biological assessment of rock island dam operations … · 1998-1999: phase ii spill will be...

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OFROCK ISLAND DAM OPERATIONS

FOR iNTERIM PROTECTION OF STEELHEAD TROUT

Prepared for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

By

the Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County

February 9, 1998

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDMID-COLUMBIA HOP EISDATE: 02/09/98FILE: E4(4)NUMBER: 103

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2

3. PROPOSED ACTION3.1 INTERIM PROTECTION PLAN

3.1.1 IPP Actions3.1.2 Additional WP Action Measures3.1.3 Extension of Interim Protection Plan Beyond 1999

4. STEELHEAD BIOLOGY 74.1 JUVENILE STEELHEAD 74.2 ADULT STEELHEAD 7

5. EFFECTS OF PROJECT OPERATION5.1 ADULT PASSAGE5.2 JUVENILE PASSAGE

5.2.1 Turbine Passage5.2.2 Spill Passage5.2.3 Juvenile Bypass Systems5.2.4 Ancillary Passage Routes5.2.5 Reservoir Passage and Production5.2.6 Predation

6. EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION6.1 ADULT PASSAGE6.2 JUVENILE PASSAGE

6.2.1 Turbine Passage6.2.2 Spill Passage6.2.3 Juvenile Bypass Systems6.2.4 Ancillary Passage Routes6.2.5 Reservoir Passage and Production6.2.6 Predation

..3

..3.4.6

99

11111212131315

17

1718181919202021

226.2.7 Analysis of Steelhead Survival Improvements from Proposed

Action

Rock Island Biological Assessment February 9, 1998

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

7. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 25

8. LITERATURE CITED 26

LIST OF TABLESTable

1 Estimated Survival of Steethead With Interim Protection Plan Measures 22

Rock Island Biological Assessment ii February 9, 1998

1. 1N~RODUCTION

The combined effects of hydroelectric projects, flood control, irrigation, timber harvesting,agriculture, ranching and other landuses, commercial and sport fishery harvest, as well as changesin ocean conditions, have resulted in the decline of some races/demes of mid-Columbia Riversahnonid fish. The Public Utility District No. 1 ofChelan County (Chelan PUD), in combinationwith Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County (Douglas PUD), are developing a habitatconservation plan to assist the recovery of these species.

The mid-Columbia River Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) addresses project-specific andcumulative impacts associated with the three mainstem mid-Columbia River hydroelectric projectsoperated by Chelan and Douglas County PUDs. The HCP is intended to be consistent with anevolving basin-wide effort, including both mainstem and tributary activities. The PUDs desire isthat by working cooperatively with state and federal fishery agencies and local Native Americantribes (Fisheries Agencies and Tribes), agreements can be developed to aid in the strengtheningof the anadromous salmonid species.

Based initially on speculation that mid-Columbia River steelliead (Oncorlzynchus mykiss) will belisted under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which, subsequently, has occurred, Chelan PUDhas developed an Interim Protection Plan for steelhead trout (IPP) for the Rock Islandhydroelectric project. The main goal of the IPP is to provide a program that continues andsupplements the measures under the Rock Island Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement)until the programs associated with the HCP are implemented. The main goal of the HCP is tohave 100% No-Net-Impact on migrating steelhead. This will be accomplished, in part, byachieving 95% survival ofjuvenile stecihead migrating past the immediate forebay, dam structure,and tailrace. The measures in the IPP are designed to make further progress toward achieving thegoals of the HCP.

Chelan PUDs obligations with respect to anadromous fish protection are stipulated in theSettlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement was signed by Chelan PUD and the FisheriesAgencies and Tribes in 1987 and has a term of forty years. Chelan PUD has gone above andbeyond the terms of the Settlement Agreement in an effort to protect downstream migratingsteelhead trout.

This Biological Assessment (BA) describes Chelan PUD actions, Rock Island project effects, andbiologically sound steelhead protective measures for the Rock Island Project. The intent of thisBA is to provide support for necessary findings with respect to upper Columbia steelhead undersection 7 of the ESA. This BA, along with the IPP, will be filed with the Federal EnergyRegulatory Commission (FERC) as the first step for initiating Section 7 consultation under theESA with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).

Rock Island Biological Assessment 1 February 9, 1998

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Rock Esland was the first hydroelectric facility to harness the power of the mainstem ColumbiaRiver. Construction ofthe project involved raising a reinforced concrete structure that spanned the

Columbia River at river mile (RM) 453.4. The original project included a spiliway and abutment,and a powerhouse (First Powerhouse) on the left (northeast) side of the river. Subsequentdevelopments included expansion of the powerhouse to hold an additional six turbines, andconstruction of an additional powerhouse (Second Powerhouse) on the opposite side of the river.Fishways are located on both sides of the river and in the center of the dam to provide upstreampassage of adult anadromous salmonids over the dam. Downstream migrating anadromous

- salmonids pass the dam by going through the turbines, the juvenile bypass channel installed in theSecond Powerhouse or through spillways during periods of spill. As a protection measure, a spillprogram is currently being implemented to improve survival of downstream migrating fish.Modification ofsome spiligates is being conducted to enhance the effectiveness of the spill program.

The original construction of the Rock Island project wascompleted by the Puget Sound Power &Light Company in 1933 to provide hydropower to the greater Seattle area. Ownership was latertransferred to Chelan PUD [Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) License No. 943].Chelan PUD distributes a substantial portion of the power from Rock Island Dam to customers inChelan County. Under tenns of the June 19, 1974 power purchase contract, Puget Sound Power &Light Company purchases the remaining output.

Rock Island BiologicalAssessment 2 February 9, 1998

3. PROPOSED ACTION

Chelan PUD proposes to implement the steelhead Interim Protection Plan at the Rock Islandhydroelectric project until themid-Columbia River HCP is implemented. Chelan PUD will submita draft Biological Assessment to FERC for use in formal consultation with NMFS.

Chelan PUDs proposed action is comprised of steelhead protective measures regarding a spillprogram, hatchery compensation program, total dissolvedgas (TDG) monitoring, a predator controlprogram, implementation ofa pilot survival study, and modifications of project operations. Theseprotective actions are described below. As stated previously, Chelan PUD developed the IPP forsteelhead trout to provide interim protection for steelhead at the Rock Island project until such timeas the HCP is completed and implemented.

3.1 INTERIM PROTECTION PLAN

Chelan PUD proposes to implement the following interim protection plan pending execution ofa long-term HCP.

3.1.1 IPP Actions

The following actions are stipulated in the Settlement Agreement and are included in the proposed‘PP.

3.1.1.1 PhaseliSpifi

Chelan PUD will continue to provide passage for downstream migrating steelhead through spill

as stipulated in Section C of the Settlement Agreement.1998 - 1999: Chelan PUD will use appropriate methodology to estimate the effectiveness

of spill and will arrange spill in a manner determined by Chelan PUD toprovide optimum passage.

1998 - 1999: Phase II spill will be provided on a daily basis at the request of theFisheries Agencies and Tribes. All spill and monitoring will be fundedthrough the Account pursuant to Section C of the Settlement Agreement.

3.1.1.2 Hatchery Based Compensation

Chelan PUD will continue to meet all obligations for hatchery-based compensation outlined in

Section E of the Settlement Agreement.


1998 - 1999: Chelan PUD will provide the funding and capacity to rear and release30,000 lbs of steelhead at 6.5 fish/lb (approximately 200,000 yearlingsteelhead).

1998 - 1999: The hatchery production program will continue to be carried out in amanner that is consistent with the maintenance of genetically distinct stocks.

3.1.1.3 Adult Fish Ladders

Chelan PUD modified the existing adult fish ladders at Rock Island Dam so their operation meetscurrent Fisheries Agency operating criteria. Chelan PUD will continue to use the existing gravitywater supply at the right bank ladder to meet design flows.

3.1.2 AddItional IPP Action Measures

The following actions are not stipulated in the Settlement Agreement, but are being proposed aspart of the 1PP.

3.1.2.1 Hatchery Program

Chelan PUD will fund the changes in hatchery procedures and evaluations needed to make thehatchery compensation program consistent with recovery of steelhead populations, as defined inthe proposed HCP Mid-Columbia Mainstem Conservation Plan Hatchery Program. The primarysource of the broodstock will be the trapping facilities on the Wenatchee River at Dryden andTumwater dams for fish released on the Wenatchee River, which is specified in the proposed HCPMid-Columbia Mainstem Conservation Plan Hatchery Program as the first step in transformingthe steelhead hatchery compensation program to a recovery program based on locally adapted,adult based supplementation.

3.1.2.2 Total Dissolved Gas (TDG~Monitoring

Chelan PUD has absorbed the cost ofobtaining equipment and constructing installations to monitor

total dissolved gas (TDG) in the forebay and tailrace of Rock Island Dam.

1998 - 1999: Chelan PUD will continue to monitor TDG in the forebay and talirace of

Rock Island Dam.

1998 - 1999: Chelan PUD will analyze data collected under different operationalscenarios to determine to what extent there is a need for gas abatementmeasures at Rock Island Dam.

While studies continue to determine the set of conditions during which TDG abatement may be


needed at Rock Island Dam, Chelan PUD will take the following actions:

1. A comprehensive modeling program to determine what, if any, structural changeswould be necessary to change the gas saturation characteristics at Rock Island Dam.

2. A design program to determine if the chosen alternative for a gas abatementstructure for Rock Island Dam is feasible.

3. Construction and testing of a gas abatement prototype in a representative locationat Rock Island Dam.

So long as Chelan PUD is operating under the terms ofthis IPP, all costs ofthe modeling, design,construction and testing ofa prototype dissolved gas abatement device will be funded through theAccount.

3.1.2.3 Predator Confrol

Since 1995, Chelan PUD has funded an effort to remove squawfish, a known predator ofjuvenilesteelhead, from the forebay and tailrace of Rock Island Dam. Chelan PUD has also funded ahazing program to minimize the losses from avian predators.

1998 - 1999: Chelan PUD will continue to fund the predator control program at itscurrent level.

1998 - 1999: Chelan PUD will investigate new and innovative ways of removingsquawfish from the reservoirs.

1999: Chelan PUD may investigate the movements of adult squawfish in theforebay and tailrace of Rock Island Dam using radio telemetry methods.This effort may allow Chelan PUD to focus the removal efforts on locationswhere squawfish congregate.

3.1.2.4 Adult Passage Survival

Chelan PUD will maintain and operate adult passage systems at the project according to theDetailed Fishway Operating Procedure (DFOP) criteria or superior criteria developed through theuse of study results. Presently, very little radio telemetry data is available to evaluate steelheadpassage success at Rock Island Dam. Chelan supports regional and local efforts to study summersteethead passage success via radio telemetry. However, due to confounding variables evident inassessing the underlying causes ofadult steelhead losses, Chelan cannot presently support the useof radio telemetry studies to measure per project survival of adult steelhead passing through RockIsland Dam. Chelan PUD will operate spill and turbine units in a manner that optimizes adultpassage white meeting requirements for juvenile passage. Chelan PUD will consider adult andkelt steelbead fallback rates and kelt protection when implementing juvenile fish bypass system


development.

3.1.2.5 Pilot Survival Study

Chelan PUD will fund and conduct a pilot survival study at Rock Island Dam in 1998.

1998: The pilot study will be conducted using releases of PIT tagged steelliead or otheryearly spring migrant salmon in the reservoir and tailrace of Rock Island Dam.Information obtained in the pilot study will be used to determine if further survivalstudies should be conducted in the near future.

1999: Further survival studies may be funded and conducted by Chelan PUD if the resultsof the 1998 pilot study warrant further investigation.

3.1.2.6 Plant Operations

The Rock Island project has generating units of three different types. The First Powerhousecontains a total of 10 vertical axis turbines, 4 Nagler fixed blade units, and 6 Kaplan typeadjustable blade units; the Second Powerhouse contains a total of 8 horizontal axis bulb turbines.Studies have shown that the survival of downstream migrating steelhead varies between thedifferent types of units, with the bulb and Kaplan turbines having a higher survival rate than theNagler turbines.

1998 - 1999: During the term of this IPP, Chelan PUD will operate Rock Island Dam toput a majority of flow through the Second Powerhouse bulb turbines duringthe outmigration of juvenile steelhead.

1998 - 1999: Chelan P151) will operate bulb and Kaplan turbines in preference to Naglerturbines.

3.1.3 Extension of Interim Protection Plan Beyond 1999

If the proposed HCP has not been approved as of December 31, 1999, then the provisions of thisIPP will be subject to review and amendment through the reimtiation of a section 7 consultationbetween FERC and NMFS.

Rock Island BiologicalAssessment 6 Februaiy 9, 1998

4. STEELHEAD BIOLOGY

Summer steelhead use the Rock Island project area as a corridor for juvenile and adult migration.The majority ofadult summersteelhead returning to the mid-Columbia River are hatchery-produced,but natural production occurs in tributaries to the mid-Columbia River including the WenatcheeRiver and many of its tributaries (Chapman et al. 1 994b). Adult summer steelhead begin arrivingat Rock Island Dam in late June, and 90 percent pass the project from the end ofJuly through themiddle of October. Some summersteelhead overwinter in theColumbia River, passing Rock IslandDam from March through June. Steelhead spawn from March through July ofthe year followingtheir entrance into fresh water.

4.1 JUVENILE STEELHEAD

On average, naturally-produced juvenile steelhead from the mid-Columbia rear in fresh water fortwo to three years (range: one to seven years) before outmigrating as smolts, and hatchery smoltsare released as yearlings. Ninety percent ofjuvemle summer steelhead passage occurs during May.The modal size ofsteelhead smolts passing Rock Island Dam has been reported as ranging from 172to 181 mm for naturally-produced smolts and 200 to 210 mm for hatchery smolts (Peven 1991,Peven 1992; Fielder and Peven 1986). Juvenile steelbead in the mid-Columbia migrate actively(averaging about 32 kmlday), thus the reservoir residence time is short (Weitkamp et al. 1986).

In theColumbia River basin, steelhead juveniles generally emerge from the gravel from July throughSeptember. After emergence, juveniles move downstream into overwintering habitats (Chapmanet at. 1994b). Most parr rear in freshwater for two to three years, but the duration of freshwaterresidence can range from one to seven years (CBFWA 1990; Peven 1992). Peven et al. (1994) foundthat about 90% ofwild steelhead juveniles in samples taken at Rock Island and Rocky Reach damswere two- and three-winter residents (equally the most common age groups). Juveniles that hadspent one, or from four to seven winters in freshwater accounted for about 10% of steelheadsampled. Wild steelhead juveniles emigrate during the spring, passing mid-Columbia dams fromApril through June (Chapman et al. 1 994b).

No information is available about the feeding habits of steelhead juveniles in the mid-ColumbiaRiver reach. Steelhead juveniles in Lower Granite reservoir on the Snake River fed primarily onChironomidae, and also took minor amounts of Homoptera, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera andPlecoptera (Chandler, J., Idaho Power Co., unpublished data). Of over 100 stomachs examined,only two contained an unidentified fish. It may be reasonable to assume the dietary behavior ofsteelhead juveniles in Snake River reservoirs is typical ofsteelhead juveniles in the mid-Columbiareach.

4.2 ADULT STEELHEAD

Adult summer steelhead enter the Columbia River during March through October, with peakmigration at Bonneville Dam occurring from late June through early September (CBFWA 1990).Adult steelhead migration is much more protracted than that ofother anadromous salmonids in the

Rock island Biological Assessment 7 February 9, 1998

Columbia River. Most adults pass through the mid-Columbia reach from June through late October.Spawning occurs the following year during March through July (Peven 1992; CBFWA 1990). TheWenatchee, Entiat, and Methow rivers support naturally spawning steelhead populations (Peven1992). Unlike other anadromous salmonids, all steelhead do not die after spawning, but may returnto the ocean. An individual steelhead may spawnmore than once during its lifetimeor may spawnonly once and die depending on the condition of the fish after spawning (Chapman et a!. 1994b), butrepeat spawning is rare for mid-Columbia River steelhead (2.1% or less) (Brown 1995).

Chapman (1986) estimated that runs of steelhead (before Caucasian interference) entering theColumbia River ranged from 449,000 to 554,000. Since 1938, escapement ofsteelhead (both naturaland hatchery) tothe Columbia River mouth reached a highof474,000 in 1986 and a low of105,000in 1975. Escapementhas averaged 292,000 adults since 1990 (WDFW and Oregon Department ofFish and Wildlife [ODFW] 1994). Between 1933 and 1959, adult steeJhead countedat Rock IslandDam averaged 2,600 to 3,700. In the 1960s, adult counts increased at Priest Rapids Dam with thebeginning of hatchery releases and peaked at 34,000 in 1985. From 1989 to 1995 an average of9,734 steelhead passed Priest Rapids Dam (Brown 1995).

Most steelhead adults returning to the mid-Columbia reach are of hatchery origin (Peven 1992).Naturally-produced adult steelhead passing Wells Dam during 1982-1993 comprised about 10% ofthe steelhead counted (range 3% to 13%) (Mullan et al. 1992; Chapman et al. 1994b). Naturally-produced steelhead accounted for an average of 19% of the adults counted from 1986 to 1995 atPriest Rapids Dam (range 10% to 29%) (Brown 1995). Naturally-producedjuveniles averaged 24%of steelhead sampled at Rock Island during 1986 to 1994 (range 15% to 38%) (Chapman et al.l994b). Total releases ofhatchery produced steelhead juveniles to the mid-Columbia reach from1982 to 1993 ranged from approximately 700,000 to 1.2 million (Brown 1995). Current productioncontinues at a program level ofabout 1 million fish.


5. EFFECTS OF PROJECT OPERATION

Prior to dam construction, upstream and downstream migrating fish encountered rapids and chuteswhich were common in the mid-Columbia reach. The mainstem mid-Columbia PUD projectsreplaced the numerous natural gradient breaks with larger gradient breaks (i.e., the dams),interspersed with large pools (i.e., reservoirs). In order to pass adult fish upstream over the dams,flshways were built at all five dams. Although salmon and steelhead pass successfully upstreamover the projects, the PUDs continue to modify adult passage facilities to improve upstreampassage conditions.

The niid~ColumbiaPUD.s~have been actively.seeking-the best measures to protect downstreamsalmon and steelhead migrants since the mid-1970s. Due to the unique attributes of each project,a number of juvenile bypass systems have been tested at the PUD projects with each showingvarying levels of effectiveness. The PUDs continue to explore ways to improve downstreammigration survival of juvenile salmon and steelhead as the key element of this BA and the

- associated HCP.

5.1 ADULT PASSAGE

The effects of the Rock Island project on the survival of upstream migrating adult summersteelhead are presumed primarily related to passage at the dam. There are currently no estimatesof adult summer steethead survival through mid-Columbia River dams. Telemetry studiesconducted in the Snake River estimated interdam loss between 3 - 4% (Bjornn et al., 1994).However, the sources of the loss could not be directly determined. Investigators concluded thata combination of harvest, natural mortality and hydroelectric impacts likely attributed to the 3 -

4% loss estimate. No comparable radio telemetry data exist for the mid-Columbia River dams.

Summer steelhead radio-telemetry studies conducted in the Nass (1993) and Skeena (1979 & 1995)river systems accounted for 30% to 55% of the radio tagged fish at fmal spawning destinations(Alexander and Koski, 1995; Koski, et a!., 1995; Alexander et al., 1996). The authors concludedthat the most important determinant of survival in these Canadian river systems, which have nodams, was water temperature. Bjornn et a!. (1993) radio tagged summer steelliead at John DayDam during 1992. Approximately, 45% of the steelhead radio-tagged during this study wererecovered at fmal spawning destinations. Based upon the results of these radio-telemetry survivalstudies, there is no evidence that summer steelhead survival through the mainstem Columbia Riverdams, including dams in the mid-Columbia River, should differ significantly from the survival ofsteelhead in natural river systems. Instead, harvest and environmental variables outside theoperations of the dams likely play larger roles in determining adult steelhead survival. Therefore,estimates ofper project mortality related directly to hydroelectric dam operations are expected tobe comparable to natural river systems. Dam related mortality is expected to be a very smallfraction of the overall adult in-river mortality. Based on this assessment, Chelan believes thatmortality to adult steelhead caused by the Rock Island Project is less than 1 % above natural causesof mortality.

Rock Island Biological Assessment 9 Februai’y 9, 1998

Direct mortality for adult steelhead is likely very low, however dams also present the potential forsub-lethal effects upon migrating adult steelhead. These effects include delays at fishway facilities,increased rates of energetic expenditure in fishways and rates of involuntary fallback. Sources ofdelay in upstream migration may include extended passage time at fishway entrances, collectionsystems and ladders. Paliback, or the downstream movement of upstream migrants, is anotherpotential source of delay or injury. Assessment ofthe magnitude and effects of migratory delayat fishway facilities is complicated by the lack of information on the time required for adultanadromous fish to migrate through the unimpounded, natural reaches of the mid-Columbia. Inaddition, there are other environmental factors influencing migration in the mid-Columbiaincluding hydrology, water temperature (in mainstem and tributaries), dissolved gassupersaturation (Dauble and Mueller 1993) and turbidity. Project operations such as turbine andspill schedules may also directly affect passage at these mainstem dams.

The impacts of delay vary by species, by race/deme, and according to hydrologic and waterquality conditions. Species such as steethead that hold in the river for considerable periods of timeprior to spawning are less likely to be negatively affected by slight to moderate delays at fishways.Late migrating species such as fall (ocean-type) chinook and sockeye salmon have a much shortermigratory “window” and may be more susceptible to the effects of delayed migration on pre-spawning mortality or spawning success.

Adult fallback may be defined as the involuntary or voluntary downstream movement of upstreammigrants. Involuntary fallback occurs when upstream migrants inadvertently pass through theproject to the tailwater downstream of the dam structure which they must reascend to reachspawning areas. Voluntary fallback refers to the phenomenon of hatchery or tributary“overshoot,” when migrants actively move back downstream in search of natal tributaries orhatchery volunteer traps. Some involuntary failbacks may fail to reascend the dam and eventuallyspawn or enter a hatchery collection channel at some locationdownstream ofthe dam. Voluntaryfailbacks (overshoots) exhibit identical behavior. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to distinguishbetween voluntary and involuntary failbacks that fail to reascend the dam. Involuntary falibacksmay fail to reascend the dam and eventually spawn at some location downstream of the dam, orenter the hatcheries along with “overshoots” or otherwise voluntary failbacks. Therefore, it isextremely difficult to distinguish between voluntary and involuntary failbacks.

Decreased water velocity in reservoirs, with the exception ofzero nighttime flow, does not appearto slow upstream migration of adult salmon and steelhead (Bjornn and Peery 1992). Study datasuggest that adult salmon and steelhead travel times through Columbia River reservoirs havedecreased compared to travel times through the previous unimpounded system. There is noevidence presented of serious disorientation, wandering, straying or mortality associated withreservoir conditions. Additionally, reduced water velocities may decrease adult energyconsumption during upstream migration through the reservoir.

Adult passage delay, if any, appears to be more closely associated with attempts to locateentrances and negotiate transportation channels, trifurcationlbifurcation chambers, trappingfacilities and counting stations (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995). Therefore, migratory delay of adults


at mid-Columbia fishways, if there is any delay, is generally attributable to the amount of timerequired to locate entranees and to locate and enter the ladder portions of the fishways rather thantraversing the reservoirs. In terms of total migration timing, more rapid passage through thereservoirs than through a higher velocity riverine environment, appears to compensate for the timefish require to pass the dams. No difference was observed in the travel rate of sockeye betweenMcNary Dam and Rock Island Dam during the period from 1955 - 1994, despite construction oftwo dams (Priest Rapids and Wanapum) between these two points during that period of time(Quinn, et a!. 1997).

5.2 JUVENILE PASSAGE

5.2.1 Turbine Passage

To date, the factors causing injury and mortality in turbines have been difficult to assess becauseit is not been possible to directly observe fish passage through a turbine unit. However, based onvisible observation of test fish, mortality associated with turbine passage has generally beenclassified in two categories: direct and indirect. Direct mortality occurs within the confines of theturbine and is assumed to originate from mechanical-pressure- or hydraulic-related factors (Eicher1987). Indirect mortality, which occurs after juvenile fish exit the turbine, can result fromconditions such as stress and backroll entrapment, which are not normally lethal in themselves,but may result in increased risk ofpredation or injury during subsequent downstream migration.Most predation of juveniles likely occurs in the tailrace as the juveniles recover from thedisorientation and stress of turbine passage (Ledgerwood Ct al. 1990). Stress may also causeharmful levels of physical or behavioral tension, leading to weakened disease resistance andsubsequent delayed mortality (Ferguson 1994).

Juvenile turbine passage survival studies for the Columbia and Snake rivers began in the 1940sand have continued on a sporadic basis to the present. The results of several studies reviewed byIwamoto and Williams (1993) showed total (direct and indirect) juvenile turbine passage mortalityestimates ranging from 2% to 20%. Balloon tag studies of direct mortality for Kaplan turbineshave been in the range of 4% to 7% when averaged over the range of operating conditions(Normandeau and Skaiski 1997). Indirect effects have not been measured directly, but anindication of the indirect mortality at Lower Granite Dam was obtained in 1995. Concurrentstudies with balloon tags (direct mortality) and PIT tags (total mortality) released chinook into thesame turbine intake (release hose, location and turbine operating conditions identical). Thesurvival estimate for PIT tag chinook was 1.3% lower than the balloon tag estimate, suggestingthat indirect mortality was of low magnitude.

Survival of juvenile fish through turbines has been generally found to correlate positively withturbine operating efficiency (Ferguson 1994). However, an analysis by Eicher (1987) concludedthat the data set is too small to draw any direct of statistically significant relationship betweenturbine operating efficiency and juvenile passage mortality. Some researchers speculate that fishsurvival is probably best at peak turbine efficiency (Bell 1981), while others believe that settingsbeyond peak efficiency offer better conditions for fish passage (Sheldon 1995).

RockIsland Biological Assessment 11 Februa,y 9, 1998

5.2.2 Spill Passage

The objective of passing juveniles over the spiliway is to provide an alternative non-turbinepassage route. The advantages of spill passage are providing a passage route with higher directsurvival, a relatively high effectiveness in diverting fish away from turbine intakes, and therelative ease and flexibility of its implementation. In general, when compared to other means ofpassage currently available, spiliways are the most benign route for juveniles to pass themid-Columbia projects (Chapman et al. 1994a; Chapman et al. 1994b). Survival of fish passingthrough spiliways of dams on the Columbia River has been estimated to be 98% to 100%(Anderson et al. 1993).

However, juveniles passing over the spiiway do face several risks. First, thejuveniles can sustainphysical injuries, such as descaling, that may incapacitate or even kill them. Second, increasingspill may result in higher TDG supersaturation levels, which in turn may cause gas bubble trauma(GBT) in juveniles and adults. Juveniles are also subjected to predation upon entry into thetailrace. Individuals that become injured or disoriented while passing over the spillway may bemore susceptible to predation.

Columbia River TDG supersaturation often occurs during periods of high runoff and spill athydropower facilities, primarily because spill in deep tailrace pools can cause significantentrainment of atmospheric gases during deep plunge of the water. Total dissolved gassupersaturation conditions can persist and accumulate through the mid-Columbia River reach,since the reach consists of relatively deep pools behind each dam, providing less effectivedissipation than naturally shallower, more turbulent river systems. Fish and other aquaticorganisms that are exposed to excessive TDG supersaturation can develop GBT, a condition thatis often harmful or even fatal.

The occurrence of TDG supersaturation in the Columbia River system is well documented and hasbeen linked to mortalities and migration delays of salmon (Beiningen and Ebel 1970; Gray andHaynes 1977; USACE 1994). Total dissolved gas supersaturation in the Columbia and Snakerivers was identified in the 1960s and 1970s as a detriment to salmon, and those concerns havereappeared as management agencies have reinstituted spill as a means of aiding fish passagearound hydropower facilities (NMFS 1995).

5.2.3 Juvenile Bypass Systems

Although most of the mainstem dams in the Columbia River basin were constructed with fishpassage devices to assist the upstream migration of adult fish returning to spawn, very fewprovisions were made to allow downstream migration ofjuvenile fish other than by passage overthe spillways or, during power production, through turbines.

Physical barriers and diversion devices are the most common bypass measures at Columbia andSnake river dams. These two measures must be combined in the case ofdownstream migratingfish, since for every barrier there must also be an escape route to allow bypass of the dam. More


and more, it is being found that the effectiveness of the Columbia River bypass systems lies notso much in the physical barrier but rather in the ability of the fish to locate and utilize the bypassentrance. This is due to the fact that design parameters for physical barriers are well understood,being based primarily on the swimming abilities and physical size of the fish of concern. Thesuccess of the bypass devices, on the other hand, is dependent largely on fish behavior, which canvary considerably under the array of conditions found at mainstem dams.

Juvenile screening facilities have been added as a retrofit to turbine intakes at several mainstemprojects. Early investigations showed that it was not possible to achieve full screening of turbineintake flows due to constrained areas within the existing powerhouse structures, excessive watervelocities, and conflicts with intended project operations. Consequently, partial screening systemshave been installed that are able to reduce, though not eliminate, turbine passage mortality. Thefish screens installed at mainstem projects intercept approximately the upper third of the turbineintake flow (DeHart 1993). The screens are typically mounted at an oblique angle in the turbineintake as a means of maximizing the available surface area and reducing the approach velocitiesthrough the screen.

5.2.4 Ancillary Passage Routes

Several support functions at Rock Island Dam are supplied by reservoir water and discharge to thedownstream side of the dam, resulting in a potential passage route for juvenile fish to pass thedam. These functions include gravity flow and supplemental water supplies for the adult fishway,an orifice collection and bypass system for the second powerhouse turbine intake gatewells, andstation service power generation. It is estimated that these functions consume less than half of 1 %of total project discharge. Intakes for the gravity water supply to the right bank fishway areequipped with trashrack and vertical rotating fish screens that route fish to the gatewell orificebypass system. The gatewell orifices and gravity water supply bypass system passed 2.2 percentofmarked steelhead released into the forebay right channel during studies in 1982 (Olson 1983).Annual passage ofjuvenile steeiliead through this bypass system has ranged from 10,000 - 44,000from 1985 -1996 (Fish Passage Center, Annual Reports 1985 - 1996).

5.2.5 Reservoir Passage and Production

Reservoir impoundment can affect the survival of outmigrating anadromous salmonid juvenilesby creating habitat for increased predator populations and by reducing water velocities, which canslow the migration rate and increase travel time ofjuveniles. Increased travel time can affect thesize and survival rate ofjuveniles, timing of ocean transition and thermal nnprinting. Increasedtravel time can cause migrating juveniles to revert to parr and some reverted parr may residualize.Increased travel time due to passage through reservoirs also increases potential exposure ofjuvenile outmigrants to predatory fish, which may reduce migration survival.

Presently, there are no estimates of reservoir passage survival for juvenile steelhead in the mid-Columbia River reservoirs. Project survival estimates from the Snake River steelhead survivalstudies have given estimates of survival per kilometer for passage through both the reservoir and


the dam, averaged across the entire length of the reservoir. During the study years, 1994 and1995, Snake River summer steelhead experienced per km project survival rates averaging 99.8%.However, there is no indication that this number represents true reservoir survival. Recentresearch in the Snake River indicates that the majority of total project mortality is attributed toeffects of passage at the dam rather than reservoir related effects. Assuming that reservoir effectsaccounted for 20% of the per km loss measured for the Snake River projects, the per km survivalrate for reservoir passage only would be 99.96%. Applying this rate to the 33 km Rock Islandreservoir yields an estimated survival rate of 98.7% (.9996~~).

The importance ofmainstem reservoir habitat for rearing ofmid-Columbia fishes varies by speciesand race/deme (Chapman et al. 1994a; Chapman et al 1994b). Spring chinook, steelhead, cohoand sockeye do not appear to rear in the shoreline habitats of the mainstem Columbia River, butoutmigrate in the thaiweg. On the other hand, subyearling (parr) that have not smolted may usethe reservoirs as rearing habitat. This life history pattern is a major strategy of summer and fallchinook in the mid-Columbia River.

Due to reservoir construction, water velocities through the Snake and lower Columbia River aretoday much slower than historically (CBFWA 1990). Raymond (1968, 1969, 1979) and Bentleyand Raymond (1976) estimated that juvenile anadromous salnionids move through the Snake Riverand lower Columbia River impoundments one-half to one-third slower than they would throughfree-flowing river sections ofthe same length. Although these and other studies indicate that watervelocity is a primary determinant ofjuvenile migration speed (Smith 1982; Buettner and Brimmer1995; Berggren and Filardo 1993), other researchers suggest covariant factors in addition to flowmay be affecting the dynamics ofout-migration (Achord et a!. 1995; Beeman and Rondorf 1992;Mains and Smith 1964; Chapman et al. 1994a; Giorgi et al. 1997). These other factors includefish size, condition, water temperature, and date of release.

Water velocities and migration rates in the Rock Island reservoir are favorable for faster migrationrates and higher reservoir survival than expected for the Snake and lower Columbia River. Underexisting conditions, water velocities in the mid-Columbia reach are roughly twice as fast as watervelocities in the Snake and lower Columbia River system. At 80,000 cfs, a commonly occurringbase spring flow rate for the Snake River, the average cross-sectional velocity in Lower Granitereservoir is about 0.7 fps (IJSACE 1992). At 140,000 cfs, a similarly common base spring flowrate for Rock Island reservoir, the average reservoir velocity is about 2.6 fps. Velocities throughthe downstream Wanapum and Priest Rapids reservoirs are 1.0 and 1.5 fps, respectively (FERC1996).

These higher velocities are reflected in faster migration rates for juvenile steelhead through themid-Columbia River. The median migration rate of steelhead through the lower mid-Columbia(Rock Island Dam to McNary Dam) was 30 km/d for PIT tagged juveniles from 1989 - 1995(Giorgi et al. 1997). In the Snake River, median migration rates reported for steelhead in 1994,when flows during the migration averaged about 80,000 cfs, ranged from 10.3 - 15.0 lun/d forsteelhead migrating from Silcott Island to McNary Dam (Muir et at. 1995). Thus, availableevidence indicates that, under normal flow conditions, steelhead migrate through the mid-


Columbia River about twice as fast as steelhead migrating through the Snake River system. Invery high flow years, median migration rates for steethead through the Snake River approach thoseseen in the mid-Columbia during normal flows. In 1996, a high flow year (100,000 cfs - 150,000cfs), Snake River steelliead migration rates (Port of Wilma to McNary Dam) ranged from 19.9km/d to 43.6 kmId (Smith et al. 1997 Draft for peer review). These higher reservoir velocitiesand faster steelhead migration rates through the mid-Columbia support the use of Snake Riverestimates of survival per kilometer of reservoir travel as conservative surrogate estimates ofsteelhead passage survival for the mid-Columbia River reservoirs.

The relationship between flows, migration rate and juvenile salmon survival is not completelyunderstood. Several studies have shown that juvenile salmon and steethead survival is higher inyears with high snow and precipitation levels, resulting in high flow levels during the migration.Other variables, such as lower temperatures, higher turbidity, and fish condition may influencethe survival rates in addition to flow in these comparisons between years. Sims and Ossiander(1981) reported average annual survival for stream-type chinook and steelhead juvenile wascorrelated with annual average flow. More recent studies indicated higher flows result in reducedtravel time of steelhead and chinook migrating through the Snake River, but within-yearcomparisons showed no increase in survival for either steelhead or chinook with increased flows(Smith et al. 1997 Draft for peer review). Comparison of survival rates in multi-year analysis didshow higher survival in years with higher flow, but other variables between years, independentof flow, may have contributed to the differences in survival (Smith et al. 1997 Draft for peerreview).

5.2.6 Predation

Construction of hydropower facilities onthe mid-Columbia River have created impoundments withhabitat more conducive to predators compared to the pre-impounded free flowing river. Changesin physical habitat, water quality and downstream passage conditions have combined to increasethe abundance ofpredators and the risk ofjuvenile outinigrant mortality due to predation (Mullanet al. 1986; Chapman et al. 1994a). Dams present an obstacle to the downstream migration ofjuvenile anadromous salmonids, often causing them to concentrate in forebays before finding aroute past the dam. Concentrations ofjuvenile anadromous salmonids provide a ready food supplyfor predators that congregate at such sites (Beamesderfer and Rieman 1991). Passage throughturbines, spiliways or bypass facilities may stun, disorient or injure somejuvenile anadromoussalmonids, making them less capable ofescaping predators. Sediment that formerly would havebeen suspended during high spring flows settles out in upstream impoundments, resulting inreduced turbidity in the mid-Columbia River. Clearer water makes juvenile outmigrantspotentially more visible and more susceptible to predation.

In addition to juvenile outmigrants being more susceptible to predators while migrating past thedams, it is generally assumed that the number of predators increased with impoundment of themid-Columbia reach. Mullan et al. (1986) reported the contradictory evidence that counts ofnorthern squawflsh in the adult fishways have generally decreased at Columbia River dams sincethe reservoirs were impounded. Whether this reduction is due to reduced population size or


changes in movement patterns is unknown. The deep, low velocity habitat created byimpoundments is preferred by northern squawfish (Piychocheilus oregonensis), the major nativepredator fish ofjuvenile anadromous salmonids. On a per capita basis, predator densities in themid-Columbia reservoirs were similar to densities in the John Day reservoir (Burley and Poe1994). Additionally, two gamefish species, walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) and smalhnouth bass(Microptrus dolomieu), were introduced into the Columbia River system in the 1940s to 1950s toprovide sportfishing opportunities (Henderson and Foster 1956; Zook 1983). Research has shownthat these species also prey on juvenile salmonids, but to a lesser extent than northern squawfish.

RockIsland BiologicatAssessment 16 February 9, 1998

6. EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION

6.1 ADULT PASSAGE

Chelan PUD made several changes to fishway structures and operations at Rock Island Dam asa result of the 1987 Settlement Agreement (FERC 1987). First, a comprehensive hydraulicevaluation of the right bank fish ladder was performed, including evaluation of the effect oftailwater elevation on fishway flows. Starting in 1988, right bank fishway channel walls weresmoothed and pilasters filled to reduce friction losses in the channel, the attraction water systemwas modified to enhance reliability and meet criteria and lights were placed immediately upstreamof-the right-bank counting station to minimize avoidance by adult chinook salmon.

Bjornn and Peery (1992) included information from mid-Columbia and other run-of-riverreservoirs in their comprehensive review of the effects of reservoirs on adult salmon. Based onthe available information, they concluded that run-of-river reservoirs had minimal effect onmigrating adults. Adult salmonids generally pass through these reservoirs at similar or faster ratesthan they did in the naturally flowing river. There is no evidence presented of seriousdisorientation, wandering, straying or mortality associated with reservoir conditions.

Upstream passage delay of adult chinook salmon appears to be more closely associated withattempts to locate entrances and negotiate transportation channels, trifurcation/bifurcationchambers, trapping facilities and counting stations than migration through the reservoir. Thechinook salmon radio-telemetry study by Stuehrenberg et al. (1995) is the only work that includesa systematic evaluation of several mid-Columbia project flshways, The median total passage timeat Rock Island Dam for all races/demes of adult chinook salmon was lower than for fishways atall other mid-Columbia River projects. Although no specific data have been analyzed to date forsteelhead (data collection is in progress), it can be inferred that adult passage characteristics ofsteelhead may be similar to salmon.

Even with existing data indicating no significant impacts to adult upstream migration at RockIsland Dam, the PUI) continues to explore ways to improve upstream migration survival of adultsalmon and steelhead. Studies were conducted in 1997 to confirmupstream passage characteristicsof chinook salmon and investigate upstream passage characteristics of other species, such assockeye salmon and steelhead. These study results are being analyzed, but few steelhead taggedin 1997 were from mid-Columbia stocks and data are limited for steelhead passage success at RockIsland Dam. Chelan supports further studies of adult steelliead passage with tagging effortsdirected at mid-Columbia steelhead stocks. Further refinement ofadult passage facility operatingcriteria, if shown to be needed, will assure that project effects on migrating adult steethead remainminimal.


6.2 JUVENILE PASSAGE

6.2.1 Turbine Passage

System survival studies conducted during 1982 and 1983 using juvenile stream-type (spring)chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia reach included a survival estimate for the river segmentabove Rock Island Dam (McKenzie et al. 1984a, 1984b). By making the assumption thatmortality would be equal for each of the three projects encountered between Pateros (near theconfluence of the Methow River) and the Rock Island tailrace, the estimate of survival throughRock Island reservoir and dam was reported as about 87% in 1982 and 84% in 1983, for anaverage of about 86% survival i.e., a 14% project mortality. There were no specific estimatesmade as to the portions that were associated with direct and indirect turbine mortality, reservoireffects or other factors involved with project passage. However, speculation at the time associatedmost of the project passage mortality with direct turbine mortality

A review of nine turbine passage studies conducted for lower Columbia and Snake River damsfound that total mortality estimates (direct and indirect effects) for Kaplan turbines varied from2% to 20% (Iwamoto and Williams 1993). A study of the Rock Island bulb turbines indicated atotal turbine mortality rate of3.9% for steelhead and 5.7% for coho (Olson and Kaczynski 1980).Recent studies conducted at Rocky Reachdam measured direct mortality at about 6% for Kaplanturbines and 4% for fixed-blade turbines (RMC and Skalski 1994a, 1994b; RMC 1994). Similarstudies in 1997 at Rock Island Dam, using balloon tags, determined direct mortality of yearlingchinook salmon to be 4.3% for the bulb turbines, 3.9% for the First Powerhouse Kaplan turbines,and 6.8% for the Nagler turbines (Normandeau and Skalski 1997). These studies indicate thatdirect and indirect turbine mortality at Rock Island Dam may be much lower than thoughtpreviously for large turbines in general. The low head ofthe Rock Island project may be a reasonwhy turbine passage mortality rates are lower than many of the mortality rates reported byIwamoto and Williams (1993). However, Chelan PUD has embarked on a juvenile fish bypassprogram (Section 6.2.3), consisting primarily of spill, to reduce juvenile fish turbine passage atRock Island Dam.

Based on knowledge of juvenile anadromous sahnonid passage behavior at Rock Island Dam,Chelan PUD has modified some of its normal turbine operating procedures in an effort to enhancepassage survival. Primarily, based on the survival study results at Rock Island Dam, the projectoperations are modified during the juvenile salmon migration to promote higher survival throughboth enhancement of spill passage efficiency and preferential use of the turbines with the highestsurvival rates. The passage efficiency ofthe spill bays on the Second Powerhouse side of the riveris much higher than the spill gates on the First Powerhouse side. Therefore, the project will beoperated to put the majority of river flow through the Second Powerhouse during the juvenilesteethead outinigration. Secondly, the bulb and First Powerhouse Kaplan turbines will be operatedin preference to the Nagler turbines. The Nagler turbines will only be operated when the riverflow exceeds the capacity of the other units, allowing some reserve capacity in the bulb turbinesfor pond management. In addition, the highest potential survival rate through the FirstPowerhouse turbines will be accomplished through block loading the Kaplan and Nagler turbines


at their most efficient setting, and using the more efficient Second Powerhouse bulb turbines toaccommodate the generation swings. Also, a computerized control system is used to automaticallyadjust the turbines to the best efficiency for any given load and head conditions.

6.2.2 Spill Passage

Spill at Rock Island Dam is currently operated to pass spring and summer juvenile migrantsaccording to the plan presented in the 1987 Settlement Agreement. This program began in 1987and has continued with modifications through the present. The agreement originally called forspring spill of 10% of instantaneous flow through the Second Powerhouse, and 50% of the flowthrough the First Powerhouseduring the middle 80% of the springjuvenile migration. Generally,80% of the spring migrants, e.g. steelhead, pass Rock Island Dam between the last week in Apriland the first week in June. The shallow spiibays are used because shallow spill is more effectivethan deep spill at Rock Island Dam (Ransom and Steig 1995). The Settlement Agreement alsocalled for 500,000 acre-feet ofwater to be provided as spill during the summerjuvenile migrationperiod.

However, beginning in 1996, the preferred method for increasing fish survival at Rock Island Damwas detennined to be the use ofspill. The Fisheries Agencies and Tribes invoked the conservationaccount, as defmed in the 1987 Settlement Agreement, which allows them to use spill at theirdiscretion until power revenue losses for the term reach $2,050,000 (in 1987 dollars, adjustedannually for inflation). The efficiency ofthe conservation account, in terms of the amount of fishprotection that can be provided with the account funds, has been increased by improvements inspill efficiency as described in the next section.

6.2.3 Juvenile Bypass Systems

In 1989, Chelan PUD installed and tested a passive diversion screen in Unit 1 of the SecondPowerhouse. The configurations tested failed to guide fish, and further modeling and testingindicated that water velocity in the turbine intakes of the Second Powerhouse was too great for anymechanical device to guide fish effectively (Elder and Weitkamp 1990).

Between 1992 and 1995, ChelanPUD installed and tested passive diversions screens in the turbineintakes at the First Powerhouse. Initially, the designs tested produced disappointing results.Through further modeling and design modification, Chelan PUD was able to achieve an overallfish guiding efficiency (FGE), for all species and test combined, of greater than 75%. However,some small migrants became impinged on the screens at the most efficient operating conditionsand, in 1995 at the joint request of the Fisheries Agencies and Tribes, Chelan PUD agreed tosuspend further testing or installation ofpassive diversion screens at the First Powerhouse at RockIsland Dam.

In 1996, Chelan PUD and the Fisheries Agencies and Tribes agreed to test the fish passage


efficiency (FPE) of spill from two types ofmodified, relatively low volume surface spillgates. Atotal of six spillgates were modified. Spill was provided through either a horizontal overflow weiror a vertical notch. Evaluation of the modified spillgates indicated that the notched gates weremore effective at passing juvenile fish than the horizontal gates. Both types ofmodified spiigateshad a higher spill efficiency than unmodified spillgates.

Chelan PUD entered into an extensive modeling program to determine the geometry of a notchedspiligate that would provide the optimum zone of influence for juvenile fish passage. Themodeling program determined that a notch 8 feet wide by 17 feet deep, spilling a volume of 2,500cfs, was the optimum design for fish passage. Chelan PUD biological staff determined that sixnew spillgates would need to be modified to provide the spillway passage necessary to reach thefuture HCP goal of 95% project passage survival.

6.2.4 AncIllary Passage Routes

It is estimated that these functions, i.e station service power, etc., consume less than half of 1 %of the total project discharge. The three adult fishways at Rock Island Dam are operatedcontinuously, except when they are alternately dewatered during two to three months in the winterfor routine maintenance. Downstream migrants passing near the fishway exits may be entrainedin the gravity flow of water into each fishway and subsequently pass through the dam in the adultladders. Downstream migrants may also be entrained in the intake flow to the gravity systemproviding auxiliary water. These latter intakes are equipped with trash racks and fish screens thatmeet current screen criteria. Chelan PUD believes that very few juvenile salmonids pass RockIsland Dam through these ancillary passage routes. Thus, Chelan PUD concludes that ancillarypassage routes are not an issue requiring mitigation.

6.2.5 Reservoir Passage and Production

The importance of mainstem reservoir habitat for rearing ofmid-Columbia fishes varies by speciesand race/deme. Spring chinook, sockeye, and coho salmon and steethead do not appear to rearin the shoreline habitats of the mainstem Columbia River, but outniigrate in the thalweg. Theriver primarily functions as a migration corridor in which food may be encountered.

Under existing conditions, WPTT in the mid-Columbia River is roughly twice as fast as the WPTTin the lower Columbia River (please see section 5.2.5, paragraph 4). Additionally, Rock Islandreservoir has a very fast turnover rate, averaging less than one day. These factors combine tomove water rapidly through Rock Island reservoir in comparison to lower Columbia mainstem andother mid-Columbia River mainstem reservoirs. In view ofthe uncertainty concerning the benefitof further decreases in WPTT, improving juvenile downstream passage survival through Rocklsland reservoir may best be achieved by:

measures directed towards predator control, andincreasing passage rate ofjuvenile outmigrants through an improved fish bypasssystem.


Chelan PUD provides hatchery-based compensation for anadromous salmonid losses resultingfrom Rock Island Dam, in accordance with provisions of the 1987 Rock Island SettlementAgreement. The compensation program set forth in the agreement calls for the design,construction, operation, maintenance and evaluation of facilities capable of rearing and releasing250,000 pounds of salmon and 30,000 pounds of steelliead. The program is stipulated to becarried out in a manner consistent with the maintenance of genetically distinct stocks in the mid-Columbia river system above Rock Island Dam (FERC 1987).

In response to these requirements, Chelan PUD coordinated with the Fisheries Agencies andTribes to develop a production plan and to select sites for facilities as appropriate to meet theintent of the production plan. In 1989, Chelan PUD completed construction of the Rock IslandHatchery complex, consisting ofthe main Eastbank hatchery facility and its five satellite facilities:the Carlton, Chiwawa, Dryden, and Similkameen rearing and acclimation ponds and the LakeWenatchee net-pens. The design ofthe facilities incorporates the capability of incubating, rearing,adult trapping and holding for up to five discrete races/demes of salmon and summer steelhead(FERC 1987). The production plan currently in effect calls for the production of one race/demeofspring (stream-type) chinook, two races/demes of summer and fall (ocean-type) chinook salmonand one stock each of sockeye and steethead. The facilities are operated under a formal agreementby the WDFW,

6.2.6 Predation

Several steelhead protective measures have been implemented at Rock Island Dam to reduce avianand squawfish predation on juvenile salmonids at the project. Gull wires have been installedacross the tailrace boating restricted zone (BRZ) to reduce gull predation onjuvenile salmonidspassing through turbulent water below the spillway and powerhouses. Propane cannons and otherpyrotechnic methods have been employed to haze gulls further downstream of the project to reducepredation in the tailrace area. No site specific estimate ofjuvenile salmonid consumption has beenmade at Rock island Dam, but at Wanapum Dam an estimated 2% of all juvenile salmonidspassing the project were consumed by gulls (Ruggerone 1986).

A predator control program was initiated at Rock Island Dam in 1995 (West 1997). Squawfishwere caught by hook-and-line in the dam tailrace and forebay area. Chelan PUD has funded thepredator control program since 1995, and will continue to fund the program as stated in Section3, in attempt to reduce juvenile steethead migration mortality.


6.2.7 Analysis of Steelhead Survival Inijrovements from Proposed Action

The measures in the Interim Protection Plan are expected to increase the survival of steelheadsufficiently to accomplish the juvenile passage standard in the HCP of95% survival ofjuvenilesteelhead migrating past the immediate forebay, dam structure, and tailrace. The surface spillgates have been highly efficient in passing juvenile salmonids during the past two years, with thesix newest notched gates giving a fish passage efficiency of44.8 fish per unit of flow versus 16.2fish per unit of flow for the standard gates (Iverson and Keister 1997). During the spring spillstudy in 1997, the proportion of all salmonids passed through spill was estimated at 26% withhydroacoustics, but three of the notched gates were in experimental locations that were notproductive. The high flows also resulted in limitations on the effective use of spill because ofTDG concerns. The spillway was more effective in 1997 for passing steelhead than for chinooksalmon, with 38% of radio tagged steethead detected passing through the spiliway (Stevenson etal. 1997). During the summer study, when TDG restrictions were lifted and total river flows werelower, the spiiway passed 54% of the fish.

Based on survival rate assumptions (Table 1) for individual passage routes, the spill programduring the past two years has accomplished the HCP objective of providing 95% survival forsteelhead passing the immediate forebay, dam structure and tailrace of the Rock Island Project.

Table 1. Esthnated Survival of Steelhead With Interim Protection Plan Measures.

Future ProJections

Yearly Passage Efficiency (Proporllon of Fish Passing Through Route)Year 1996 1997 1998 Additional E(foils 1999Total Spill 0.540 0.380 0.500 PHi Flow Management 0.500Turbines PHi 0.260 0.330 0.200 Added Predator Control 0.100Turbines PH2 0.200 0.290 0.300 0.400

Total Spifi

Survival RateBy Route

0.980Proportion of Fish Survival by Route

0.529 0.372 0.490 0.990 0.495Turbines PH! 0.929 0.242 0.307 0.186 0.940 0.094Turbines P112 0.941 0.188 0.273 0.282 0.950 0.380Total 0.959 0.952 0.958 0.969

The above table uses the following survival rates detennined from studies at the project:

Powerhouse 1 Passage Survival:The direct survival of chinook salmon passing through the Kaplan turbines was determined to be0.961 (units 5-10), while the direct survival of chinook passing through the Nagler turbines was0.932 (Normandeau and Skalski 1997). For the value in the table, the average direct survivalassuming full powerhouse loading (all units operating) for fish passing through the turbines was

Rock Island Biological Assessment 22 February 9. 1998

0.949. An assumed indirect mortality of 2% (0.02) was subtracted from the direct survival rateto estimate the total survival rate of 0.929 for years 1996 - 1998. Cumulative benefits of predatorcontrol, along with powerhouse operations to reduce the use of the Nagler turbines, was assumedto increase the survival rate through powerhouse 1 for 1999.

Powerhouse 2 Passage Survival:The direct survival of chinook passing through powerhouse 2 turbines was measured at 0.957(Normandeau and Skalski 1997), while for coho and steelhead the total survival (including indirectmortality) was estimated to be 0.943 and 0.961, respectively (FERC 1986). For the value in thetable, the total steelhead survival rate of 0.961 was reduced by an additional 0.02 loss assumedfor predation to give a conservative survival estimate of 0.941 for years 1996 - 1998. Cumulativebenefits of predator control were assumed to improve survival to 0.950 by 1999.

Spillway Passage Survival:The survival was assumed to be 0.980 for years 1996 - 1998, with most ofthe mortality presumedto be predation related. Improved survival of 0.990 was assumed for 1999 with reduced predatornumbers.

Passage Efficiency Rates:The actual passage rates through the powerhouses and spiliway determined from hydroacousticstudies (averaged over all species) was used for 1996, while the radio telemetry passage rates forsteelhead were used for 1997. A spiliway passage rate of0.500 was presumed achievable withthe spill account since that rate has been achieved during the summer when manageable flow levelsallowed control of powerhouse operations. Better placement of modified surface spiligates willimprove the probability of meeting a 0.500 spillway passage rate in high flow years. Asdemonstrated by the table, a 95% survival rate is achievable with less than a 0.500 spillwaypassage rate, provided that predation mortality does not exceed 2%.

The spill account has had funds remaining for both years it has been used, even after funding somemonitoring costs. While a specific spill volume costs more in energy value in low flow years, thevolume ofspill necessary to achieve equivalent levels of fish passage efficiency decreases as theriver flow decreases. The spill account in 1996 was $2,852,418, of which $2,001,901 was usedfor spill, $373,509 for cost sharing on prototype gate modifications and $409,817 for spill fishpassage efficiency monitoring costs. A surplus of $67,191 was carried over into the 1997 accountunder the terms ofthe Rock Island Agreement. In 1997, the spill account (adjusted for inflation)was $2,937,991, which with the additional $67,191 left over from 1996 gave an account total of$3,005,181. Of this, $1,378,673 was used for spill and $826,477 for monitoring costs, leavinga surplus of $800,031 that will carry over into the spill account for 1998.

The total spill account (including carry over amount) is projected to be over $3,800,000 for 1998.Modeling and prototype testing of gas abatement measures is not expected to exceed the modelingand development costs experienced for the notched spill gates (about $250,000 per year formodeling and $200,000 for a single notched gate). The spill account was adequate in 1996 and1997 with total monitoring and construction costs of about $800,000, which is higher than the

Rock Island BiologicalAssessment 23 February 9, 1998

projected combined cost ofmonitoring and gas abatementprototype development. With projectedmonitoring costs for 1998 estimated at $300,000, the roughly $3,500,000 account balance is morethan adequate to achieve 95% survival given the estimated dam passage survival rates shown inTable 1. The use of spill account funds for monitoring and gas abatement prototypes is subjectto approval of the Rock Island Coordinating Committee.


7. SUMMARY OF FINDiNGS

Chelan PUD believes that through implementing the steelhead protective measures described inthis section and, ultimately, the mid-Columbia River HCP, that steelhead survival will beincreased to the levels described above. In summary, these survival levels were estimated to be95.8% - 96.9% for passage at the dam, 98.7% for passage through the reservoir, and in excessof99% for adult steelhead. These anticipated survival rates exceed the 95% dam passage survivaland 91 % project passage survival standards in the HCP being developed. This assertion is basedon the knowledge that Chelan PUD has gained from years of effort and numerous protectivemeasures developed and tested with the intent of improving mid-Columbia River salmon andsteelhead migration survival. A vast majority of Chelan PUDs protective measure developmentand testing has been conducted in cooperation with the Fisheries Agencies and Tribes and FERC.Initial evaluation ofthe steelhead protective measures included in the Proposed Action have shownefficacy in reducing mainstem migration mortality of steelhead. Chelan PUD is confident thatimplementation, continued testing and refmement of steelhead protective measures that will beimplemented under this Interim Protection Plan will provide additional improvements in steelheadmigration survival. Chelan PUD concludes that implementing the JPP will increase steelheadsurvival and project operation in accordance with the IPP will comply with the ESA.


8. LITERATURE CITED

Achord, S., D.J. Kainikawa, B.P. Sandford and G.M. Matthews. 1995. Monitoring themigrations of wild Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon smolts, 1993.Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon.

Alexander, R. F. and W. R. Koski. 1995. Distribution, timing and fate of steelhead returningto the Nass River Watershed in 1993. Report by LGL Limited, Sidney, B. C. to theNisga’a Tribal Council, New Aiyansh, B. C. Nisga’a Fisheries Report NF93-10.

Alexander, R. F., K. K. English and W. R. Koski. 1996. Distribution, timing and numbers ofsteelhead returning to the Skeena Watershed in 1995. Report by LGL Limited, Sidney,B. C. to B. C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, B. C.

Anderson, J., D. Askren, T. Frever, J. Hayes, A. Lockhart, M. McCann, P. Pulliam and R.Zabel. 1993. Columbia River Salmon Passage Model (CRiSP.1) documentation forversion 4. University of Washington Center for Quantitative Science report for BonnevillePower Administration, Portland, Oregon.

Beamesderfer, R. and B.E. Rieman. 1991. Abundance and distribution of northern squawfish,walleyes, and smallmouth bass in John Day reservoir, Columbia River. Transactions ofthe American Fisheries Society 120:439-447.

Beeman J.W. and D.W. Rondorf. 1992. Estimating the effects of river flow, smoltification, andother biotic and abiotic variables on the travel time ofjuvenile salmonids in the Columbiaand Snake rivers. Report of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Bonneville PowerAdministration, Portland, Oregon.

Beiningen, K.T. and W.J. Ebel. 1970. Effect of John Day Dam on dissolved nitrogenconcentrations and salmon in the Columbia River, 1968. J~:Chapman, D., C. Peven, A.Giorgi, T. Hillman and F. Utter. 1995a. Status of spring chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, Idaho.

Bell, M.C. 1981. Updated compendium on the success of passage of small fish through turbines,U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division, Portland, Oregon. 294 pp. plustables.

Bentley, W.W. and H.L. Raymond. 1976. Delayed migrations of yearling chinook salmon sincecompletion of Lower Monumental and Little Goose dams on the Snake River.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 105:422-424.

.---Ber-ggren,-T;L-and-M;J. -Filardo~-i993. An analysis of variables influencing the migration ofjuvenile salmomds in the Columbia River Basin. North American Journal of FisheriesManagement 13:48-63.


Bjornn, T.C. and C.A. Peery. 1992. A review of literature related to movements of adult salmonand steelhead past dams and through reservoirs in the lower Snake River. Prepared forU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla, Washington.

Bjornn, T. C., J. P. Hunt. K. R. Tolotti, P. J. Keniry and R. R. Ringe. 1993. Migration ofadult chinook salmon and steethead past dams and through reservoirs in the lower SnakeRiver and into tributaries - 1992. Report by Idaho Coop. Fish and Wildlife Res. Unit,Univ. ofIdaho, Moscow, ID for U. S. Army Corps ofEngineers, Walla Walla District and

~BonnevillePowerMministration, Portland, OR.

Bjornn, T. C., I. Hunt, K. Tolotti, P. Kemry and R. Ring. 1994. Migration of adult chinooksalmon and steelhead past dams and through reservoirs in the lower Snake River and intotributaries - 1992. Technical Report 94-1, Idaho Cooperative Fish and Wildlife ResearchUnit, University of Idaho, for U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla, WA and theBonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR, WA.

Brown, L.G. 1995. Mid-Columbia River summer steelhead stock assessment. WashingtonDepartment of Fish and Wildlife, Progress Report. 87 p.

Buettner, E.W. and A.F. Brimmer. 1995. Smolt monitoring at the head of Lower GraniteReservoir and Lower Granite Dam, Annual Report for 1993 Operations. BonnevillePower Administration, Portland, Oregon.

Burley, C.C. and T.P. Poe. 1994 Significance of predation in the Columbia River from PriesstRapids Dam to Chief Joseph Dam. Prepared for Chelan, Douglas and Grant CountyPUDs. 112p.

Chandler, J., Idaho Power Co., unpublished data

Chapman, D.W. 1986. Salmon and steethead abundance in the Columbia River in the nineteenthcentury. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 115:662-670.

Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumotoand R. Klinge. 1994a. Status ofsummer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region.Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, Idaho. 411 pp.

Chapman, D., M. Peven, T. Hillman, A. Giorgi and F. Utter. 1994b. Status of summer steelheadin the mid-Columbia River. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, Idaho. 235 pp.

Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority (CBFWA). 1990. Integrated System Plan forSalmonand Steelhead Production in the~Columbia River Basin. Northwest Power Planning

Council, Portland, Oregon. 449 pp.


Dauble, D.D. and R.P. Mueller. 1993. Factors Affecting the Survival ofUpsiream Migrant AdultSalmonids in the Columbia River Basin. Recovery Issues for Threatened and EndangeredSnake River Salmon Technical Report 9 of 11. Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy,Bonneville Power Administration, Division of Fish and Wildlife. Portland, Oregon.

Dellart, D.A. 1993. Passage mitigation at main stem Columbia River dams - how well is itworking. Proceedings of Symposium for Fish Passage Policy and Technology. Portland,Oregon. 11-15 pp.

Eicher and Associates, Inc. 1987. Turbine-related fish mortality: review and evaluation ofstudies. AP-5480 Research project 2694-4, final report. Prepared for Electric PowerResearch Institute (EPRI), Palo Alto, CA.

Elder, R.A. and D.E. Weitkamp. 1990. Evaluations of 1988 diversion screen system at RockIsland powerhouse no. 2. Prepared by Elder Consulting and Parametrix, Inc. for PublicUtility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 1986. Initial decision establishing interimprocedures for Rock Island Project. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, WashingtonD.C. 19 pp.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 1987. Rock Island Project SettlementAgreement. Project No. 943. Docket No. E-9569. Public Utility District No. 1 ofChelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,Washington D.C. 17 pp.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 1996. Final environmental impact statement,Application to increase reservoir pool level for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric ProjectChelan and Douglas Counties, Washington, FERC No. 2145. Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission, Washington D.C. 202 pp.

Ferguson, J.W. 1994. A program to improve fish survival through turbines. Prepared for theU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland, Oregon. 18 pp.

Fielder, P. C. and C. M. Peven. 1986. Juvenile salmonid monitoring at Rock Island Dam bypasssampler - annual report. Contract No. DE-A179-86BP61748, Project No. 84-54. U.S.Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, and Division of Fish andWildlife. Portland, Oregon. 21 pp.

Giorgi, A. E., T. W. Hiiman, J. R. Stevenson, S. G. Hays and C. M. Peven. 1997. Factors thatinfluence the downstream migration rates ofjuvenile salmon and steethead through thehydroelectric system in the Mid-Columbia River Basin. North American Journal ofFisheries Management 17:268-282.

Gray, R.H. and J.M. Haynes. 1977. Depth distribution ofadult chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus


tshai4ytscha) in relation to season and gas-supersaturated water. j~: Chapman, D., A.Giorgi, T. Hiliman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R.Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. DonChapman Consultants, Boise, Idaho. 411 pp.

Henderson, C. and RE. Foster. 1956. Studies of smallmouth black bass (Micropterus dolomieu)in the Columbia River near Richland, Washington. Transactions ofthe American FisheriesSociety 86:112-127.

Iverson, T. K. and J. E. Keister, 1997. Hydroacoustic evaluation ofnotched surface flow spillgates and overall fish passage at Rock Island Dam in 1997. Report prepared for PublicUtility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. 70 pp.

Iwamoto, R.N. and J.G. Williams. 1993. Juvenile salmonid passage and survival throughturbines. Funded by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland, Oregon and NationalMarine Fisheries Service, Seattle, Washington. 27 pp.

Koski, W. R., R. F. Alexander and K. K. English. 1995. Distribution, timing and numbers ofcoho salmon and steethead returning to the Skeena watershed in 1994. Report by LGLLimited, King City, Ontario to B. C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks,Victoria, B. C.

Ledgerwood, D.L., E.M. Dawley, L.G. Gilbreath, P.J. Bently, B.P. Sandford and M.H.Schiewe. 1990. Relative survival of subyearling chinook salmon which have passedBonneville Dam via the spillway or the second powerhouse turbines or bypass system in1989, with comparisons to 1987 and 1988. Contract No. E85890097. Report to the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, Portland, Oregon. 64 pp. plus appendices.

Mains, E. and J. Smith. 1964. The distribution, size, time and current preferences of seawardmigrant chinook salmon in the Columbia and Snake rivers. Washington Department ofFisheries, Fish Research Paper, 2(3): 5-43.

McKenzie, D., D. Weitkamp, T. Schadt, D. Carlile and D. Chapman. 1984a. 1982 systemsmortality. Prepared for the Public Utility Districts of Chelan, Grant, and DouglasCounties by Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland. Washington. 27 pp. plusappendices.

McKenzie, D., D. Carlile and D. Weitkamp. 1984b. 1983 systems mortality. Prepared for thePublic Utility Districts of Chelan, Grant, and Douglas Counties by Battelle PacificNorthwest Laboratories, Richland. Washington.

Muir, W. D., S. G. Smith, R. N. Iwamoto, D. J. Kamikawa, K. ~W.McIntyre, B. E.

Rock island Biological4ssesz,nent- 29 February 9, 1998

Hockersmith, B. P. Sanford, P. A. Ocker, T. E. Ruehle, J. W. Williams and J.R. Skalski.1995. Survival estimates for the passage ofjuvenile salnionids through Snake River damsand reservoirs, 1994. Annual report to Bonneville Power Administration, Portland,Oregon and U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla, Washington. 187 pp.

Mullan, J. W., M. B. Dell, S. G. Hays and J. A. McGee. 1986. Some factors affecting fishproduction in the mid-Columbia River 1934 - 1983. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service ReportNo. FRI/FAO-86-15. 69 pp.

Mullan, J. W., K. R. Williams, G. Rhodus, T. W. Hiliman, and J. D. McIntyre. 1992.Production and habitat ofsalmonids in mid-Columbia River tributary streams, U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service Monograph I. 187 pp. + appendix.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1995. Draft reinitiation of Consultation on 1994-1998 operation of the federal Columbia River power system and juvenile transportationprogram in 1994-1998. National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, Washington.

Normandeau Associates, Inc. and J. R. Skaiski. 1997. Turbine passage survival of chinooksalmon smolts at the Rock Island Dampowerhouse I and II, Columbia River, Washington.Draft report prepared by Normandeau Associates for Public Utility District No. 1 ofChelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. pp.20.

Olson, F.W. 1983. 1982 Rock Island Dam Fish Bypass Study. Report prepared by CH2M Hillfor Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. Pp.29.

Olson, F.W. and V.N. Kaczynski. 1980. Survival of downstream migrant coho salmon andsteelhead through bulb turbines. Report prepared by CH2M Hill for Public Utility DistrictNo. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. pp. 45.

Peven, C.M. 1991. Rock Island Dam smolt monitoring, 1991. Fish and Wildlife Operations,Power Operations and Public Utility District No. 1 Chelan County. Project No. 84-54.Contract No. DE-FC79-88BP38906. Bonneville Power Administration, Portland Oregon.

Peven, CM. 1992. Population status of selected stocks of salmonids from the mid-ColumbiaRiver basin. Chelan County Public Utility District, Fish and Wildlife Operations,Wenatchee, Washington. 52 pp.

Peven, C.M.. R.R. Whitney and KR. Williams. 1994. Age and length of steelhead smolts fonnthe mid-Columbia River basin. North American Journal of Fisheries Management.5: 115-125.


Quinn, T.P., S. Hodgson and C. Peven. 1997. Temperature, flow, and the migration of adultsockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in the Columbia River. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sd.54: 1349-1360.

Ransom, B.H. and T.W. Steig. 1995. Comparison of the effectiveness of surface flow and deepspill for bypassing Pacific salmon smolts (Oncorhynchus spp.) at Columbia River basinhydropower dams. Waterpower ‘95. July 25-28, 1995. San Francisco, CA.

Raymond, H.L. 1968. Migration rates of yearling chinook salmon in relation to flows andimpoundments in the Columbia and Snake rivers. Transactions ofthe American FisheriesSociety 97: 356-359.

Raymond, H.L. 1969. Effect of John Day reservoir on the migration rate ofjuvenile chinooksalmon in the Columbia River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 98:513-514.

Raymond, H.L. 1979. Effects of dams and impoundments on migrations ofjuvenile chinooksalmon and steelhead from the Snake River 1966-1975. Transactions of the AmericanFisheries Society 108: 505-529.

RMC Environmental Services. 1994. Source and extent of injuries tojuvenile fall chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tshav~ytscha)in passage through unit 7 at the Rocky Reach Dam,Washington. Report prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County,Wenatchee, Washington. 15 pp.

RMC Environmental Services and J.R. Skaiski. 1994a. Survival ofjuvenile fall chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tshawyrscha) passage through a fixed blade propeller turbine at the RockyReach Dam, Washington. Report prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of ChelanCounty, Wenatchee, Washington. 31 pp.

RMC Environmental Services, Inc. and J.R. Skaiski. 1994b. Survival of yearling fall chinooksalmon smolts (Oncorhynchus tshaisytscha) in passage through a Kaplan turbine at theRocky Reach hydroelectric Dam, Washington. Report prepared for Public Utility DistrictNo. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. 38 pp.

Ruggerone, G.T. 1986. Consumption of migratoryjuvenile salmonids by gulls foraging belowa Columbia River dam. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 115:736-742.

Sheldon, Lee FL, Senior Hydromechanical Engineer, Kleinschmidt Associates, Pittsfield, Maine.Personal communication, letter regarding fish passage survival related to turbine operatingefficiencies to John W. Ferguson (Portland District, US Army Corps of Engineers), dated19 June 1995.


Sims, C.W. and F.W. Ossiander. 1981. Migrations of juvenile chinook salmon and steelbeadtrout in the Snake River from 1973 to 1979: A research summary. Report to the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (Contract DACW68-78-C-0038) by National Marine FisheriesService, Seattle, Washington.

Smith, L.S. 1982. Decreased swimming performance as a necessary component of the smoltmigration in salmon in the Columbia River. Aquaculture 28:153-161.

Smith, S. G., W. D. Muir, E. E. Hockersmith, S. Achord, M. B. Eppard, T. E. Ruehie, J. G.Williams and J. R. Skalski. 1997. Survival estimates for the passage of juvenilesalmonids through the Snake River dams and reservoirs, 1996. Draft report to BonnevillePower Administration, Portland, Oregon. 192 pp.

Stevenson, J. R., A. E. Giorgi, W. R. Koski, K. K. English and J. R. Skaiski. 1997. Evaluationof juvenile spring chinook and steelhead migratory patterns at Rocky Reach and RockIsland Dams using radio telemetry techniques, 1997. Report prepared for Public UtilityDistrict No. 1 ofChelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. 31 pp.

Stuehrenberg, L.C., GA. Swan, L.K. Timme, P.A. Ocker, M.B. Eppard, R.N. Iwamoto, B.L.Iverson and H.P. Sandford. 1995. Migrational characteristics of adult spring, summer andfall chinook passing through reservoirs and dams ofthe mid-Columbia River, final report.Funded by the Mid-Columbia PUDs and Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies. CoastalZone and Estuarine Studies Division, National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle,Washington.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1992. Draft Lower Granite and Little Goose Projects1992 reservoir drawdown test report. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla WallaDistrict, Walla Walla, Washington.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1994. Draft Columbia River salmon mitigation analysisphase I. Prepared for the Northwest Power Planning Council and the Columbia River Fishand Wildlife Program. Portland, Oregon

Washington Departmentof Fishand Wildlifeand Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFWand ODFW). 1994. Status report Columbia River fish runs and fisheries 1938-93.Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife. Olympia, Washington.

Weitkamp, D.E., D.H. McKenzie, and T.H. Schadt. 1986. Survival of steelhead smolts duringpassage through Wells Dam turbines and spiliways. Report by Parametrix, Inc. to PublicUtility District No. 1 ofDouglas County, East Wenatchee, Washington. 49p. + appendices.


West, T.R. 1997. Northern squawfish (Plychocheilus oregonensis) population reduction programRocky Reach Dam and Rock Island Dam 1997. Chelan County Public Utility District No.1, Fish and Wildlife Operations, Wenatchee, Washington. 28 pp.

Zook, W. J. 1983. Resident fisheries of Wells pool (a review) - Draft. 1990. Fulton FisheriesAdvisors. Prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 ofDouglas County, East Wenatchee,Washington. 56 p.


REVISEDEXHIBIT B

ROCK ISLAND PROJECTINTERIM PROTECTION PLAN FOR STEELHEAD TROUT

1998 — 1999

Introduction

The purpose of this Interim Protection Plan (IPP) forsteelhead trout is to provide a program that continues andsupplements the measures under the Rock Island SettlementAgreement until the programs proposed for the HabitatConservation Plan (HCP) become effective. The primary goalof the HCP is to achieve 100% no net impact on migratingsteelhead. During the initial 5-year period of the HCP(Phase 1), Chelan proposes to utilize any combination ofsurface collectors, turbine intake screens, spill, turbinereplacements and any other available measure to achieve a95% survival rate for juvenile steelhead and other PlanSpecies migrating past the immediate forebay, dam structure,and tailrace. The measures in this IPP are designed tobegin implementation of several Phase 1 HCP measures,effective January 1, 1998, to provide adequate interimprotection for steelhead and to continue progress toward thegoals of the HCP pending review and final approval of theHCP.

Background

Chelan’s obligations with respect to anadromous fishprotection are stipulated in the Rock Island SettlementAgreement. The Agreement was signed by Chelan and theFisheries Agencies and Tribes in 1987 and has a term offorty years. However, Chelan has also adopted measures inaddition to the requirements of the Settlement Agreement toincrease protection of downstream migrating steelbead trout.

In 1989, Chelan installed and tested a passive diversionscreen in Unit 1 of the Second Powerhouse. Theconfigurations tested failed to guide fish and furthermodeling and testing indicated that water velocity in theintakes of the Second Powerhouse is too great for anymechanical device to guide fish effectively.

Between 1992 and 1995, Chelan installed and tested passivediversion screens in the turbine intakes at the FirstPowerhouse. Initially, the designs tested produceddisappointing results. Through further modeling and designmodification, Chelan was able to achieve an overall fishguidance efficiency (all species and tests combined) of over75%. Numbers of steelhead captured were too low for areliable estimate of fish guidance efficiency, but the trendin steelhead guidance indicated about 70% efficiency at 90%of full load. At lower turbine operating settings (70%gate) the fish guidance efficiency was less than 50%. Some

small migrants (35mm — 70mm) became impinged at the mostefficient operating conditions of the screens. In 1995, atthe joint request of the Fisheries Agencies and Tribes,Chelan agreed to defer any further testing or installationof passive diversion screens at the First Powerhouse of RockIsland Dam while testing the potential fish guidanceefficiency of surface spill or surface collection.

In 1996, the Fisheries Agencies and Tribes elected toestablish the Fisheries Conservation Account as outlined inSection C of the Settlement Agreement. Pursuant to thiselection, Chelan’s obligations for direct funding have beenreplaced by an alternate funding method which is subject tothe terms and conditions of Section C of the SettlementAgreement.

In 1996, Chelan and the Fisheries Agencies and Tribes agreedto test the fish passage efficiency of spill from two typesof modified, relatively low volume, surface spill gates.Six gates were modified, each spilling a volume of 1,850cfs. The spill was provided through three gates with ahorizontal overflow weir 7’ deep X 30’ wide and three gateswith a vertical notch 14’ deep X 11’ wide. The total costof design and modification of these spill gates totaledapproximately $660,000, of which approximately $375,000 wascharged to the Account. Chelan paid the remaining costs ofgate design and modification ($285,000), although it was notobligated to do so under the Settlement Agreement.

Both types of modified spiligates had a higher spillefficiency than unmodified spillgates. However, evaluationof the modified spillgates indicated that the notched gateswere more effective at passing fish than the horizontalgates. Therefore, the three notched gates were retained forfuture use, and the overflow weir gates were restored totheir original configuration.

Because additional notched gates were needed to provideadequate fish passage, Chelan conducted an extensivemodeling program to determine the geometry of a notchedspillgate that would provide the optimum zone of influencefor fish passage. Chelan’s expenditures on the modelingeffort totaled $321,000 in 1996 and $230,000 in 1997, but nocosts of the modeling were charged to the Account.

The modeling program determined that a notch approximately9’ wide X 17’ deep, spilling a volume of 2,500 cfs is theoptimum design for fish passage. Chelan determined that sixnew gates would be needed to provide the spillway passagenecessary to reach the proposed HCP goal of 95% survival(based on estimated fish passage efficiencies in 1996 of theprototype gates and the turbine passage survival estimatesin the Rock Island Agreement). Under Section C of theSettlement Agreement, the cost of the modeling, design,

2

construction, and evaluation of the new gates could havebeen charged against the Account. However, the Agencies andTribes chose not to use the Account to pay the costsassociated with the new gates. Chelan agreed to absorb thecosts (totaling in excess of $1.3 million) associated withthe design and construction of the new gates. The FisheriesAgencies and Tribes agreed to allow the cost (approximately$825,000) of monitoring the effectiveness of spill fromthese gates to be charged against the Account.

Interim Protection Plan

In view of this experience and since the Upper ColumbiaRiver steelhead have been listed as endangered, Chelanproposes to implement the following interim protection planpending execution of a long—term HCP.

IPP Measures Stipulated in the Settlement Agreement

1. Phase II spill - Chelan will continue to providepassage for downstream migrating steelhead through spill as—---------stipulated in Section C. of the Settlement Agreement.

A. 1998 - 1999: Chelan will use appropriatemethodology to estimate the effectiveness of spilland will arrange spill in a manner determined by

Chelan to provide optimum passage.

B. 1998 — 1999: Phase II spill will be provided ona daily basis at the joint request of the

• Fisheries Agencies and Tribes. All spill andmonitoring will be funded through the Account,subject to prior approval of the Fishery Parties,

• pursuant to Section C of the Settlement Agreement.

2. Hatchery Based Compensation - Chelan will continue tomeet all obligations for hatchery-based compensationpursuant to Section E of the Settlement Agreement.

A. 1998 — 1999: Chelan will provide the funding andcapacity to rear and release 30,000 lbs ofsteelhead at 6.5/lb (approximately 200,000yearling steelhead).

B. 1998 - 1999: The hatchery production programwill continue to be carried out in a manner thatis consistent with the maintenance of geneticallydistinct stocks.

3. Adult Fish Ladders - Chelari modified the existing adultfish ladders at Rock Island dam so their operation meetscurrent Fishery Agency operating criteria and Chelan will

3

continue to use the existing gravity water supply at the

right bank ladder to meet design flows..

IPP Measures in Addition to the Settlement Agreement

4. Chelan will fund the changes in hatchery procedures andevaluations needed to make the hatchery compensation programconsistent with recovery of steelhead populations, asdefined in the proposed HCP Mid-Columbia MainstemConservation Plan Hatchery Program. The primary source ofthe broodstock will be the trapping facilities on theWenatchee River at Dryden and Tumwater dams for fishreleased on the Wenatchee River, which is specified in theproposed HCP Mid-Columbia Mainstem Conservation PlanHatchery Program as the first step in transforming thesteelhead hatchery compensation program to a recovery pro-gram based on locally adapted, adult based supplementation.

5. Total Dissolved Gas Monitoring - Chelan has absorbedthe cost of obtaining equipment and constructinginstallations to monitor total dissolved gas (TDG) in theforebay and tailrace of Rock Island Dam.

A. 1998 - 1999: Chelan will continue to monitor TDGin the forebay and tailrace of Rock Island Dam.

B. 1998 — 1999: Chelan will analyze data collectedunder different operational scenarios to determineto what extent there is a need for gasabatement measures at Rock Island Dam.

C. While studies continue to determine theset of conditions during which TDG abatement maybe needed at Rock Island Dam, Chelan willtake the following actions:

1. A comprehensive modeling program to determinewhat, if any, structural changes would benecessary to change the gas saturationcharacteristics of Rock Island Dam.

2. A design program to determine if the chosenalternative for a gas abatement structure forRock Island Dam is feasible.

3. Construction and testing of a gas abatementprototype in a representative location atRock Island Dam.

D. So long as Chelan is operating under the terms ofthis IPP, the modeling, design, construction andtesting of a prototype dissolved gas abatementdevice will be managed through the Rock IslandCoordinating Committee and, if approved by the

4

Fishery Parties, will be funded by theConservation Account.

6. Predator Control - Since 1995, Chelan has funded aneffort to remove squawfish, a known predator of juvenilesteelhead, from the forebay and tailrace of Rock Island Dam.Chelan has also funded a hazing program to minimize thelosses from avian predators.

- A. - - 1a98 — 1999: Chelan will continue to fund thepredator control program at its current level.

B. 1998 - 1999: Chelan will investigate new andinnovative ways of removing squawfish from thereservoirs.

C. 1999: Chelan may investigate the movements ofadult squawfish in the forebay and tailrace ofRock Island Dam using radio telemetry methods.This effort may allow Chelan to focus the removalefforts on locations where squawfish congregate.

7. Adult Passage Survival - Chelan will maintain andoperata adult passage systems at the Project according tothe Detailed Fishway Operating Procedure (DFOP) criteria orsuperior criteria developed through the use of studyresults. Presently, very little radio telemetry data isavailable to evaluate steelhead passage success at RockIsland Dam. Chelan supports regional and local efforts tostudy summer steelhead passage success via radio telemetry.However, due to confounding variables evident in assessingthe underlying causes of adult steelhead losses, Chelancannot presently support the use of radio telemetry studiesto measure per project survival of adult steelhead passingthrough Rock Island Dam. Chelan will operate spill andturbine units in a manner that optimizes adult passage whilemeeting requirements for juvenile passage. Chelan willconsider adult and kelt steelhead fallback rates and keltprotection when implementing juvenile fish bypass systemdevelopment.

8. Pilot Survival Study - Chelan will fund and conduct apilot survival study at Rock Island Dam in 1998.

A. 1998: The pilot study will be conducted usingreleases of PIT tagged steelhead or other yearlingspring migrant salmon in the reservoir andtailrace of Rock Island Dam. Informationobtained in the pilot study will be used todetermine if further survival studies should beconducted in the near future.

B. 1999: Further survival studies may befunded and conducted by Chelan if the results of

5

the 1998 pilot study warrant furtherinvestigation

9. Plant Operations - The Rock Island Project hasgenerating units of three different types. The FirstPowerhouse contains a total of 10 vertical axis turbines, 4Nagler fixed blade units and 6 Kaplan type adjustable bladeunits; the Second Powerhouse contains a total of 8horizontal axis bulb turbines. Studies have shown that thesurvival of downstream migrating steelhead varies betweenthe different types of units, with the bulb and Kaplanturbines having a higher survival rate than the Naglerturbines

A. 1998 - 1999: During the term of this IPP, Chelanwill operate Rock Island Dam to put a majority offlow through the Second Powerhouse bulb turbinesduring the outmigration of juvenile steelhead.

B. 1998 - 1999: Chelan will operate bulb and Kaplanturbines in preference to Nagler turbines.

Extension of Interim Protection Plan Beyond 1999

If the proposed HCP has not been approved as of December 31,1999, then the provisions of this IPP will be subject toreview and amendment through the reinitiation of a section 7consultation between FERC and NMFS.

6

biological assessment of rock island dam operations … · 1998-1999: phase ii spill will be...

Documents