents are posted on the ftp site. To view the supplemental documents, please log in to the following location using a Web browser: ftp://eeeeeeeeeeeeeEeeeeeEeeeeeeeEEEEeEeeeeeeEeeeee The user name is: eeeeee The password is: eeEeeeeeeee Respectfully, Pam Garland Recreation & License Administrator phone-360-424-2912 fax-425-462-3118 Figure 1. E-mail message from PSE accompanying the draft Aesthetic Resource Implementation Plan.

9.3 Summary of Reviewer Replies No ARIP reviewers sent comments to PSE.

ftp://204.61.33.75/Baker_License/ARIP_Review_Draft/�