of old... · d d j j j j [j j j] j q]] j]]] j before the federal energy regulatory commission...

ddJJJJ[J

JJ]

JQ]

]

J]

]

]

J

BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGYREGULATORY COMMISSION

ApPLICATION FOR LICENSE FOR A MINOR

WATER POWER PROJECT, VOLUME 2

OLD HARBOR PROJECTFERC PROJECT No. 11690-000 AND No.

11561-000

April 26, 1999

Submitted byALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.

4831 EAGLE STREETANCHORAGE AK 99503-7497

fi'J{LTf§. . . ......; ." ; i nformatiol'lSe~

Allaska Resources L.IOf:\f;<··5 'r- illLibrar\ i3UlIOlng, ' UI ,? .

3211I'n)',iJcncc Dnve 4Anchorage, AK 99508-461

prepared by

polarconsult alaska, inc.1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310

Anchorage, Alaska 99503Phone: (907) 258-2420

o[]

orduoooooooooJ]

Draft Environmental Assessment Old Harbor Project, FERC #11690-000

APPENDIXC

I •

'----' \....--) \-..-.J. L-... L---J .~ l-J (--) L.J c-) c=J C·..J c--;,. , :--1"=-'"""

\ .. ) ('·-"';\.1. . . . r--·'-\-----..' C··O a::::J

Communications Log Old Harbor ProjectProject No. I 1690-000

4/26/99

NO OFTO TO ORGANIZATION FROM FROM ORGANIZATION DATE PAGES DESCRIPTION

preliminary permit application acceptanceCharles Walls Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. James Fargo Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 3/30/99 3 letter

No comments fax from Alaska HydrologicDaniel Hertrich Polarconsult Stan Carrick Alaska Department ofNatural Resources 3/1/99 I surveyParticipants Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 12/31/98 I Notice of availability ofDLA and PDEAParticipants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 12/Il/98 Draft License ApplicationParticipants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 9114/98 I Scoping Document I needs no revisionsDaniel Hertrich Polarconsult John Williams LASER 6/1/98 I Comment on project, request for studies

Phone log regarding the stream gauge at theDan Vos National Marine Fisheries Service Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 5/27/98 I intake

Comments on Scoping Document and RequestDaniel Hertrich Polarconsult Jeanne Hanson National Marine Fisheries Service 5/15/98 2 for Additional Studies

Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult Kodiak Mirror 4/22/98 I Affadavit of Publication of meeting notice

Notice ofIntent to conduct environmentalEarle Ausman Polarconsult Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 4/14/98 I scoping meeting and a site visit

Notice ofScoping Meeting with attachedParticipants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 4/8/98 I Scoping Document I

Finalized Study Plans Based on ISCDParticipants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 4/1/98 2 Comments

Proposed Study Plans Based on ISCDParticipants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 3/6/98 2 Comments

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 2/25/98 I Acceptance ofAPEA process by FERC

comments on iscd - request for lagoon creekDaniel Hertrich Polarconsult Wayne Dolezal Alaska Department ofFish and Game 2/17/98 2 stream gauging to assess flow impacts

comments on icsd - request for bird survey,continued fish surveys, lagoon creek flow

Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult Gary Wheeler U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2/13/98 2 survey

regarding the 401 Water Quality CertificationDaniel Hertrich Polarconsult Gary Saupe Department of Environmental Conservation 1/16/98 I and Coastal/Consistency Applications

request for comments on intent to performParticipants Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 1/8/98 I APEA process

Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult Editor Kodiak Mirror 11/21/97 I Affadavit of Publication of meeting notice

Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult Anchorage Daily News 11/24/97 I Affadavit of Publication of meeting notice

Participants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 11113/97 I ISCD letter, notice of meetingLois Cashell, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 10/1/97 5 Waiver Request

Acceptance of Communications Protocol and

Lois Cashell, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 10/1/97 3 NEPA Consolidated Process

Page 1 of3

L,.,J L..-I fL-J ~c ,-_J <L.:-J L-:-J' \r-~-,J c::=J c--"', r-'~-- 'I

l--.",/ { 'J r--~

~ ~-----.-- [> c:J frll [~-~;j riJ) G:iCommunications Log Old Harbor Project

Project No. 11690-0004/26/99


comments regarding the comm protocol andDaniel Hertrich Polarconsult Wayne Dolezal Alaska Department ofFish and Game 9/18/9,7 2 waiver items

comments regarding the comm protocol andEarle Ausman Polarconsult Wayne Dolezal Alaska Department of Fish and Game 8/13/97 3 waiver items

Response to notice of Fil ing of PreliminaryCharles Walls Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Larry Brockman U.S, Environmental Protection Agency 7/2/97 5 Permit

Wayne Dolezal Alaska Department ofFish and Game Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 6/2/97 2 new schedule, stream flows during fish surveyresponse to mtg, mtg minutes, schedule, and

Participants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 4/9/97 4 ferc process chart attachedcomments regarding the comm protocol and

Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult Ronald Morris U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA 2/19/97 2 waiver itemsApproval of Communications Protocolrequested. comm protocol, approval form, am

Participants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 2/7/97 2 list of participants attachedBarry Roth, Craig US Department of the Interior, Alaska

Walter Ebell Jamin, Ebell, Bolger, and Gentry Tillery Department of Law 12/2/96 3 land issues, changes required in covenantscorrection to comm protocol, copy of notice 0

ACMP reviewers Arlene Murphy Division of Governmental Coordination 9/23/96 I apea process to reviewersdraft com protocol, list of parties, draft com

Participants Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 9112/96 I log, cover letter for progress report I

notice of intent to do apea process, list ofThe Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 9/12/96 I parties, draft com protocol, cc'd to participantsMichael Strzelecki Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Daniel Hertrich Polarconsult 8/8/96 I list of interested partiesAVEC Members Charles Walls Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc, 7/31/96 2 project info to old harbor

US Department of the Interior, U.S, Fish and land status - conservation easement not

Charles Walls Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Wildlife Service 4/15/96 2 blocking project

ACMP reviewers Arlene Murphy Division of Governmental Coordination 3/29/96 2 notice offerc preliminary permitArlene Murphy Division of Governmental Coordination Earle Ausman Polarconsult 3/20/96 5 minutes of 3/13/96 mtgThe Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Ronald Morris U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA 3/14/96 3 fish concernsEarle Ausman Polarconsult Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 3/11/96 5 order issuing preliminary permit

U.S. Department ofInterior, Office of the regarding land issures, other comments toThe Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Secretary 2/22/96 5 preliminary permit

US Department ofthe Interior, Bureau of Land acknowledge receipt of preliminary permit,Mark Robinson Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Management 2/8/96 2 land status

Earle Ausman Polarconsult Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 1/19/96 2 time extension for comments on permit filingacknowledge receipt of preliminary permit,

The Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Wayne Dolezal Alaska Department ofFish and Game 1/18/96 4 fish concerns & wildlife concerns

City of Old Harbor 12/8/95 I resolution supporting project-_.

Old Harbor Tribal Council 12/7/95 I resolution supporting project

Page 2 of3

L---.J ~; .\o--J "'-----.J ..L-..J L-J ~d 'L.-...Y (~ L_i L .....,r 'L-".J ;L-J I...-.-J 'L...} IJ.LJ' LJ L-.J l-L.J

Communications Log Old Harbor ProjectProject No. 11690-000

4/26/99


Earle Ausman Polarconsult Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 12/7195 2 notice of preliminary permit filingEarle Ausman Polarconsult Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 11/9/95 2 notice of preliminary permit filingThe Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Earle Ausman Polarconsult 10118/95 1 preliminary permit application

Page 3 of3

d]'

]

JJ]

J]

]

]

J]

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSIONWASHING"rON. D. C. 20426 .

. .,.... ' ..,.. ...........,. ',:",.':.'

MAR 3 0 1999 ',.OFFICE OF HVnAQPOWEA LICENSING

··Project·No. 11690 - 000 -AlaskaOld Harbor ProjectAlaska Village Electric'Cooperative, Inc.

Mr. Char:es Y. WallsGeneral ManagerAlaska Electric Cooperative, Inc.4831 Eagle StreetAnchorage, Alaska 99503-7497

Dear Mr. Walls:

Your preliminary permit application for the Klamath CountyWater Power Project has been accepted by the Commission forfiling as of March 1, 1999. Federal, state, and local agencieswill be informed in the Commission's public notice that a copy ofthe complete application may be obtained from you.

Within 5 days after you receive this letter, send one copyof the application to the following: the Commission's PortlandRegional Office; the Department of the Interior, Office ofEnvironmental Affairs; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, PortlandDistrict: the Director, Bureau of Land Management; and the AlaskaDirector t Bureau of Land Management. A list of their addressesis enclosed.

Since your project includes federal lands within itsboundaries, please complete the appropriate enclosed landdescription form and prepare a microfilm copy of the permitapplication's Exhibit 4 mounted on aperture cards (as re!erencedon the land description form). If the lands can be described inthe Rectangular Survey System, complete the form for public landstates; if not, complete the fo~ for non-public land states.Submit one copy of the land description form and aperture cardsto the Secretary of the Commission (ATTN: DLe, EL 11.1) and anadditional copy of both to the blaska Bureau of Land Managementstate office within 45 days of the date of this letter.

o[]

ni····c-

DooQ

oooooooo

u~

]

<2-

If you have any questions, please contact Hector M. Perez an(202) 219-2843.

Sincerely,

James M. FargoChiefEngineering West Section

cc: Public Files

Enclosures: list of addressesland description forms

g

JJ

JJJ]

J]

]

]

J]

JJJJJ

LIST OF ADDRESSES

Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionPortland Regional Office101 S.W. Main Street,. #905Portland, OR 97204

Department of the InteriorOffice of Environmental AffairsRoom 2340 ME1849 C Street, NWWashington, DC 20240

U.S. Army Corps o! EngineersPortland DistrictP.O. Box 2946Portland, OR 97208-2946

State DirectorAlaska State OfficeBureau of Land ManagementDivision of Lands andRenewable Resources (AK-930)Attn: FERC Withdrawal Recordation222 West 7th Avenue, #13Anchorage, AX 99513-7599

DirectorBureau of Land ManagementBranch of LandsAttn: FERC Withdrawal Recordation7450 Easton Blvd.Springfield, VA 22153

**aA*atii*******A'AAA.' '**.iA••••' ••••,**•••••••"" ••••".AAA&••ll.' *••••••••~ ** .

COMMENTS:

IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, PLEASE CALL THE SENDER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

DATEfTIME: 0310119910:32 AM

FAX #: 258-2420 PHONE #: 258-2419

PHONE #: (901)269-8637

DIVISION OF MINING AND WATER MANAGEMENTALASKA HYDROLOGIC SURVEY

3801 C Si, Suite SOOAnchorage, Ak. 99803-5135

Phone: (907)269-8600

FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO

Alaska Department 01

NATURALRESOURCES

TO: Daniel Hertich

CO/DEPT: Polarconsult Alaska] Inc.

FROM: Stan Carrick, Hydrologist

DIVISION OF MINING AND WATER MANAGEMENT FAX #: (907)562-1384

NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: 1

I have reviewed the Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment for the Old Harbor HydroelectricProject dated December 15, 1998, and we have no comments at this time. Thank you for includingus in the review process.

~ /")0~~_~

Stan CarrickHydrologist

ooo8ooooJDj

o~

]

J

L.-J I ; \'--------'...i l-J I '\...---..J L-J L-j , - I

L-...i c=.J L:1 (~--J LJ L::J c:J c=) c:J c=J r-----) (---D c·r--J

UNITED STATES OF AMERICAFEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Project No. 11561-000 - 2 -

NOTICE OF DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION,PRELIMINARY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (PDEA), AND

SOLICITING PRELIMINARY TERMS, CONDITIONS, N~D RECOMMENDATIONS

David P. Boergers, SecretaryFederal Energy Regulatory CommissionDockets - Room 1A888 First StreetWashington, DC 20426

(December 31, 1998)

Take notice that the following hydroelectric application hasbeen filed with the Commission and is available for publicinspection:

a.

h.

c.

Type of Application: Minor Unconstructed Project

Project No.: 11561-000

Applicant : Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.Anchorage, Alaska

k.

All comments must (1) bear the heading "PreliminaryComments", "Preliminary Recommendations", "Preliminary Termsand Conditions", or "Preliminary Prescriptions"; and (2) setforth in the heading the name of the applicant and theproject number of the application. Any party interested incommenting must do so before March 15, 1999.

With this notice, we are initiating consultation with theSTATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER (SHPO), as required by §106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the regulationsof the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 36 CFR800.4.

e.

d. Name of Project: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project

Location: Partially within the Kodiak National WildlifeRefuge, on Mountain Creek, a tributary to the EastFork of Barling Creek, near Old Harbor, Alaska.

f. Applicant Contact: Mr. Dan HertrichPolarconsult Alaska, Inc~

1503 West 33rd AvenueAnchorage, AK 99503(907) 258-2430

g. FERC Contact: Nan Allen (202) 219-2938

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.Acting Secretary

h.

1.

j.

Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., mailed a copy of the PDEA anddraft license application to interested parties on December15, 1998. The Commission received a copy of the PDEA andDraft License Application on December 21, 1998.

As noted in the Commission's February 25, 1998, letter toall parties, with this notice we are soliciting preliminaryterms, conditions, and recommendations for the PDEA andcomments on the draft license application.

All comments on the PDEA and draft license application forthe Old Harbor Project should be sent to the address notedabove in item (f) with one copy filed with the Commission atthe following address:

DC-A-14

Enclosed is a draft application for license and Preliminary Draft EnvironmentalAssessment (PDEA) for the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project, prepared by PolarconsultAlaska, Inc., on behalf of the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC). Thesedocuments are part of the stage II consultation required by the Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission regulations (18 CFR §4.38).

Please review the draft application and provide Polarconsult with your written commentsno later than March 15 1999. It is important that we receive your comments by this dateso we can incorporate them into the draft application and PDEA before we file it with theCommission. In addition to comments on the draft application and PDEA, we arerequesting preliminary tenns, conditions, and recommendations from the resourceagencies for the PDEA.

The draft application and PDEA have been distributed to the parties on the attachedmailing list. If you need additional copies, please let us know.

Please call us as soon as possible if you have any questions concerning the documents.Thank you for your comments and interest in the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project.

Sincerely,

y~J1~

To: PARTICIPANTS

1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419

polarconsult alaska, inc.ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS· ENERGY CONSULTANTS

December 15, 1998

Project No. 11561-000Old Harbor Project

Tim RumfeltTim SmithBrad SmithRita StevensDan VosCharles WallsGary WheelerJohn WilliamsJennifer Wing

Walter EbellChristopher EstesLinda FreedU. GrossSteven HomDon KohleShirley MackeBrad MeiklejohnEric MeyersGary ProkoshBennie Rinehart

Preliminary Draft Environmental AssessmentSubject:

Daniel Hertrich, PE

cc:Nan AllenBrian AndersonTony AzuyakJay BellingerRick BernsWalt BoyleJohn BregarLois Cashell, SecretaryEmil ChristiansenWayne Dolezal

ooooooooJo~

o]

]

]

]

J]

J

Ifyou have any questions on this matter, please call Dan Hertrich at 907-258-2420.

Based on the review of the comments received, no changes to Scoping Document 1 areneeded. We will prepare the EA based on the outline and issues identified in ScopingDocument 1.

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and Commission regulations,Polarconsult, as the agent for AVEC, will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) forthe project and submit it to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

September 14, 1998


Tim RumfeltTim SmithBrad SmithRita StevensDan VasCharles'WallsGary WheelerJohn WilliamsJennifer Wing

Christopher EstesLinda FreedU. GrossSteven HomDon KahleShirley MackeBrad MeiklejohnEric MeyersGary MuehlenhardtGary PrakashBennie Rinehart

Scoping Document 1

PARTICIPANTSTo:

Subject:

The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) proposes to construct and operate theOld Harbor Hydroelectric Project. The project would be located on Kodiak Island, nearOld Harbor, Alaska, partially within the boundaries of the Kodiak Island NationalWildlife Refuge.

Polarconsult solicited comments from appropriate federal, state, and local resourceagencies, the public, and other interested parties through the scoping process. ScopingDocwnent 1, which was issued on April 10, 1998, includes a brief description of theproposed action, potential alternatives, a list of preliminary environmental issuesidentified, a preliminary schedule for preparation of the EA, and the mailing list for theproject.

Daniel Hertrich, PEcc:Nan AllenTony AzuyakJay BellingerRick BernsWalt BoyleJohn BregarLois Cashell, SecretaryEmil ChristiansenWayne DolezalWalter Ebell

1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419

lu

o(]

oUJJ]

J]

]

Qpolarconsult alaska, inc.oi=NGINEERS • SURVEYORS· ENERGY CONSULTANTS

oBoooo

oBoooooooDj

oJ]

]

]

]

]

]

JOHN WILLIAMS12770 SW FOOTHILL DR.PORTLAND, ORE 97225503-626-5736, FAX-503-641-2093JUNE 1, 1998

Mr. Daniel HertrichPo1arconsult AlaskaSuite 310Anchorage, AK, 99593

SCOPING COMMENTS, OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT, No. 11561

Dear Mr. Hertrich:

I am a researcher for LASER, a labor-affiliated group, which has many members whowork, live, hunt, fish and seek recreation with their families, in the vicinity of the proposedproject.

Laser is concerned at this time about the project's causing wetlands losses, noise, impactson the drainage basin and the aquatic species therein, and the socio-economic impacts from thisproject. LASER urges that a Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) analysis be conducted underappropriate Fish & Wildlife criteria, to calculate the Habitat Units (HUs) at the project site, bothbefore and after project constmction and operation. We urge no net loss ofHUs.

Please send the ENDEIS, and related correspondence, to my address above.

Yours, John Williams

CC: FERC 9b L- 0,A~·

;,"

RECEIVEDDate: (9 /;; (1'3

Q

ooooooooooooooooJ]

polarconsult alaska, inc.ENGINEERS - SURVEYORS - ENERGY CONSULTANTS

specializing in energy conservation systemsCONVERSATION RECORD

DATE: PROJECT: TIME:May 27, 1998 Old Harbor Project 2:00PMCONTACT: COMPANY:Dan Voss NmfsPHONE#: FAX#: Taken By:

Daniel HertrichSUBJECT:Stream Gauge at Intake Site

SUMMARY:

I mentioned to Dan Voss that the stream gauge that was at the intake site was damagedand subsequently removed. I said that I didn't recall discussing that stream gauge duringthe agency meeting. Dan Voss conferred with Wayne Dolezal and they agreed that a newgauge should be installed at the intake site. I agreed to install one at the same time weinstall the gauge at the canyon of the Barling Bay Creek Tributary.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Marine Fisheries Service222 W. 7th Avenue, #43Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7577

May 15. 1998

ooo

Daniel HertrichPolarconsult Alaska, Inc.1503 W. 33'd Avenue #310Anchorage, AK 99503

RE: Old HarborFERC License Number 11561-000Scoping Comments and Request for Additional Studies

Dear Mr. Hertrich:

R E C r f '";: [; Dta~c .;:-/~&?

o

[]

]

]

J]

]

JJ

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has thoroughly reviewed your scoping documents which includedfisheries and hydrology studies. Additionally, NMFS participated in a site visit on May 12, 1998 and a scopingmeeting on May 14, 1998. The site visit and following meeting were well organized and very infonnative.

NMFS has several comments and recommendations.

In the NMFS letter dated March 14, 1996, we requested, "... surveys to enumerate adult spawning populations,juvenile studies to describe rearing habitat use, and mapping of spawning habitat. Flow studies ofthese drainagesmust also be done to describe the relative changes of the project on naturally-occurring flow patterns."

In order to address this request, the fisheries and hydrology information presented in the document needs to beaugmented. The primary questions that should be answered are:

A. How much salmon production (migration, spawning. incubation and rearing habitats) will be lost inBarling Creek Tributary due to the diversion?

B. How much salmon production (migration, spawning, incubation and rearing habitats) will be gainedin Lagoon Creek due to the diversion?

In order to answer these questions NMFS recommends:

-A stream gage be placed below the canyon in Barling Creek Tributary.

-Cross sections are done in Barling Creek TributaJ)'.

-Additional cross sections are done in Lagoon Creek down to salt water influence.

-Flows and dry sections are correlated for Barling and Lagoon Creeks.

-Adequate spawning surveys are conducted during appropriate times for pinks, chum and coho salmon onboth streams when there is adequate water for passage.

-Juvenile sampling surveys should include the canyon section of Barling Creek Tributary.

-Detailed large scale maps ofBarley and Lagoon Creeks showing cross sections, adnll fish location~'\

'~"z >C';_ ~l..'"

<'j"'''t.(;l~'''f .. r O' (..0":'1'"

o

ooooooo

[]

]

J]

JJ]

dry sections at different flow regimes and juvenile sampling locations.

-Analysis of Barling and Lagoon Creeks should include natural and predicted project conditions for:FlowsDry stream channel (migration impacts)Spawning areaIncubation area (based on fall and winter base flows)Fish production

The Environmental Assessment should also include:

-Detailed construction plans that include culverts, bridge plans, diversion structure, powerhouse tailrace,etc. Considerations should include adequate culverts, drainage on bridge approach, erosion preventionalong pipeline, and a tailrace design that doesn't attract fish.

-A comprehensive erosion control and revegetation plan with specific procedures and methods. Includescale drawings when appropriate.

-Timing for in water construction.

-Maintenance timing.

-Analysis should include ATVaccess, restrictions and impacts.

-A detailed monitoring plan that includes adult salmon escapement, flow monitoring and cross sectionanalysis.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

#M~

eanne L. HansonActing Field Office upervisorHabitat Conservation Division

NMFS Contact: Daniel 1. Vos

cc: FERC, USFWS, EPA. DGC, ADFG, ADEC - AnchorageApplicant

oo

Publisher's Affidavit

ooooooo

ooLJ

oo

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State of Alaska•. ~---l---lo!.......,..' ........

-87-

NOTICE OF INTEN-T"TO CONDUCTENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING MEETING

AND A SITE VISIT(APRIL 22, 1998)

Billing Code 6717-01,MUnited States 01 AmericaFederal Energy Regulatory CommissionAlaska VHIage Elactric CooperativeProject No. 11561 AJukaThe Energy Policy Act 0I19Q2 allows appli

cants to pnijlare their own Environmental As-

sessment (EA) for hydropower projects and lile it with the Fedelal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) along with their licenseapplication as part 01 the applicant-preparedEA (APEA) process. The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)inlends to prepare anEA to file with the Commission for the proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project, no.11561. AVEC will hold two scoping meetings,pursuant to the National Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA) of 1969, to identify the scope 01environmental issues that should be analyzedin the EA.

Scoping MeetingsThe times and locations of the two scoping

meetings are:Public MeetingDate: Tuesday, May 12, 1998Place: City Hall, Old Harbor, AlaskaTime: 7:00 p.m.Agency MeetingDate: Thursday, May 14,1998Place: Division of Seniors Conference

tr~ Room, 3601 C Street, Suile 310A (FrontierBuilding) Anchorage, Alaska

Time: 9:00 a.m.At the scoping meetings, AVEC will: (1)sum

marize the environmental issues tentativelyidentified lor analysis in tha EA; (2) outline anyresources they believe would not require a detailed analysis: (3) identify reasonable aitematives to be addressed in the EA; (4) solicit fromthe meeting participants all available inlormation, especially quantitative data, on the -resources at issue; and (5) encourage statements

! Silo from experts and the public oil issues thatshould be analyzed in the EA.

All interested indiViduals, organizations, andagencies are invited and encouraged to attendeither or both meetings to assist in identifyingand clarifying the scope 01 environmental issues that should be analyzed in the EA.

To help focus discussions at the meetings.AVEC prepared and distributed an Initial StageConsuitation Document (ISCD) on November13, 1997, and a SCoping Document on Aprilto, 1998. Copies 01 the ISCD and the ScopingDocument can be obtained by calling DanielHertrich 01 Polarconsuit Alaska, Inc•• AVEC'sagent. at (907) 258-2420. Copies 01 both documents will also be available at both scopingmeetings.

Site VisitFor those who intend to participate in

scoping, AVEC will also conduct a site visit to_ the proposed Old Harbor Project on Tuesday,

May 12, 1998. Those attending must meet atthe Silkalidak Lodge in Old Harbor, Alaska atto:oo a.m. We will promplly leave lor the

, project site, via helicopter. Those beingshuttled by helicopter to the project sile mayneed to sign a waiver 01 liability regarding helicopter use. Because 01 the remoteness anddifficultv nf """,,,r'W'I ..__.... _& .... • •

SS: I, the undersigned, being first duly

sworn, depose and say: I am editor or

publisher of the Kodiak MIRROR, a

daily newspaper published at Kodiak,

TIlird Judicial Division, State of Alaska,

and that the annexed printed notice was

published in said newspaper in issues

of the following dates:

4d.~3) ~-----

signature of Editor or Publisher

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before

me thisdfl day of_AQ.v/'· i ,193~

~C<.~?f;=NOTARY PUBLIC~for the

State of Alaska.

My Commission expires Cf..-Clp.....o/

R F r: ~ " "7Cc:. df1-< 3' /q l'

CJ r J c:=J Ii C--l c=J [- I 1'·-'1 CJ c::=J c.::J c::J C~] I ~] CJ CLJ c:.::J C~-DJ iT]

Alaska Village Electric Cooperative ) Project No. 11561) Alaska

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M


NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING MEETINGSAND A SITE VISIT

(April 14" 1998)

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 allows applicants to preparetheir own Environmental Assessment (EA) for hydropower projectsand file it with the Federal Energy RegUlatory Commission(Commission) along with their license application as part of theapplicant-prepared EA (APEA) process. The Alaska VillageElectric Cooperative (AVEC) intends to prepare an EA to file withthe commission for the proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project,No. 11561. AVEC will hold two scoping meetings, pursuant to theNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, to identify thescope of environmental issues that should be analyzed in the EA.

Scoping Meetings

The times and locations of the two scoping meetings are:

- 2 -

To plan on helicopter use in advance of the visit, AVEC mustidentify the number of individuals interested in the site visit:;Therefore, if you intend on visiting the proposed project site,you must register with Daniel Hertrich at (907) 258-2420, nolater than April 24, 1998. If inclement weather prevents a sitevisit on May 12, the alternate date will be May 13 at the sametime and location.

tin nn.t

Project No. 11561

To help focus discussions at the meetings, AVEC prepared anddistributed an Injtial stage Consultation Document (ISCD) onNovember 13, 1997, and a Scoping Document on April 10, 1998.Copies of the ISCD and the scoping Document can be obtained bycalling Da~iel Hertrich of Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., AVEC'sagent, at (907) 258-2420. Copies of both documents will also beavailable at both scoping meetings.

For those who intend to participate in scoping, AVEC willalso conduct a site visit to the proposed Old Harbor Project onTuesday, May 12, 1998. Those attending must meet at theSitkalidakLodge in Old Harbor, Alaska at 10:00 A.M. We willpromptly leave for the project site, via helicopter. Those beingshuttled by helicopter to the project site may need to sign awaiver of liability regarding helicopter use. Because of theremoteness and difficulty of ground access at the project site,those attending the site visit should be physically fit and mustwear appropriate clothing and footgear. The site visit should becompleted by 4:30 P.M. Participants must provide their own sacklunches.

Agenoy MeetingPubliO Meeting

Date:Place:

Time:

Tuesday, May 12, 1998City HallOld Harbor, Alaska

7:00 P.M.

Thursday, May 14, 1998Divisi~n of SeniorsConference Room3601 C street, Suite 310A(Frontier Building)Anchorage, Alaska9:00 A.M.

Meeting Procedures

The meetings will be conducted according to the proceduresused at Commission scoping meetings. Because this meeting willbe a NEPA scoping IDeeting under the APEA process, the Commissionwill not conduct a NEPA scoping meeting after the application anddraft EA are filed with the Commission.

At the scoping meetings, AVEC will: (1) summarize theenvironmental issues tentatively identified for analysis in theEA; (2) outline any resources they believe would not require adetailed analysis; (3) identify reasonable alternatives to beaddressed in the EA; (4) solicit from the meeting participantsall available information, especially quantitative data, on theresources at issue; and (5) encourage statements from experts andthe public on issues that should be analyzed in the EA.

All interested individuals, organizations, and agencies areinvited and encouraged to attend either or both meetings toassist in identifying and clarifying the scope of environmentalissues that should be analyzed in the EA.

Both scoping meetings will be recorded by a stenographer ortape recorder, and will become part of the formal record of theproceedings for th:ls project.

Those who choose not to speak during the scoping meetingsmay instead SUbmit written comments on the project. Writtencomments must be submitted by June 15, 1998, and should be mailedto: Mr. Daniel Hertrich, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., 1503 West33rd Avenue, Suite 310, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. Allcorrespondence should show the following caption on the firstpage:

DC-A-12

To: PARTICIPANTS

April 8, 1998

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.


Gary ProkoshBennie RinehartTim RumfeltDiane SheridanTim SmithBrad SmithRita StevensCharles WallsGary Wheeler

Walter EbellChristopher EstesLinda FreedU. GrossSteven HomDon KohleShirley MackeBrad MeiklejohnEric MeyersGary Muehlenhardt

Scoping Document 1 and Scoping MeetingSubject:

cc:Nan AllenTony AzuyakJay BellingerRick BernsWalt BoyleJohn BregarLois Cashell, SecretaryEmil ChristiansenWayne Dolezal

Please refer to the scoping document for details. FERC representatives will be present atthe site visit and both meetings.

Attached is Scoping Document 1 for the Old Harbor Project. Please note the following:

• Volume 2 (Appendix D) is exactly the same as Volume 2 (Appendix B) of the InitialStage Consultation Document (see Scoping Document table of contents). Volume 2is not included. Please contact me if you would like a copy.

• The site visit and public meeting are scheduled for May 12, 1998 in Old Harbor.• The agency meeting is scheduled for May 14, 1998 in Anchorage.

;;:JJ&~Daniel Hertrich, PE

polarconsult alaska, inc.~·'GINEERS. SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS

1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE. SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419

R0'······f

'-

o0.

c

o

oooouoooJ]

]

]

J]

]

To: PARTICIPANTS

April 1, 1998

Dear Secretary,

1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419

Study Plans Based on ISCD CommentsSubject:

The following are the study plans in response to the comments received from the AlaskaDepartment of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the Initial StageConsultation Document (ISCD).

The requests submitted can be summarized as follows:

1. Perform a breeding bird survey that is conducted in the spring/summer of 1998with special emphasis on determining whether Kittlitz or marbled murrelets nestwithin the Project area.

2. Conduct fish surveys similar to the past surveys on an annual basis during theperiod of the preliminary permit. Goals are to determine the frequency and extentthat the tributary to Barling Bay Creek is dry in its lower reaches, determine therelative value of this stream for salmon usage, and to determine the upper extentof fish presence in the stream.

3. Item 2 be done for Lagoon creek also. Specifically however, installation of astream gauging station is recommended near the Projects outfall as soon aspossible.

4. Outline and discuss expected daily, monthly, and yearly fluctuations induced bypower/demand changes in Project's discharge to Lagoon creek with emphasis onsubsequent impacts to fish.

5. Stream channel cross sections profiled with reference to their location along thereach for Lagoon creek. Also, a map showing the locations of each stream reachand the surveyed cross sections.


To satisfy #1, AVEC proposes to have Rich Macintosh perform a breeding bird surveysometime in June.

To satisfy #2, Lonnie White of White Fisheries will conduct two fish surveys that willassess the type of fish, approximate number of fish, and extent of fish population. Onesurvey will be performed in August and the other in September. His survey will includeboth the Barling Bay Creek tributary and Lagoon Creek.

To satisfy #3, a stream gauge will be installed by Polarconsult near the location of thepowerhouse on Lagoon Creek sometime around the 1st ofMay. The stream gauge will be

polarconsult alaska, inc.ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS· ENERGY CONSULTANTS

o

o[]

ooo[]

ooooJD[J

D[]

uo]


left in place until late summer. Two flow measurements will be taken, one uponinstallation of the stream gauge, and another upon removal of the gauge.

To satisfy #4, an analysis will be performed on the fluctuations in the output of theproject along with their corresponding impacts to the stream flow regimes and waterdepths. This analysis will be contained in the scoping document using estimated flows inLagoon Creek and will be updated around late summer using flow data from the streamgauging in Lagoon Creek.

The approximate location of the existing stream cross section information gathered thusfar will be shown on a map. Additional stream cross sections will be taken of LagoonCreek. These locations will also be put on the map. A drawing showing the profileinformation will be made. There will be approximately 20 new cross sections measuredalong Lagoon Creek from the powerhouse to the mouth at the salt lagoon. This will workwill be done in the first week ofMay.

Sincerely,

p-:l/~Daniel Hertrich, PE

oooaoJoooooooJJ]

]

]

]


WaIter EbellChristopher EstesLinda Freedu. GrossSteven HomDon KohleShirley MackeBrad MeiklejohnEric MeyersGary Muehlenhardt

Arlene MurphyGary ProkoshBennie RinehartTim RumfeltRita StevensTim SmithBrad SmithCharles WallsGary Wheeler

opolarconsult alaska, inc.o~NGINEERS· SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS Project No. 11561-000Old Harbor Project

March 6, 1998

To: PARTICIPANTS

Dear Secretary,

To satisfy #1, AVEC proposes to have Rich Macintosh perform a breeding bird surveysometime in May.

To satisfy #2, Lonnie White of White Fisheries will conduct two fish surveys that willassess the type of fish, approximate number of fish, and extent of fish population. Onesurvey will be performed in August and the other in September. His survey will includeboth the Barling Bay Creek tributary and Lagoon Creek.

To satisfy #3, a stream gauge will be installed by Polarconsult near the location of thepowerhouse on Lagoon Creek sometime around the 1st of May. The stream gauge will be

Proposed Study Plans Based on ISCD CommentsSubject:

The following outlines the proposed study plans in response to the comments receivedfrom the Alaska Department ofFish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service onthe Initial Stage Consultation Document (ISCD).

The requests submitted can be summarized as follows:

1. Perform a breeding bird survey that is conducted in the spring/summer of 1998with special emphasis on determining whether Kittlitz or marbled murrelets nestwithin the Project area.

2. Conduct fish surveys similar to the past surveys on an annual basis during theperiod of the preliminary permit. Goals. are to determine the frequency and extentthat the tributary to Barling Bay Creek is dry in its lower reaches, determine therelative value of this stream for salmon usage, and to determine the upper extentof fish presence in the stream.

3. Item 2 be done for Lagoon creek also. Specifically however, installation of astream gauging station is recommended near the Projects outfall as soon aspossible.

4. Outline and discuss expected daily, monthly, and yearly fluctuations induced bypower/demand changes in Project's discharge to Lagoon creek with emphasis onsubsequent impacts to fish.

5. Stream channel cross sections profiled with reference to their location along thereach for Lagoon creek. Also, a map showing the locations of each stream reachand the surveyed cross sections.

ooUr\

oU

[J

J[J

[J

J]

]

]IJ

]

]1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419


left in place until late summer. Two flow measurements will be taken, one uponinstallation of the stream gauge, and another upon removal of the gauge. .

To satisfy #4, an analysis will be performed on the· fluctuations in the output of theproject along with their corresponding impacts to the stream flow regimes and waterdepths. This analysis will be contained in the scoping document using estimated flows inLagoon Creek and will be updated around late summer using flow data from the streamgauging in Lagoon Creek.

The approximate location of the existing stream cross section infonnation gathered thusfar will be shown on a map. Additional stream cross sections will be taken of LagoonCreek. These .locations will also be put on the map. A drawing showing the profileinfonnation will be made. There will be approximately 20 new cross sections measuredalong Lagoon Creek from the powerhouse to the mouth at the salt lagoon. This will workwill be done in the first week of May.

ooooo.rlr..,...

LJ

D~

JJJJJ]'

JJ

]

]

p=;;;UDaniel Hertrich, PE



Arlene MurphyGary ProkoshTim RumfeltKelly Simeonoff, Jr.Tim SmithBrad SmithCharles WallsGary Wheeler

9ooooooooDo[J

[J

[J

I,Jl

o

J]

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSIONWASHINGTON, D. C. 20426

FEB 25 1998

OFFICE OF HYDROPOWER LICENSING

Project No. 11561-AlaskaAlaska Village ElectricCooperative, Inc.

To the Party Addressed:

On January 8, 1998, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(Commis~ion) issued a notice of Alaska Village ElectricCooperative, Inc.'s (AVEC) request to use alternative proceduresin filing a license application for its Old Harbor HydroelectricProiect. In sUDDort of the use of alternative licensina_ _ _ J

procedures, AVEC demonstrated that they have made an effort tocontact all resource agencies, citizens' groups, and othersaffected by the AVEC's proposal; and that a consensus exists thatthe use of an alternative procedure is appropriate in this case.AVEC also submitted a Communications Protocol that is supportedby most interested entities. The notice requested any additionalcomments on AVEC's proposal to use alternative procedures.

We received no comment letters in response to our notice;

In light of the support shown for using an alternativelicensing process, I believe that the use of alternativelicensing procedures would be appropriate in this case because itwould foster improved communications, participation, andcooperation among the participants, and Ultimately simplify andexpedite the licensing process. Therefore, I am approving AVEC'srequest to follow alternative licensing procedures in accordancewith the Commission's RegUlations for Licensing HydroelectricProjects ~/ and the Communications Protocol submitted to theCommission on October 1, 1998.

Please call Nan Allen at (202) 219-2938 if you have anyquestions.

Sincerely,

~/,-1~,''V~,,"----< • f '1-,/ Y" '..1/ /,,,,--}, tCarol L. SampsonDirectorOffice of Hydropower Licensing

cc: PUblic Files

~/ 81 FERC ~61,103 (1997).

TONY KNOWL.c:i, uUVl::HIVUH

The Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the November 13, 1997 InitialStage Gonsultation Document. The report accurately describes what we understood the projectproposal to be. We wish to take this opportunity to identify additional information that will beneeded during the environmental assessment for this project.

Hydrologic information collected to date has centered on the East and West Forks of Hydro Creek(also referred to as Barling Creek), the Barling Bay tributary from which water will be withdrawn tooperate the hydroelectric facility. Although a limited amount of spawning area data have beencollected for Lagoon Creek, the hydroelectric project's discharge receiving water body, almost noinformation is available concerning its stream flow. To be able to assess pre and post project affectson this system, adequate baseline data are needed. We recommend that a gauging station beestablished at or near the project's outfall as soon as possible to begin gathering this information.Stream channel cross section profiles and stream flow data for the Lagoon Creek stream reachesidentified in Table 3 of the October 8, 1996 Fishery Report for those reaches, located downstream ofthe project's outfall will also be needed. A map depicting the location of each streal11 reach should beincluded and the site of each channel profile station should documented. In addition, we request anassessment be completed of whether the project's water discharge will follow a power demand cycleresulting in multi-daily or seasonal fluctuations in stream flow and the predicted magnitude of thosefluctuations .

ooo,0

oofJ·\,

ooJoo[J

[J

.L

DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME

HABITAT AND RESTORATION DIVISION

February 17, 1998

Mr. Daniel HertrichPolarconsult Alaska Inc.1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310Anchorage, Alaska 99503

Dear Mr. Hertrich:

Re: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project - Initial Stage ConsultationFERC NQ 11561-000

333 RASPBERRY ROADANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99518-1599PHONE: (907) 344-0541

DD

d]

We appreciate the opportunity to comment and look forward to the upcoming site visit during May.Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 267-2333.

Sincerely,

/"' b G'"V""-<-~ U. ~ \..-\C\V C. Wayne Dolezal

Habitat BiologistRegion II(907) 267-2285

11·K107LH

cc: N. Allen, FERC ContactC. Estes, ADF&GJ. McCullough, ADF&GL. Schwarz, ADF&GT. Rumfelt, ADECG. Wheeler, USFWS-WAESJ. Bellinger, Kodiak NWRB. Smith, NMFSL. Freed, KIBE. Ausman, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.o

r~i~..

ooJf~}

"

oDDoo]

J]

Mr. Daniel Hertrich -2- February 17, 1998

Dear Mr. Hertrich:

We have reviewed the Initial Stage Consultation Document for the Old Harbor HydroelectricProject and have the following comments.

Re: Old Harbor ProjectProject No. 11561-000

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICEEcological Services Anchorage

605 West 4th Avenue, Room 62Anchorage, Alaska 9950 I

FEB 3 1998WAES

~ECE~VED., I-I t---

..,....-:-- ~/!p I<..jYW:WL-.. __ ~.,. .11_-

Our comment letter on the preliminary permit for this project listed several bird species of concernthat may nest within the project area. We are concerned that to date no breeding bird surveyshave occurred within the project area to determine if any of these species are present. We requestthat a breeding bird survey ofthe project area be conducted during the spring/summer of 1998. Abird survey ofthe project area was conducted August 9, 1996; however, this survey wasconducted after most birds had dispersed from their nesting areas. We request that specialemphasis for the survey be placed on attempting to determine ifKittlitz or marbled murrelets nestwithin the project area.

Daniel Hertrich, PEPolarconsult Alaska, Inc.1503 W. 33rd Avenue #310Anchorage, Alaska 99503

We have reviewed the fisheries surveys thus far conducted for the project. We request thatsimilar surveys be conducted on an annual basis during the period of the preliminary permit todetermine the frequency and extent that the tributary to Barling Bay Creek is dry in its lowerreaches, to determine the relative value of this stream for salmon spawning and rearing, and todetermine the upper extent of fish presence in the stream. We also request that the stream besurveyed annually during its low water period (MarchiApril) to determine the extent of the drystream section. We request that Lagoon Creek also be surveyed annually for the same purposesas the tributary to Barling Bay Creek.

We are also concerned about potential fluctuations in the project's discharge to Lagoon creek.Project information should include a discussion of the expected daily, monthly, and yearlyfluctuations in discharge to Lagoon Creek. Our concern stems from the possibility of salmonspawning in shallow areas ofLagoon Creek under higher flows only to have the eggs perish whenproject flows are reduced. If it appears there will be substantial changes in flows on a daily or

IN REPLY REFER TO:

oooBoQ

D[]

o]

ooD]

J]

J]

ooJJJJoJ]

]

]

J3J

seasonal basis, it may be advisable to discharge project flows into a reservoir where releases toLagoon Creek can be regulated to avoid rapid fluctuations.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this document. Questions regarding thesecomments or further coordination should be directed to project biologist Gary Wheeler at (907)271-2780.

Sincerely,

*~.G?dfAu.i~·/ ()

'(,(). ..'({~). Ann G. Rappoportr\v ~ \I -Field Supervisor

cc: Kodiak NWRRealtyNMFSADFGFERC

I have been assigned to work on the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. I'll be handling the 401Water Quality Certification when your proposed project gets to that point in the review process.

You should also contact Bill Lamoreaux at 269-7523 of ADEC's Anchorage Office of WatershedDevelopment Group, Industrial Discharges, on a plan review for controlling storm water runoff fromconstruction related activities.

Rf~~ftVEDt~. /[zp/qg -

TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR

Phone: (907) 269-7567Fax: (907) 269-7508

TrY: (907) 269-7511

ii

Sincerely,

~~'Gary L. SaupeEnvironmental Specialist

:'r:, t-;::J

:~ :i ;~.:'! j iii~ V'- i,-. -.i

· .~ .

Re: Old Harbor Hydroelectric ProjectFERC Project #11561-000

Mr. Daniel Hertrich, PEPolorconsult Alaska, Inc.1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310Anchorage, Alaska 99503

January 16, 1998

Dear Mr. Hertrich:

In reviewing the Project Schedule in the "Initial Stage Consultation Document, Volume 1," I noticedthat you have included 401-WQC and Coastal/Consistency Applications together. This is partlycorrect in that they will be processed together. However, there isn't a 401-WQC application per se.To initiate the 401-WQC process, you will have to submit an application for a 404-Pennit to theArmy Corps.ofEngineers. The COE's application will serve as the 401-WQC application. The COEwill.then make a detennination whether a 404 Pennit is required. Ifa 404-Pennit is required, ADEChas to issue a 401-WQC before the 404-Pennit will issued. Ifyou have any questions, please giveme a call at the above phone number.

Part of your proposal is to use some of the discharged water from the impulse turbine as a source fordrinking water. You will need to have your plan reviewed by ADEC's Division of EnvironmentalHealth, Drinking Water Program. Please contact James Weise, Drinking Water Program Manager,at 269-7647 concerning your proposal to use discharge water as a source for drinking water.

(DA&WQ/old-hr.ltr)

cc: James Weise, ADEC/Anchorage

DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATIONDivision of Air and Water Quality555 Cordova StreetAnchorage, Alaska 99501

Q.'."'.·.1.l~~--

[J

fJJQ[JU

ooooo]

]

J~.~

J

J]

L-J i .. I""1.........,...1..';_./~: - )'-=----=-'

r '·-1\'L--.J; (---J L=-:J (~~~')

(---....,~-~

l-J C~'-J CJ ("] C"T) c=J C'J q U"") r-l ~. -"7I! - (T"-l

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M Project No. 11561-000 - 2 -


Alaska Village Electric Corporation ) Project 11561-000, AK

participation, and to improve communication and cooperation' amongthe participants.

APPLICANT PREPARED EA PROCESS AND OLD HARBOR PROJECT SCHEDULE

The alternative procedure being requested here combines theprefiling consultation process with the environmental reviewprocess, allowing the applicant to complete and file anEnvironmental Assessment (EA) in lieu of Exhibit E of the licenseapplication. This differs from the traditional process, in whichthe applicant consults with agencies, Indian tribes, and NGOsduring preparation of the application for the license and beforefiling it, but the Commission staff performs the environmentalreview after the application is filed. The alternative procedureis intended to simplify and expedite the licensing process bycombining the prefiling consultation and environmental reviewprocesses into a single process, to facilitate greater

The preliminary permit holder, Alaska Village ElectricCorporation (AVEC), has asked to use an alternative procedure infiling an application for original license for the proposed OldHarbor Hydroelectric project No. 11561. 1/ AVEC has demonstratedthat they have made an effort to contact all resource agencies,Indian tribes, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and othersaffected by their proposal, and that a consensus exists that theuse of an alternative procedure is appropriate in this case.AVEC has also submitted a communication protocol that issupported by most interested entities.

The purpose of this notice is to invite any additionalcomments on AVEC'S request to use the alternative procedure, asrequired under the final rUle for RegUlations for the Licensingof Hydroelectric Projects. 2/ Additional notices seekingcomments on the specific project proposal, interventions andprotests, and recommended terms and conditions will be issued ata later date.

y

~/

NOTICE OF ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC CORPORATION'SREQUEST TO USE ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURES IN

FILING A LICENSE APPLICATION

(January 8, 1998)

The 380-kilowatt project would be located on Kodiak Island,near Old Harbor, Alaska, partially within the boundaries ofthe Kodiak Island National Wildlife Refuge.

81 FERC 1 61,103 (1997).

DC-l\-24

":a9,,., ifI

-n~rn-,<

IIIa

On November 13, 1997, AVEC distributed an Initial stageConsultation Document for the proposed project to state andfederal resource agencies, Indian tribes, and NGOs. AVECscheduled a consultation meeting and site visit for allinterested parties on December 15 and 16, 1997, respectively, tosolicit stUdy requests from participants. Notices announcing themeeting and site visit were published locally, as required byCommission regUlations.

PUblic scoping meetings are planned for Spring 1998. Basedon stUdy requests from the December 15, 1997, meeting, stUdyplans would be developed early in 1998. Studies would beconducted during spring, summer, and fall 1998, as needed. Theapplication, inclUding the applicant-prepared EA, would be filedwith the Commission on or before March 11, 1999, the expirationdate of AVEC'S preliminary permit.

COMMENTS

Interested parties have 30 days from the date of this noticeto file with the Commission, any comments on AVEC'S proposal touse the alternative procedures to file an application for the OldHarbor Hydroelectric Project.

FILING REQUIREMENTS

The comments must be filed by providing an original and 8copies as required by the Commission's regUlations to:

Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionOffice of the secretaryDockets - Room 1A8BB First Street, NEWashington, DC 20426

All comment filings must bear the heading "Comments on theAlternative Procedure," and include the project name and number(Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project, No. 11561).

For further information, please contact Nan Allen of theFederal Energy RegUlatory Commission at 202-219-2938 or E-mail [email protected].

David P. BoergersActing Secretary

Publisher's Affidavit

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

D

o

nd

oDo

]

J]

]

J

State of Alaska

-240-

PUBLIC MEETING NonCEOlD HARBOR PROJECT

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORYCOMMISSION PROJECT NO. 11561-000

NonCE OF INTENT TO CONDUCT JOINTMEETING AND SITE VISIT AND REQUEST FOR

. SCIENnFIC STUDIES

AJaska V~lage ~~~.Inc. (AveC)wiD hold ~ sngle /Otfll public/agency lnilial SlageCcnsu~ Meeling and sfte visft 10 inform inter~~.!artl8s a/loul Ihe Old Harbor Prol'eel\ ..........). . ,

Joint Public/Agency Meeling' ..Dale: MondaY. December 15. 1997TIme: 1 p.m. ,Place: Old HaIbor Cfty HaD "Old HaIbor •AI< " '

a ,All, inlllrllsllK! ,individuals. organiza~. and.~ 8181nviled 10 a~and the meeting 10 Ieam........,~ PJOject and 8SSiSl in identifying lheofen~1issues lhal should beana:

"For _ ~ 10 the meeting, AVEC dislrb-=~o~lplInls the "initial Slage Consulla-a___ lor this Proiect Copies of this docu

menl can be obtained by ~.ingDaniel Hettrich ofPOIa,rcons~. al (907) 258-2420, or they can beobtained d',rectly althe meeting., !lfte VIsft '" " '" •

Dale: Tuesday. DeCember 16. 1997Tune: 9 am. .,"., : ,.. "

Place: Old Harbor City HaD .. '", ". ' Old Harbor, AK. ,

A.VEC wiN also conduct a s~e visft: Those al.I~,ng ~ust.meel by 9 'am. .and leave lor" theP,ro~ ,sfte V18. fOOl,lrav~. Those a"ending thesfte V1Sft ~ould be physiCally iii and musi wearwarm( cJolhlF'lg and boots suftable for stream cross'ngs -2' depth). '".' -

The meeling will be recorded ~nd becomepart of Ihe formal record for Ihis"Project An amay submft wri"en commenls on Ihe'Pro~~tComments shoukl be mailed 10: '

Daniel HerlrichPolarconsull " " ,1503 West 33rd Avenue, Sufte 310Anchorage. Alaska 99503,All correspondence should shOw the 101 '

captIOn on the first page: Old Harbo PrIoMngProject No, 11561-000 ' . r Oject.

F ' ,

Heor further informalion, Please contact Daniel

rtrich at.(~~) 25~2~20.

PUb:November21,199~,

/--"',/

,-',

,,',~ .'

\ ""

,"

SS: I, the undersigned, being first duly

sworn, depose and say: I am. editor or

publisher of the Kodiak MIRROR, a

daily newspaper published at Kodiak,

Third Judidal Dividon, Stzte of ~\!aska,

and that the annexed printed notice was

published in said newspaper in issues

of ~e following dates:

NOV~b~ )-1, ICI~+-)

x j10A/{bf ~A/l/(C1.A..A-

signature of Editor or Publisher

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before

me thisc:Jfe day oi NO\J~Nvlbe1!933-

r:2:l a1l () 'rt- ,~aJ~U - . ~Ci-c<NOTARY PUBLIC Zd for the

State of Alaska.

My Commission expiresCY-;)&2 ~;x!}.j (

II .....~",-,

2582420POL$96.57

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION

For lurther Inlormation.please contact Daniel Herfrichat (907) 258-2420.Pub.: November 23. 1997

a single joint public/agencyInitial Sfage Consultation AVEC will also conduct a siteMeeting and site visit to visit. Those attending mustinlarm interested parties meet bY 9 a.m. and leave lorabou! lhe Old Harbor Proiect the proiect site via loot travel.(Prolect). " , Those attending the site visil

.. should be physically IiI and'must wear warm, clothing andboots suitable lor streamcrossings (approx. 2' depth).

Joint PUbliciAgency MeetingDate: Mon.• December 15.1997Time: I p.m. .Place: Old Harbor City HallOld Harbor. AK ,The meeting will be recorded

, and became a part 01 the,All interested individuals. lormal record lor this Proiect.

: arga~iz~tions. and agencies Anyone may submit written,~re onvlled to attend the m~et· comments an 'the praiec!.• ,ng. to l!!Orn. abl?ut t~e. Prolect Comments should be mailed~~:pea~,s~~~ro~d;,~~:~ln?ss~~; to: 'fhat should be analyzed.

'I ,Public Meeting Notice

Old Harbor ProjectFederal Energy Regulatory

Commission "Proiect No. 11561;000

Daniel Hartrich. For review prior to the meet· Polarconsult

Ing•. AVEC distrlbyted to the 1503 Wesl 33rd Avenueparticipants the "Initial Stage Suite 310Consultation Package" lor this Anchorage. Alaska 99503.Praiect. Copies 01 this

:i~~e~~nf:.nH:r'iri~~t~:ned bY All correspondence .shouldPolarconsult at (9071 258-2420. show .the lollawong cap"on on

NOTICE OF INTENT TO 'or theY can be obtained direct- the lorst page: Old HarborCONDUCT JOINT MEETING Iy at Ihe meeting. " Proiect. Praiecl No. 11561-000.

AND A SITE VISI,T. ANDREQUEST FOR SCIENTIFIC Site Visit

STUDIES \" Date: Tues.• December 16.1997, "Time: 9 a.m. .

Alaska Village Electric. Ceop- Place: Old Harbor City Hallerative. Inc. (AVEC) will ,hQ,!d Old Harbor. AK .

STATE OF ALASKA.THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRIIT.

Eva 11. Kaufmannbeing first dUly sworn on oathdeposes and says that he/she isan advertising representative ofthe Anchorage Daily News. adaily newspaper. That saidnewspaper has been approvedby the Third Judicial Court.Anchorage. Alaska. and it nowand has been published in theEnglish language continually as adaily newspaper in Anchorage.Alaska. and it is now and duringall said time was printed in anoffice maintained at the aforesaidplace of publication of saidnewspaper. That the annexed isa copy of an advertisement as itwas published in regular issues(and not in supplemental form) ofsaid newspaper on

Nov. 23, 1997

o

o

o

ooo

J]

]

]

and that such newspaper wasregularly distributed to itssubscribers during all of saidperiod. That the full amount ofthe fee charged for the foregoingpublication is not in excess ofthe rate charged privateindividuals.

~~~Subscribed andSw~re

/Jc~me this .o.2~ay of .If.~ .

'~~t.?~: .NO~bIiC In and for

the State of Alasthird Division.

Anchorage. Alaska.......... 7?Z:f~::E:.r~

RECEJ VEDDate: /ZI /<::t7

J

Qpolarconsult alaska, inc.oI=NGINEERS • SURVEYORS· ENERGY CONSULTANTS

oProject No. 11561-000

Old Harbor Project

November 13, 1997

To: PARTICIPANTS

You will have 90 days (until 2/16/98) to submit comments regarding the Project. Also,this is the first of two chances to request studies. Study requests are also due 2/16/98.The second chance to request studies will occur when Scoping Document 1 is issued(approximately 4/1/98). The first Scoping Meeting will occur around 5/1/98. Thismeeting also includes a site visit.

If you can only make one of the site visits I recommend attending the Scoping Meetingsite visit instead of the 12/16/97 one.

Attached you will find the ISCD for the Old Harbor Project. This document contains allof the information that we have gathered regarding the proposed Project and is being sentto you for review. Since I have previously distributed the environmental studies throughprogress reports I am not attaching Volume 2 of the ISCD (Appendix B). Please contactme ifyou would like a copy of Volume 2.

If, after reviewing this document, you have any questions regarding the Project pleasedon't hesitate to contact me. If you want to submit comments that are included in thepublic record or wish to request studies then you will need to do so in writing (refer tocommunications protocol).



Initial Stage Consultation Document (ISCD) and MeetingSubject:


Daniel Hertrich, PE


goooooooooQ

oooo]

BACKGROUND

1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503PHONE (907) 258·2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419

On March 11, 1996 the Commission issued to AVEC a preliminary permit for theProject, setting the License Application filing deadline no later than March 11, 1999.AVEC began it's compliance with the Commission's pre-filing consultation requirementsby contacting agencies and performing studies based on their comments on the Project.

Old harbor began it's compliance with it's communications protocol and pre-filingconsultation requirements by preparing the Initial Stage Consultation Package (ISCD) -

Alaska Village Electric Corporation (AVEC) and various federal, state, local agenciesand special interest groups have agreed to participate in the Applicant PreparedEnvironmental Assessment (APEA) process for the licensing the Old Harbor Project,Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) Project No. 11561-000 (Project).The intent of the agencies to participate is evidenced by the receipt of the agencyapproval and support form's for the NEPA consolidated process. This communicationseeks the cooperation and participation of the Commission in the APEA process for theOld Harbor Project as well as the waiver of certain requirements of the traditionalCommission licensing process.

October 1, 1997


Waiver Request

LOIS CASHELL, SECRETARY

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

888 FIRST STREETNE

WASHINGTON DC 20426

Subject:

AVEC and the federal, state, local agencies and special interest groups have signed aCommunications Protocol. This Communications Protocol is intended to satisfy the exparte rules of the Commission and to provide a guideline for communications andcoordination among the participants involved in preparation of the EnvironmentalAssessment. A copy of the Communications Protocol is attached hereto.

Coordinating preparation of the application and environmental review processes willrequire some modification to the Commission's regulations. Accordingly, AVECrequests waiver of regulations that may be inconsistent with the coordinated process. Asdemonstrated below, AVEC submits that good cause exists for granting the requestedwaiver.

polarconsult alaska, inc."''''GINEERS • SURVEYORS. ENERGY CONSULTANTS

gFTLJ

og

oooBooo

ooooLJ

oo

Q

D

g

oooBooooooooo


which will be submitted following the response on the waiver request. Included in withthe ISCD will be Scoping Document 1 (SD1).

AVEC will then; in consultation with the Commission, hold the Scoping Meeting withthe public and state and federal resource agencies. Comments, as well as any request forscientific studies, will be due no later than thirty (30) days after the scoping meeting.AVEC will file all review comments and additional study requests with the Commissionand integrate these comments into the NEPA Scoping Document 2 (SD2). AVEC willprepare and distribute SD2 and prepare workplans for completing any additional studies.

Pursuant to the workplans, AVEC will conduct the studies necessary to prepare a draftlicense application and begin preparing the draft EA. Once the studies have beencompleted and the results released, the agencies and public will have sixty (60) days inwhich to comment on the study results and request additional scientific studies. Thisopportunity to request additional scientific studies will replace the traditional opportunityto request studies after the license application is filed [see 18 CFR §4.32 (b) (7)].

In preparing the draft license application, AVEC will substitute the draft EA for anExhibit E to its License Application, see 18 CFR §4.38(t) & 4.41(t). When completed,AVEC will distribute the draft license application and the draft EA at the same time forreview and comment. The documents will provide the information required in thesecond-stage consultation package: a draft License Application, study and informationgathering results, and a written request for review and commene. See 18 CFR§4.38(c)(4). The draft EA will incorporate the results of AVEC's studies, including anyadditional studies, together with any required measures to address environmental affects.Preliminary comments, including draft recommendations and mandatory license termsand conditions or prescriptions, will be due ninety (90) days after AVEC distributes thedraft license application and draft EA for review. See 18 CFR §4.38(c)(5). AVEC willarrange additional public meetings and site visits as needed2

• Based on the comments,recommendations, terms and conditions and prescriptions received, AVEC will finalizethe license application and revise the draft EA.

AVEC will then file its License Application, including the revised draft EA, with theCommission, completing second-stage consultation. See 18 CFR §4.38(c)(l0).Throughout the coordinated process and pursuant to the Communications Protocol,

1 AVEC intends to submit its application to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation forwater quality certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 USC § 1341, at the same time itdistributes the draft EA and draft License Application. See 18 CFR § 4.38(f)(7)(i).2 If the written comments demonstrate substantive disagreement, additional meetings will be held incompliance with FERC's requirements for dispute resolution during second-stage consultation (18 C,FR §4.38(c)(6) - (8)).

[]

Dog

ooo[]

oooooo

[]


information, including summaries of all coordination meetings, transcripts of publicmeetings, conference call reports, periodic progress reports, and contact logsdocumenting verbal communication will be maintained on file with the Commission andwill be available to the public at the offices ofAVEC's consultant:

Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.1503 W 33rd Ave #310Anchorage AK 99503

After AVEC files its license application, the Commission will conduct an adequacyreview. The Commission will also issue public notice of acceptance of the licenseapplication and the Applicant Prepared Draft EA. The notice will solicit interventionsand provide sixty (60) days for submitting comments and final recommendations andmandatory license terms and conditions or prescriptions. After receiving these commentsand mandatory conditions, the Commission will issue the staff s Draft EA. TheCommission will provide thirty (30) (or forty five (45) if FERC section 10 applies) daysfor submitting comments and recommendations on the staffs Draft EA. At that time, theCommission will institute the Federal Power Act Section IOU) process as necessary. See18 CFR §4.34(b) & (e). The Commission will then complete and issue the final EA.Complete the Section lOG) process, and issue an order on AVEC's License Application.

REQUEST FOR WAIVER

AVEC respectfully requests that the Commission waive Sections 4.32(b)(7), 4.34(b),4.41(f) and 4.38(f) of its regulations, to the extent that these requirements are inconsistentwith the coordinated license application and environmental review process.

Section 4.32 (b)(7) should be waived to the extent it requires the Commission to issuepublic notice of tendering of the license application and permits interested parties torequest additional scientific studies be performed after the License Application is filed.Under the coordinated process, the substantive elements of this notice and commentprocedure will be completed prior to filing the License Application. Interested partieswill have the opportunity to comment on SD1 and, at the same time, also request studiesin addition to those requested during the first stage consultation process.

Section 4.34(b) should be waived to the extent that it requires the Commission to issue aNotice that the application is now ready for environmental analysis (NREA), whichwould usually initiate the environmental review process and provide sixty (60) days foragencies to submit initial comments, recommendations, and mandatory terms andconditions or prescriptions. Under the coordinated process, agencies will have submittedpreliminary recommendations and mandatory terms and conditions or prescriptions upon

Boo§

oooDooooo[]

[J

ooou


review of the Draft License Application and Applicant Prepared EA. Thus, when AVECfiles its License Application and revised Draft EA, the environmental analysis will bealmost complete. AVEC will have already incorporated those preliminary comments,recommendations, and mandatory terms and conditions or prescriptions in theapplication. Rather than issuing a NREA, following its adequacy review, theCommission will notice the filing of the License Application and the Revised Draft EA.That notice will solicit interventions, final comments, recommendations, and mandatorylicense. terms and conditions or prescriptions. After the Commission receives finalrecommendations, mandatory terms and conditions or prescriptions, staff will issue itsDraft EA and the Commission will again receive comments before finalizing the EA.

Finally, as stated above, the EA will contain most of the environmental reports and otherinformation required in an Exhibit E as outlined in Section 4.41(f). While seeking waiverof Section 4.41(f), AVEC is aware that it must file with the Commission any informationtypically included in the application, but not typically included in an EA. SimilarlyAVEC seeks waiver of Section 4.38(f) to the extent it requires documentation of the threestage consultation process and a discussion of consistency with comprehensive plans.Under the Communications Protocol, throughout the coordinated process, AVEC willdocument agency and public consultation in its monthly progress reports. Rather thandocumenting the consultation process in the application, AVEC will include a summaryof the three~stage consultation process in the License Application and make available theprogress reports to entities upon request. Thus, in so much as Section 4.41(f) and 4.38(f)would impose unnecessary duplicative requirements on AVEC, they should be waived.

AVEC maintains that good cause exists for granting the requested waivers. Coordinatingthe environmental review and application preparation processes will result in a moreefficient and comprehensive review of the Project. Advancing requests for informationthat the public, federal and state resource agencies and the Commission make before theapplication is filed will improve the quality of the environmental information developedabout the Projece. Allowing the public and state and federal resources agencies to reviewand comment on application related material simultaneously with the EA will reduce thetime and effort associated with Project review. Final recommendations and mandatorylicense terms and conditions and prescriptions will not be solicited until after the finalLicense Application and Revised Draft EA are made available. Further, commission staffwill issue a draft and final EA before completing the environmental review process forthe Project. Integrating preparation of the EA and the License Application will change

3 AVEC recognizes that FERC retains authority under section 4.32(g) of its regulations to requestadditional information from AVEC throughout the process. Prior to filing the License Application andformal invocation of Section 4.32(g), AVEC voluntarily agrees to submit to that authority.

8oo


the scheduling of some events, however, no major consultation requirement will beomitted.

CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, AVEC respectfully requests that you grant thewaivers described herein pursuant to your authority under 18 CFR §375.314(c)(4) &(c)(9).

Further AVEC, respectfully requests waiver of any other provisions of part 4 of theregulations that might otherwise conflict with the coordinated application andenvironmental review process described herein.




Daniel Hertrich, CE

oooL1

ooooooooooj

With the following exceptions, all of the approval forms have been signed.

, ADEC Exxon Valdez Trustee CouncilThis council is deferring to agencies. They have stated that they don't have a role in thisarea.

U.S. Corps ofEngineersThey state that their expected level of involvement in the project does not require signingthe agreement form.

Alaska Village Electric Corporation (AVEC) expressed its intent to prepare an ,ApplicantPrepared Environmental Assessment (APEA) in place of an Exhibit E for the LicenseApplication it will prepare during the preliminary permit term for Project No. 11561-000.The letter of intent was filed with the Commission on September 12, 1996. Commissionstaff requested AVEC seek approval from the state and federal resource agenciesregarding the APEA process and communications during this process.

October 1, 1997


They defer to the individual

Acceptance ofCommunications Protocol and NEPA Consolidated Process

LOIS CASHELL, SECRETARY


888 FIRST STREET NE

WASHINGTON DC 20426

Dear Secretary,

Subject:

Department ofTransporationWill not sign but say go ahead with the APEA process anyway.

Division of Governmental CoordinationThis agency doesn't have a role in decision making directly.agencies in this matter.

opolarconsult alaska, inc.or:t-,jGINEERS· SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS

ooooooooooou

J]

J]

Alaska Department ofFish and GameHave not signed the form yet but agree with the reViSiOns m the communicationsprotocol.


Bonooooooooo[J


Department of Environmental ConservationHave stated that they will sign the form but have not received it yet.

Environmental Protection AgencyHave not received a response yet.

u.s. Department of the InteriorStates that BLM doesn't have involvement in the land issue due to lack of ownership.

If the Commission has any questions for these agencies you may wish to contact themdirectly. The attached list of interested parties includes numbers and addresses.

AVEC herein files an original and eight (8) copies of the Agency Approval and SupportRequest for the APEA process and Communications Protocol approved by the resourcemanagement agencies.

Direct any questions to Polarconsult

Sincerely, .

p~~Daniel Hertrich, CE

Attached:Revised Communications ProtocolList of Interested PartiesSigned Agency Approval Forms (Lois Cashell, Secretary, only)

oooooo

cc:Nan AllenTonyAzuyakJay BellingerRick BernsWalt BoyleJohn BregarLois Cashell, SecretaryEmil ChristiansenWayne Dolezal



C---I C-] (--) CJ C=:J r---"'-"-"L---! c=J (~:J C~'-J CJ c=J C--~J C] c:J CJ o=J r~] _CT'7D CD

List of Interested Parties Old Harbor ProjectProject No_ I1561-000

10/1/97

First Name M. Last Name Organization Name DepartmentlDivision Address1 City State Postal Code Work Phone FAX Number------- - ------ ----------------------------- -------------- ------ --.--- --~- c--------Nan Allen Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE Washingto D,C. 20426202-219-2938 202-219-2732------- --- -::.~-----

Tony Azuyak Old Harbor Tribal Council P_O. Box 15 Old Harbor AK 99643 907-286-2215

~--- R. ~~ger:=_ ~~:~~:~1ifeSerV1Ce==- --- KodiakNational Wildl!~e T~e~~~=--=~3~~:o~~~9River Road--~ ~~dd~~rbor ~~ -- --::~~i~;:~~~~~~~-~~:~:~:~~FIWalt C. Boyle Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Portland Regional Office 101 SW Main Street Suite 905 Portland OR 97204 503-326-5840 503-326-5857John------ -- Bregar--- Environmental Protection Agency- 12006 AVE MAIL STOP ECO- Seattle WA 98101 206-553-1984 206-553-6984I:ois casiieiCSecrFecterai"EnergyRcguiaiiiiY-Commission----- - - ----- ------------------ 888 First Street NE Washingto D.C. 20426 202-219-2700 202-219-0125

- - -- - - - ------.-.- .. - ----- _._----- - - - --. -.--- - -.. _- - _.- -- ._-----Emil Christiansen Old Harbor Native Corporation P_O. Box 71 Old Harbor AK 99643 907-286-2286 907-286-2287-----.- - ._--_._-_._.-.-_._----------_._-------------- --- ~- ------------ -.---- -------- ----------._- ------------Wayne Dolezal Alaska Department of Fish and Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage AK 99518-1599 267-2333 267-2464wlifie.:--- - Ebell----·· jaITiii1,'EileIT:1loiger, anliOentry--·-- ------- ----- ------------- 605 First Ave Suite 300 Seattle WA 98104 206-622-7634 206623-7521Christopher -- Estes -- Alaska DepartmeiliOfi'iSililncIGame------ -Sf·Rrs------------------ 333 Raspberry~----.- Anchorage AK 99518267-2142 267-2422--Urilfa--- Freed -- Kodiak Island Borough ---- --------- 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak AK 99615907-486-9360 907-486-9376U_ L. Gross Koniag Incorporated -------- 4300 B St Suite 407 Anchorage AK 99503561-2668 562-5258Steven Hom Department of Transporation Permits Officer PO Box 196900 Anchorage AK 99519-6900 266-1508 243-6927~on Kohle U.S. Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 898 Anchorage AK 99506-0898 753-2724 753-5567Shirley Macke U.S_ Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management, Attn. 931 222 W 7 AVE #13 Anchorage AK 99513-7599271-3266 271-5479Brad A. Meiklejohn The Conservation Fund 9850 Hiland Road Eagle Rive AK 99577 694-9060 694-9070Eric Meyers ADEC Exxon Valdez Trustee Council 645 G Street Anchorage AK 99501 278-8012 276-7178Gary Muehlenhard U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Realty lOll E Tudor Rd Anchorage AK 99503 786-3388 786-3901Arlene---- Murphy Division of Governmental Coordination 3601 C Street, Suite 370 Anchorage AK 99503-5930269-7475 561-6134_.._-------- --- -- -------.. -------------~ .._-_._----_.._--------- ._----------------------Gary Prokosh Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Mining and Water Manage 3601 C Street Suite 800 Anchorage AK 99503-5936269-8600 562-1384----------- --- ---_._-------- =- -Tim Rumfelt Department of Environmental Conservation 555 Cordova Street Anchorage AK 99501 269-7564 269-7508Kelly Simeonoff, J Kodiak Area Native Association 3449 E RezonoffDr Kodiak AK 99615 907-486-9800 907-486-9898Tim Smith Alaska Department ofNatural Resources Historic Preservation Office 3601 C Street Suite 1278 Anchorage AK 99503-5921 269-8721 269-8908Brad Smith U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service 222 West 7th Avenue Suite 43 Anchorage AK 99513-7577 271-5006 271-3030Charles Y. Walls Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage AK 99503-7497 561-1818 562-4086---- =;-_._--------_.-------- ----- ------Gary Wheeler U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 605 W 4th Ave, Room G-62 Anchorage AK 99501 271-2780 271-2786

Page 1 of 1

Re: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Communications ProtocolFERC N2 11561-000

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the August22, 1997 revised communications protocol for the Old HarborHydroelectric Project. We appreciate the changes made in response toour recommendations of August 13, 1997. In most aspects, the revisedprotocol clearly details what is to be done. However, as revised, thetopic of ex parte communications within and between resource agenciescontained in newly added Section "I", did not adequately address ourconcerns.

Ex parte communications (18 CFR 385.2201) pertain specifically tocommunications with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)and do not apply to communications among resource agencies. Ourposition is that inter/intra agency communications for purposes ofsuch things as identifying information requirements, reviewing projectdocuments for adequacy of the data presented, and formulating agencyrecommendations and responses to project proposals are not subject tothe forma). documentation and notification requirements of the publiccommunications protocol.





September 18, 1997

Dear Mr. Ausman:

Mr. Earle AusmanPolarconsult Alaska Inc.1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310Anchorage, AK 99503

Therefore, proposed Section "I" should be deleted and changed to readas shown in Section D of the attached September 18, 1997 mark-up ofthe August 22, 1997 version to the communications protocol. By addingthe new Section D, a few editorial changes are required in thefollowing sections (i.e., renumbered Sections E, F, G, H, and I, anddeletion of the reference to paragraph "I" in renumbered Sections E,F, and G). Further, to clarify exactly what is required under FERC'sex parte rules, and to have a copy readily available we recommend thata copy of 18 CFR 385.2201 be attached to the protocol. Reference tothe attachment can be made in renumbered Section H.

oooooooooooo[J

u[J

ooo] 11·K107LH

Enclosures

Two other recommendations include; specifying in Section J of theprotocol, that changes be made through written concurrence, andmodifying Section B to include that notices of meetings be publishedin at least one newspaper having statewide circulation (e.g.,Anchorage Daily News) .

We appreciate your commitment to working with us to refine the OldHarbor Hydroelectric communications protocol and thank you for theopportunity to comment. Should you have any questions please do nothesitate to contact me at either the letterhead address or call me at(907)267-2333.

cc: N. Allen, FERC ContactC. Estes, ADF&GT. Rumfelt, ADECG. Wheeler, USFWS-WAESJ. Bellinger, Kodiak NWRB. Smith, NMFS

September 18, 1997-2-Mr. Earle Ausman

Sincerely,

C!d~~C. waZDolezalHabitat BiologistRegion IIHabitat Division

oooooooooooooooo

o

3. April 9, 1997 letter from Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. which (a) clarifies the intents and purposesfor the waiver of 3 conditions of the FERC process, and (b) updates section D of theCommunications Protocol.

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the proposed communicationsprotocol for the Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project. We appreciate the extensive effort you haveput into preparing a comprehensive process aimed at expediting the Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission's (FERC) hydroelectric project licensing process including baseline documentationthat should lead toward preparation of a meaningful environmental assessment.

We understand that the project sponsor, the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC),proposes to use the FERC applicant prepared environmental assessment process (APEAP) toaddress National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements for this venture. Toward thatend a proposed communications protocol dated February 7, 1997, was drafted and has since beendiscussed and amended by several pieces of correspondence.

As it now stands, the evolution of this communications protocol is detailed by the followingdocuments (copies enclosed):

1. Proposed COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLPage 1, dated February 7, 1997Page 2, dated April 9, 1997Page 3, dated February 7, 1997Page 4, dated February 7, 1997

2. April 2, 1997 Meeting Minutes which under item 5 provides some clarification onAgency ex parte communications.



Dear Mr. Ausman:

Re: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Communications ProtocolFERC NQ 11561-000

Mr. Earle AusmanPolarconsult Alaska Inc.1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310Anchorage, AK 99503


HABITAT AND RESTaRATlON DIVISION

August 13, 1997

o

BooBoooDo

oo

tJ

Jo

11-K107LH

4. A flow chart received in July 1997, which depicts the schedule for each part of the APEAPand identifies the beginning and end dates of the associated milestones or steps in theprocess.

In most aspects of the current Old Harbor Hydroelectric project proposal, the ADF&G supportsand will abide by the consolidation of the NEPA process and the Communications Protocol.

Enclosures

However, two topics remain unclear and must be resolved before we will formally commit to theprocedure. These topics include ex parte communications, and a qualifier somewhere in theprocedure concerning potential future changes to the protocol. We also have a few editorialcomments.

Ex Parte Communications: In addition to the information contained in the meeting minutes ofApril 2, 1997, the issue of ex parte communications must be further clarified and formallyincorporated in the protocol. It was our understanding that except for Old Harbor specificcommunications (as explained in Section G of this protocol) with FERC, AVEC, or AVEC'srepresentative, communications within or among agencies whether as meetings, telephonecommunications, or written communications, are not subject to the ex parte rule and do not haveto be recorded. However, this is not what Sections D, E, and F now state. Therefore SectionsD, E, and F of the proposed protocol must be amended or a new section added which providesthis .clarification concerning agency communications.

We appreciate your commitment to working with us to refine the Old Harbor APEAP protocoland thank you for the opportunity to comment. Should you have any questions, please do nothesitate to contact me at either the letterhead address or call me at (907) 267-2333.

Sincerely, .

C/(A7'/U~~By: C. Wayne Dolezal

Habitat BiologistRegion II

August 13, 1997-2-

In addition, because the ADF&G is involved in reviewing many hydroelectric projects andbecause many of our communications with FERC are of a general, non-project specific nature,Section G of this protocol should be amended to specify that the procedures contained thereinapply only when the Old Harbor project is specifically being discussed.

Potential Changes to Protocol: To avoid future complications, the communications protocolshould allow for contingencies which might require a modification of the protocol. Werecommend a new section be added which states that any changes to the protocol must be madeby prior written, mutual agreement of all signatory parties to the protocol.

Editorial Comments: (1) The last paragraph on page 4 should be rewritten to explain who theparticipants are that will receive copies of the monthly progress report. Are these only protocolsignatories or do they include any interested parties? (2) The last sentence on the signature pageshould either be deleted or rewritten to become a goals statement. At present the consolidatedprocess is an unproven methodology and the statement cannot yet be verified.

Please add Christopher Estes of ADF&G/SF-RTS, to the list of interested parties for receipt ofproject related correspondence. He is located at 333 Raspberry Road, Anchorage, Alaska,99518.

Mr. Earle Ausman

Booooooooooooo

[J

']

J]

BoooooooooooJJ]

]

]

]

-l

Mr. Earle Ausman

cc: N. Allen, FERC ContactC. Estes, ADF&GT. Rumfelt, ADECG. Wheeler, USFWS-WAESJ. Bellinger, Kodiak NWR

B. Smith, NMFS

-3- August 13, 1997

Dear Mr. Walls:

cc: FERC-Cashell

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION 10

1200 Sixth AvenueSeattle, Washington 98101

A 2.REPLY TOAnN OF: WD-126

o Printed on Recycled Papel

;ZY, I~Lar~manHYdr;O~:~ Coordinator

Re: Notice of Filing of a Preliminary Permit with the Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission (FERC), Project No. 11561-000

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has received the abovereferenced notice from FERC. The information included in the notice does notprovide the necessary level of detail to enable us to offer substantive comments onthe environmental issues at this time.

Charles Y. Walls, General ManagerAlaska Village Electric Cooperative4831 Eagle StreetAnchorage, Alaska 99503-7497

Please keep us informed of the status of this project. If you would like todiscuss any of the topics of concern EPA has raised in the enclosure, please call meat (206) 553-1750.

However, we have enclosed a list of topics to consider while preparing yourenvironmental documents. EPA believes these topics are extremely important inevaluating the environmental effects of small hydropower projects. This is ageneralized list and all of the items may not be applicable for your proposed projects.Therefore, we suggest that you review this list to determine the applicability of eachitem to site specific conditions.

Enclosure

Boonooooooooo

oo[J

oJ

DooQ

ooooo

oDoooouo~]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYSMALL HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT IMPACT CONCERNS

GENERALIZED LIST

WATER QUALITY IMPACTS

Provide a discussion of water quality upstream anddownstream of the project and in the by-pass reach locationhighlighting stream temperatures! dissolved oxygen, suspendedsediment loads, turbidity levels! and extent of any changes ininstream flow patterns. Address how the project may affectfisheries! aquatic life and potable water supplies with regard tothese water quality concerns.

Water quality assessments based on chemical and physicalparameters alone are often not sufficient to identify or addressall surface water pollution problems. Biological assessments canmeasure the condition of the resource at risk. Therefore, EPArecommends that an analysis of the stream biota including studiesof population dynamics, food-web organization, and taxonomicstructure of communities be carried out.

Background hydrologic studies should be included so that theimpacts (adverse or beneficial) are fully understood by thereviewing agencies. Indicate whether the construction andoperation of the project would cause or contribute to anyviolations of applicable state water quality standards. Includethe stream capability to assimilate point and non-point pollutionfrom-other sources. Waste materials allowed to reach navigablewaters without proper permits are considered a violation of theClean Water Act.

Monitoring

The environmental document should include a discussion ofmonitoring for each resource category determined to besignificant through the scoping process, including fisheries andwater quality. A properly designed monitoring plan willdemonstrate how well the preferred alternative resolves theidentified issues and concerns by measuring the effectiveness ofthe mitigation measures in controlling or minimizing adverseeffects. The environmental document should include a discussionof how the three basic types of monitoring (implementation,effectiveness and validation monitoring) are being incorporatedinto this project.

oooooDoooJruoLJ

oou]

J]

The monitoring plan should include types of surveys,location and frequency of sampling, parameters to be monitored,indicator species, budget, procedures for using data or resultsin plan implementation, and availability .of results to interestedand affected groups. A helpful resource for the development ofwater quality and biological monitoring plans is:

Rapid Bioassessment Protocols For Use in Streams and Rivers,EPA/444/4-89-001, May 1989.

The environmental document should describe the feedbackmechanism which can use monitoring results to adjust BMPs,standard operating procedures and monitoring intensity at firstdetection of adverse effects. Provision of such an adjustmentprocess ensures that mitigation strategies will improve in thefuture and that unforeseen adverse effects are identified andminimized.

PROJECT COMPONENT ALTERNATIVES

Alternative project components should be considered from thewater quality/soil stability point of view. For example,alternate construction techniques and in-stream flow regime needsshould be evaluated in order to determine the degree to whichwater quality impacts may be reduced by each alternative.Alternate access road alignments should be considered in order tominimize potential erosion and landsliding problems.

WETLANDS IMPACTS

Wetlands could be affected by the project. Riparian areas(including spray zones, shrub-scrub, and emergent wetlands) couldbe lost or degraded by construction activities. Wetlands arecritical resources which have experienced severe cumulativelosses nationally. Protection of wetlands is one of the toppriorities of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Thefunctions and values of the area's wetlands should, therefore, beevaluated so that the significance of potential impacts can bedetermined. Appropriate tools for this evaluation may includethe Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) or Wetland EvaluationTechniques. Any unique or special features of the wetlandsshould receive special attention.

Once the functions and values of the wetlands are defined,the possibilities for mitigation of potential impacts to thesefunctions and values should be explored. Unique features may beparticularly difficult to mitigate and should again be givenparticular attention. The key is that the functions' and valuesof the wetlands are the concern, not merely "acre-for-acre"mitigation. We stress avoidance of impacts over other types ofmitigation. Therefore,addressing alternatives is of extremeimportance.

2

ooDooooooJooJ]

JJ]

J]

A section 404 permit from the u.s. Army Corps of Engineers(Corps) would likely be required for the project. The Corps canassist you in considering alternatives to determine whetherimpacts to wetlands can be reduced or eliminated. We recommendthat you begin coordination with the nearest Corps District asearly as possible so that possibilities of alternatives towetland impacts are not precluded. If the section 404alternatives analysis is not incorporated into the FERChydropower licensing process it is conceivable that alternativeroutings to avoid wetlands, which have not been evaluated in thelicensing process, could be required during the 404 permitprocess .. Delaying the analysis of section 404 alternatives untilafter completion of the licensing process could result in theapplicant ne~ding to change the configuration of the project,thus costing additional time and money. Again we encourage youto contact the nearest Corps District early on in the process.

AQUATIC AND RIPARIAN HABITAT

Describe and quantify such habitats in the vicinity of theproject, emphasizing spawning and rearing habitat for anadromousand resident fish. Project-induced changes in instream flows andriver surface elevations would have an effect on the fishresources as well as such processes as sediment transport andgravel recruitment. The environmental report should evaluate andassess these effects and their consequences upon the aquatic andriparian habitat. The assessment should include the acreage andvalue of the habitat affected. Also the report should indicatehow the stream reach for this proposed project has beenclassified by the Northwest Power Planning Council's "ProtectedAreas List" (i.e., anadromous fish only, resident fish andwildlife, unprotected ... ).

ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES

Evaluate in some detail potential measures for minimizingimpacts on water quality, fish, wildlife, and associated aquaticand wetland habitats. Give special attention to the habitats offish, wildlife, and botanical species found on the state andfederal Threatened or Endangered Species lists.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

A soils stability study should be undertaken for the projectwhich includes the soil type, approximate location and arealextent of each type, and susceptibility to erosion. Discuss theimpacts the project may have upon these soils with regard toslope stability and sedimentation. This information is essentialin order to determine accurate sedimentation and erosion-relatedimpacts upon the subject basin.

3

j

J]

9JJJJJ]

JDJ]

]

J]

J]

A catastrophic slope movement event in the basin area couldalso be catastrophic in terms of human and wildlife loss, habitatloss, and monetary loss. A prudent investigation of the geologyof the project area can be sound and effective project-failuremitigation in itself, especially if the studies reveal aninherent geologic weakness that may be exploited by the projectsor their related activities.

POTENTIAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The environmental reports should evaluate the contributionsthe hydropower project may have on cumulative impacts to waterquality, fish and wildlife, wetlands, riparian areas, andrecreation resources in the river basin/watershed. Considerationof these impacts together with those of any past, present, andreasonably foreseeable future actions, both hydro and non-hydroactivities (i.e., forestry, mining, road construction) iswarranted.

For any resource, the cumulative impact evaluation mustbegin with an assessment of ·the degree to which impacts havealready occurred (including impacts resulting from other thanhydropower development). Such a baseline assessment is criticalto the ability to ascribe significance to any amount of furtherimpact. For cumulative effects in particular, the magnitude ofimpact may not be .synonymous with the significance of thatimpact. A minor impact could be significant. The purpose ofthis evaluation should be to determine the relationship betweenthese concepts.

It is also important that the environmental documentsaddress possible mitigation for what we have termed "residual"cumulative effects. (By this we mean the cumulative level ofimpact expected to remain after project-specific mitigationmeasures have been applied. This would also include effects thatmay exist if project-specific mitigation is not as effective orsuccessful as predicted) .

4

June 2, 1997

New Schedule, Stream Flows During Fish Surveys.

ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME

333 RASPBERRY ROADANCHORAGE AK 99518-1599

Dear Wayne Dolezal

Subject:

• .The flow measured 2000' above the dry area in Barling Creek on 9/3/96 was -14cfs. The drainage area for this location is 7.32 mi2. Dry section length = 5000 ft.

• The flow measured at the intake site on 8/10/96 was 5.5 cfs. The drainage areafor this location is 1.79 mi2.

• The flow measured 100 ft above dry area of Lagoon creek on 9/3/96 was 1.65 cfs.The drainage area for this locations is 1.45 mi2. Dry section length = 4200 butcreek resurfaced with substantial flow about a mile before the mouth.

Regarding questions on the schedule we have added a legend and clarified item number55. If this is insufficient please let me know.

Regarding your concerns about knowing all the streamflow characteristics in the creeksby step 46 in the schedule we offer the following infonnation regarding the existing data.We hope that this can provide an adequate foundation for any future studies.

September 3rd the Barling Creek and Lagoon Creek flows were measured. Thiscorresponds to the same dates that the pictures were taken shown in Appendix A of the4/1 0/97 Progress Report.

The intake site was gauged on August 10th. The flow at the intake site likely did notchange significantly during the rest of the month of August. TIlls assumption is based ·onthe September 3rd survey where it was found that Barling Creek ran dry at nearly thesame location where it was observed dry on the August 9th survey.

To summarize:

The operation of the hydroplant would remove all of the 5.5 cfs from the intake site anddivert it to Lagoon Creek. The affect would be that the flow in Lagoon Creek would beincreased by about 333% (at the gauged site) while the flow in Barling Creek would bereduced by about 39% (at the gauged site).

A quantitative conclusion regarding the change in dry areas of both streams can not bedetennined with any kind of accuracy. However, based on the above infonnation and thephotos it can be concluded that the amount of water needed in Barling Creek to havesufficient water to sustain fish spawning is substantially larger than the amount ne~dedfor the dry section in Lagoon Creek to be productive. Therefore, for the conditions

1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310 • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419

8polarconsult alaska, inc.o.... -INEERS· SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS

oEJ

oooo

oorJo[J

[]

oJJ]

Boog

ouooooD{]

o[1

oooJ

during the survey, the net effect of the hydroplant would be an enhancement of fish

production overall.

Sincerely,

p~;.L:i:JDaniel Hertrich, CE

Attachments: Schedule, 2 pages

April 9, 1997


PARTICIPANTSTo:

Bpolarconsult alaska, inc.ot=NGINEERS· SURVEYORS· ENERGY CONSULTANTS

oEf

Attached are minutes from the meeting. Also attached with this letter is a schedule thatanswers questions that were brought up in the meeting. The remainder of this lettercontains answers to questions brought up in the meeting and a discussion of the schedule.

Item #2Attached are three schedules. They are the same except for formatting. The firstschedule shows the entire project and timeline and the dates of occurrence and duration ofall tasks. The second schedule shows the entire timeline but only shows milestones andtasks that require agency input. The third schedule shows the timeline from 4/1 /97 10/1/97 and shows only milestones and tasks that require agency input.

Item #1Bullet 1 regards the WaIvmg of Exhibit E requirements by substituting the draftenvironmental assessment. Exhibit E is the environmental assessment (EA) that is doneafter the final application is filed. In the APEA process the EA is done prior to the finalapplication being filed. The EA will be very similar to Exhibit E.

Bullet 2 regards study requests. Advancing the time for submittal of request foradditional studies to the time when field studies are completed refers to Stage 2 commentperiod in the APEA process (see schedule). Typically, in the standard three stage processstudy requests cart be made in stage 3 after the final application is filed (see attachedchart). The APEA process limits the study requests to before the final application is filed.

Bullet 3 refers to the environmental assessment portion of the project. For this project theenvironmental assessment is done prior to the final application submittal. The traditionalprocess does the environmental assessment after the final application is filed. FERC isdropping the notice that the project is ready for environmental assessment in APEAprocesses (because at the traditional time of announcing it, the assessment has alreadybeen accomplished in the'APEA process).

Q

oooooD

oo[}

nLJ

Subject: Response to meeting on 4/2/97

[J

[J

o1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE • SUITE 310. ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503PHONE (907) 258-2420 • TELEFAX (907) 258-2419


Item #4Attached is the revised section of the communications protocol. Please replace the oldpage in the communications protocol with this one.

~cerelY~ I!;/dd//~Daniel Hertrich, CE

ooog

Q

U

oooDooo[J

oooo]

cc:Nan AllenTony AzuyakJay BellingerRick BernsWalt BoyleStan CarrickEmil ChristiansenChuck Diters

Wayne DolezalBill DonaldsonWalter EbellLinda FreedU. GrossClaire HollandSteven HomAli IliffMichelle Jesperson

Don KohleShirley MackeDianne MayerMaureen McCreaRich McIntoshBrad MeiklejohnEric MeyersGary Muehlenhardt

Content:

Subject: Discussion of Communications Protocol and Agency Approval Form

3. The name and phone number of the FERC representative in Washington DCwho is working with this project was requested. That contact is:

1. Agencies felt that there should have been more clarification on the threewaiver conditions. These conditions were stated in the February 7, 1997 lettertitled "Approval of Communications Protocol Requested." The requestedwaivers are as follows:

FERC Project # 11561-000

Meeting Minutes

Old Harbor Project

• Waive exhibit E requirements by substituting the draftenvironmental assessment.

• Advance the time for submittal of request for additional studiesto the time when field studies are completed.

• Waive the public notice that the project is ready forenvironmental assessment due to the APEA already being inplace.

2. Agencies wanted a schedule/flow chart describing the FERC process that weare proposing as it applies to this particular project. The schedule shouldinclude review times and comment periods, the time at which the 401 waterquality permit and coastal/consistency review will take place, identify wherein the process field studies are completed, where and when requests foradditional studies takes place, note where reviewed documents are producedin the process, and include ANILCA title XI compliance if applicable.

Date: Wednesday, April 2, 1997

AttendeesWayne Dolezal, Alaska Department ofFish and GameTim Rumfelt, Department of Environmental ConservationArlene Murphy, Division of Governmental CoordinationGary Wheeler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceEarle Ausman, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.Daniel Hertrich, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.

Boo8Q

oQ

oooo[J

o

oooD

Nan AllenFederal Energy Regulatory Commission888 First Street NEWashington, D.C. 20426

April 9, 1997 Page 1

7. There was a question as to whether the FERC process met ANILCA Title XIrequirements. Gary Wheeler and Polarconsult will be looking into that.

8. The timeline proposed by FERC for 401 permitting and coastal/consistencyreview was questioned. Polarconsult will put those permitting processes onthe schedule for review and comment.

4. Agencies requested that a change be made in the communications protocol,section D, to copy meeting minutes to all participants and to anyone elserequesting a copy.

6. Also discussed was the inclusion of state entities in the process of transferringlands and in making covenant changes in order to construct the project in therefuge.

FERC Project # 11561-000

202-219-2938 voice202-219-0125 fax

5. Agencies wanted clarification as to whether section E of the communicationsprotocol required inter agency discussions to be documented and submitted toPolarconsult. It was determined that this was not required.

9. Polarconsult said that they would submit a schedule for the project that wouldanswer the questions in item 2, also submit a letter and modifiedcommunications protocol that would answer items 1 and 4. Also, the Statewould be included as necessary in the memorandum of understanding with theDepartment of Interior.

Old Harbor Project8fl.·LJ

oD···,-L

Q

ooonu

ooIJoooooo

April 9, 1997 Page 2

9Of\'

ogoooRU

oooDoooo~

JJ


February 19, 1997

Daniel HertrichPolarconsult Alaska, Inc.1503 West 33rd Avenuesuite 310Anchorage, Alaska 99503

Dear Mr. Hertrich:

Thank you for your letter concerning the licensing andcommunications protocols for the proposed Old Harbor hydroelectricproject. We have no objections to the adoption of the FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission's Applicant-Prepared EnvironmentalAssessment process in this matter. However, experience to datewith the APEA process has found the communications process and FERCrequirements to document this communication are often unclear orcannot reasonably be met with existing agency workloads andstaffing. The Communications Protocol, as it appears in yourletter, establishes how the applicant will disseminate informationto agencies and interested parties. It would be most helpful ifthe protocol was expanded to describe how and when agency inputwill be sought, and what the FERC requires as far as officialresponse, review, or comment. Also, we believe the FERC shouldbecome more active in the early stages of the APEA process. Werecommend a contact within that agency be designated to oversee theprocess and be available for meetings, conferences, and to addressany issues arising during the pre-application phase.

Regarding the waiver of item 2 in your letter, to advance the timefor submittal of additional study requests, we understand thismeans there will be one opportunity for such requests provided onrelease of the environmental study reports (prior to thePreliminary Draft Environmental Assessment) and another uponrelease of the draft License Application. Provided this iscorrect, we agree to the waiver.

Finally, we request that the monthly progress report be provided tothis office. Please direct any questions to Brad Smith at (907)271-5006.

• Morrisaska Office SupervisorResources Management Division

Roo

ooooooofllJ

o[J

oooo]

cc: USFWS,DGC,ADFG - Anchorage

opolarconsult alaska, inc.o~NGINEERS • SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS

oTo PARTICIPANTS


February 7, 1997

Daniel Hertrich, CE


Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.1503 W 33 Ave #310Anchorage, AK 99503

Attached for your review and approval is the Communications Protocol AVEC proposesto follow during this consolidated process. If you agree, and support the guidelinesattached, please sign the attached letter of support and return to:

Approval ofCommunications Protocol RequestedSubject:

AVEC asks for your approval and support on consolidating the NEPA process. AVECintends for the preparation of the Project License Application to coincide with theenvironmental review of the Project. Under this process, the EA will be submitted to theCommission with the License Application in order to provide a more efficient andexpeditious licensing process.

Please note that this process requires certain waivers to be granted by the Commission.By agreeing to this you accept waiving of the following:

• Waive exhibit E requirements by substituting the draft environmental assessment.• Advance the time for submittal of request for additional studies to the time when

field studies are completed.• Waive the public notice that the project is ready for environmental assessment due

to the APEA already being in place.

As stated in our previous "Notice of intent to do APEA process" (September 12th, 1996),

Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) through their consultant, Polarconsult,intends. to submit to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) theEnvironmental Assessment (EA) as part of the Application for License in place of ExhibitE.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

V~JL.#

ooooooooBooooJJ]----------------_.. _------

ooooouooooooooo[J

~

g]

cc:Eric MeyersWayne DolezalClaire HollandAli IliffGary ProkoshTim SmithCharles WallsRick BernsTim RumfeltSteven HomArlene MurphyWalt BoyleSecretaryWalter EbellKelly Simeonoff, Jr.Linda FreedU. GrossEmil ChristiansenTony AzuyakBrad MeiklejohnDon KohleBrad SmithJay BellingerGary Wheeler

---------------


This responds to your request for the Federal and State legal viewson how the covenants pertaining to the Old Harbor NativeCorporation (ORNC) fee lands purchased by the United States lastyear relate to the proposed Old Harbor hydroelectric proj ect.Since our previous conversations, you have confirmed with theproject sponsors that the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) wascorrect in its determination that a majority of the facilities andactivities will take place on lands owned in fee by the UnitedStates within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, at least a

- portion of which are subj ect to certain restrictive covenantscontained in the Warranty Deed from ORNC to the United States andthe Conservation Easement from ORNC to the State of Alaska, both ofwhich were executed on September 27, 1995. The remaining portionof the project facilities will occur on lands owned by ORNC and theCity of Old Harbor.

Were this project to receive a license to proceed, there is nodoubt that the contemplated construction activities would violatethe restrictive covenants negotiated by ORNC to satisfy its concernthat the fee lands would be "maintained in their natural, pristinestate, in perpetuity, in accordance with the terms of theRestrictive Covenant contained in the State Conservation Easementsand the Warranty Deeds .... " See, Section 5. a. of the Agreement forthe Sale, Purchase and Donation of Lands and Interests in LandsBetween Old Harbor Native Corporation and the United States ofAmerica, dated May 23, 1995 (Agreement).

Under the terms of Section II. (1) of the Warranty Deed and Sectiona. of the State Conservation Easement, activities such as theconstruction of buildings or fences and the manipulation oralteration of natural water courses are generally prohibited. Thelisted exceptions to these prohibitions, for refuge or conservationresearch or management or for conveying information to the public·to protect public safety or natural resources, are inapplicable tothe proposed proj ect . Furthermore, there is no clause in theWarranty Deed or State Conservation Easement comparable to Section3. (c) of the ORNC Conservation Easement which permits the Refuge

oooooooooooBuoo

UJ


OFFICE OF THE SOLICITORWashington. D.C. 20240

IN REPLY REFER 10:

C. Walter Ebell, Esq.Jarnin, Ebell, Bolger & Gentry300 Mutual First Building605 First AvenueSeattle, WA 98104

Dear Walt:

./'- JAMiN, EBELl., BOlGER &GE

A Professional Corporatfo(

LtL; 0 2 1996

SEAme,WASHI~

.._----._--------------------------

Manager to approve otherwise prohibited activities upondetermination that "they are compatible with the purposes of thisEasement."

While the Warranty Deed sets forth no process for approving suchactivities, we have consulted with the u.s. Department of Justice,and are all in agreement that the three parties to the PurchaseAgreement and related conveyance instruments, OHNC, the State andthe United States, have the discretion to act jointly to modifythese restrictive covenants as to a particular project if it iscompatible with the restoration and conservation purposes of theWarranty Deed and the State Conservation Easement. We have not yetconcluded what format such an instrument would take, but we believethat it must be suitable for recording in the Kodiak Island landrecords. Additionally, both governments believe that the TrusteeCouncil should be consulted on any changes to these deeds, andtheir concurrence obtained as long as the Council remains inexistence.

As the Department of the Interior's February 22, 1996, letter tothe Federal Energy Regulatory Commission indicated, this projectnecessitates the undertaking of certain fish, wildlife and habitatstudies to assess the impact of the proposed proj ect. Any decIsionby the State and the United States to consent to modifying therestrictive covenants for this proj ect remains subj ect to theresults of these studies and the outcome of the FERC licensingprocess. Assuming that studies indicate the proj ect will result inno more than minor to negligible impacts to fish and wildliferesources, that likely impacts can be successfully mitigated, andthat the project is deemed compatible with the purposes for whichthe Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge was established and compatiblewith the restoration and conservation purposes of the Warranty Deedand State Conservation Easement, we would seek modification to therestrictive covenants to permit this project with the concurrenceof the Trustee Council. Both the Alaska Department of Fish andGame (ADF&G) and FWS would be pleased to work with the projectsponsor in designing the necessary studies.

The FWS is the lead for the,Department of the Interior on issuesrelated to the studies and evaluations and judgments concerningproj ect impacts. Contact with FWS should be through Jay Bellinger,the Refuge Manager. The ADF&G has the lead for the State. Theircontact person is Janet Kowalski, the Director of the Division ofHabitat and Restoration. Regina Sleater, Esq. of the DOI AlaskaRegional Solicitor's Office, is representing the Department in theFERC proceeding and questions involving that proceeding should be

o6oooooooooo]

]

]

JJj

]

C. Walter Ebell, Esq 2

directed to her. In the meantime, we would be happy to work withyou and respond to any questions you may have pertaining to the oilspill restoration program and the terms of the purchase agreements.We trust that this letter is responsive to your concerns.

oj

Joj

JJJ]

]

]

]

]

]

JJJJ]

C. Walter Ebell, Esq

r~o~~cr~igr-~TilleryAssistant Attorn y GeneralAlaska Department of Law

cc: Janet Kowalski, ADF&GJay Bellinger, FWSRegina Sleater, Esq., DOI

3

Sincerely,

/2:;NO RothAttorney-AdviserConservation &Wildlife DivisionOffice of the solicitor

Please copy this office with any corrections or comments to the polarconsult alaska, inc.correspondence.

Attached is the cover letter for the documents listed above. Please let the agent, DanHertrich, polarconsult alaska, inc., or me know if you have not received a copy of the packetsent my Mr. Hertrich on September 12th.

There is one correction I pointed out today by phone to Mr. Hertrich regarding theCuiiiinUiiicatioii5 p:-otocol inciuded in the packet. The project agem is usuaily responsible tordetermining if a summary of a meeting is required and he would be the one to prepare thesummary. DGC is available to facilitate any interagency meetings requested by the AlaskaCoastal Management Program participants.

q/u,!q6


C1 PIPELINE COORDINATOR'S OFFICE411 WEST 4TH AVENUE, SUITE2CANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501-2343PH: (907) 271-4317IFAX: (907) 272·0690

Ali Iliff, DNRClaire Holland, DNR, DPORTim Rumfelt, DECLinda Freed, KIBU.L. Gross, Koniag, Inc.Charles Walls, AVECDaniel Hertrich, polarconsult alaska, inc.

CENTRAL OFFICEP.O. BOX 110030JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811-0030PH: (907) 465-35621FAX: (907) 465·3075

C1

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGETDIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR

NOTICE OF APEA PROCESS & COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLOLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTSTATE I.D. NO. AK9512-21AA (FERC 11561-000)

Don Kuhle, COEGary Prokosch, DNR, DMWMTim Smith, DNR, SHPOWayne Dolezal, DFGSteven Horn, DOTPFKelly Simeonoff, Jr., KANAMichael Strzelecki, FERC

SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE3601 'C' STREET, SUITE 370ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503-5930PH: (907) 269-74701FAX: (907) 561-6134

September 23, 1996

Dear ACMP Reviewers:

SUBJECT:

cc:

Sincerely,

N:\ADMPROJ\OLDHARBO.LT1

Cb~~~-Arlene MurphyProject Review Coordinator

01·A35LH

ooo~o

ooooooooJJJJ]

j

J

September 12, 1996


OLD lIARBOR PROJECT PARTICIPANTS

Progress Report 1, Draft Communications Protocol

To:

Subject:

Attached you will find the cover letter for the first progress report, the currentcommunications log, the current list of interested parties, and a draft communicationsprotocol.

Daniel Hertrich, CE

Feel free to make comments on the communications protocol. When I send out the finalcommunications protocol I will ask everyone to give their consent to the APEA processand the communications protocol.

If yo.u have any questions or would like copies of communications feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

v4iLtdcc:

- Eric Meyers~Wayne Dolezal- Ali Iliff- Gary Prokosh-Charles Walls--:-RickBems'" Brad Meiklejohn- Tim Rumfelt- Arlene Murphy

- Secretary- Walter Ebell- Linda Freed

- Emil Christiansen- Tony Azuyak-< Don Kohler- Brad Smith- Jay Bellinger- Gary Wheeler


opolarconsult alaska, inc.oENGINEERS· SURVEYORS· ENERGY CONSULTANTS

oooooooooo

JJJ]

J]

AVEC (through Polarconsult) intends to perform the applicant prepared environmentalassessment (APEA). Polarconsult is requesting that the Commission agree to advisethem in this process.

Polarconsult has identified a list of interested parties. This list is attached. Also attachedis a proposed communications protocol. This communications protocol is being sent tothe list of interested parties. Shortly afterwards, a request will be made asking for theirassent to the protocol and the APEA process.

Alaska Village Electric Corporation (AVEC) a preliminary permit (effective March 1,1996) issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). AVEC hasdesignated Polarconsult to perform investigations, prepare the initial stage consultationdocument and the draft environmental assessment, act as liaison officer with interestedparties to keep them informed as to the progress of the project, and perform otheractivities regarding the filing ofa license.


September 12, 1996


Tony AzuyakDon KohlerBrad SmithJay BellingerGary Wheeler

Brad MeiklejohnTim RumfeltArlene MurphySecretaryWalter EbellLinda FreedEmil Christiansen

Notice ofintent to do APEA process

THE SECRETARY


888 FIRST STREET NE

WASHINGTON DC 20426

Dear Secretary,

Subject:

Daniel Hertrich, CE

cc:Eric MeyersWayne DolezalAli IliffGary ProkoshCharles WallsRick Bems

Sincerely,

p~/h~

opolarconsult alaska, inc.oE'NGINEERS· SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS

ooooooooooUJJJ]

j

]

F960B071.DOC

Date: 08/08/96FAX Number: 102-Zt q. 0(7..5

No. of pages including this page: 1


Anchorage, Alaska 99503-3661Phone: (907) 258-2420

FAX: (907) 258-2419

Old Harbor FERC Permitting - List of Interested Parties

Daniel Hertrich

Michael StrzeleckiFederal Energy Regulatory Commission

Attn:To:From:

Subject:

Tentative List of Interested Parties

We have tentatively identified the you and the following list ofpeople as being on our "list of interested parties"for the FERC permitting process at Old Harbor. Please review your infonnation and make any correctionsneeded. If you feel that you or your agency does not belong on this list please let us know. Also, if you think thatthere is a party affected by this project that is not on this list please let us know. If we have all of yourinfonnation down correctly you don't need to do anything.

Your infonnation:Name Michael StrzeleckiAgency Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionAddress 888 First Street NE, Washington D.C. 20426Voice Phone 202-219-2827Fax 'Zt:::v.z. - 2-./ q -0 I 2.-'ST"'mail. .

Tony Azuyak Old Harbor Tribal CouncilJay Bellinger U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Kodiak National Wildlife RefugeRick Berns City of Old HarborEmil Christiansen Old Harbor Native CorporationWayne Dolezal Alaska Department of Fish and GameWalter Ebell Jamin, Ebell, Bolger, and GentryLinda Freed Kodiak Island BoroughDon Kohler U.S. Corps ofEngineersArthur Martin Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Portland Regional OfficeMaureen McCrea Alaska State Division of Governmental

CoordinationEric Meyers Alaska Department of Environmental Exxon Valdez Trustee Council

ConservationGary Prokosh Alaska Department ofNatural Resources Division of Mining and Water

ManagementBrad Smith U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA National Marine Fisheries ServiceMichael Strzelecki Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCharles Walls Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.

try Wheeler U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

oo

ooooo

DooooJJJJ]

j

]

ooooooooooo

lJ[J

o]

9]

AVEC °ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.

July 31, 1996

To our members in Old Harbor,

We are working to develop a hydroelectric project for you. This note is to report we aremaking progress, but have a long ways to go before we start building it.

The site is one suggested by Mayor Berns. This site diverts water from the east branch ofthe east fork of Barling Creek to a powerhouse at Lagoon Creek. The plant will provideabout 330 kW to Old Harbor and eliminate most of the diesel power production. The hydroproject will not have a reservoir. It will be what is called "run of the river." So, when thecreek runs low in the winter time then the diesels will be used.

Our challenge right now is to get a permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC) to build the project. The permit requires that the effects of the project on theenvironment be stated. This statement is based on a description of the environment, whichincludes animals, fish, plants, birds, aesthetics (appearance), antiquities (cultural resources)and geology. The permit requirements also ask for comments from the public and otherinterested entities such as the Refuge Manager. The purpose of all this work is to provideinformation which will enable a decision to be made if the project is a proper use of thepublic's resources. The term used for this project is an environmental assessment (EA).

The permit process normally takes about three years before construction can be started. Weare in our first year of the permit process. For a small project like this. the cost of thepermit process can cost as much as, or more than. building the project. The permitting forthis project is more complicated than most because it is located on Refuge and trust lands..We have obtained a preliminary permit from FERC that allows us to proceed with theenvironmental investigations.

Our environmental investigation work will begin in August when a fish biologist, and birdpeople will survey the project for fish in Barling Creek and Lagoon Creek. birds, and plantsin the vicinity of the project. At the same time our project engineer, Polarconsult Alaska.will locate the project on the ground and do some minor soils exploration. Information fromthis work will become part of an EA. The survey team will need support from thecommunity as to labor. equipment, room and board. During the survey any of you with aninterest are welcome to come and see what is being done. There will be more fish andantiquities work done in September and more fish work near the end uf October.

4831 Eagle Street • Anchorage. Alaska 99503-7497 • Phone (907) 561-1818 • In State (800) -l78-1818 • Fa" (907) 561-2388

oU',·~L

ooooooooooJ]

]

J']

j

J

One of the requirements to make this project feasible is to make sure that it results in apositive environmental advantage to the community, refuge and trust lands. If we can use theproject to enhance fish, provide a better source of fresh water, reduce the risks of usingdiesel fuel. reduce engine noise, and reduce the cost of electricity over time there can be anumber of positive environmental benefits. You may, however, think of other benefits whic~

can be positive. If you do please bring them to our or Polarconsult's attention.

Public hearings on this project will be held in Old Harbor and in Kodiak. You will all beasked to participate in the hearings. Community support for this project is very important.We are very interested in your opinions. and information you can provide on this project. Atthis juncture we expect the public meetings will be held in late September or in October whenmost people have returned from fishing.

The project is estimated to cost $1.6 million. While the environmental work is 'going on weare also working on finding financing for this project. At this date it appears likely that mostof the cost of the project can be paid by a combination of state and federal grants. Thebalance would likely be paid for from AVEC's funds. If we succeed in getting most of theproject grant funded, then we can lower the cost of power in Old Harbor when we get theproject on line. That is our goal; to stabilize or reduce the cost of power in Old Harbor overthe long term.

Of course, the economic benefit to Old Harbor will begin now. The people doing theenvironmental work will be spending money in Old Harbor. When the project moves intoconstruction, workers will be hired in Old Harbor to build it. However, we must keep theproject under tight management so that the costs don't rise. Whatever costs the grant(s)doesn't pay must be paid by the electric rate payers. So, the less expensive the project is tobuild then the lower the cost of electricity will be for the Old Harbor electric rate payers(that's you!).

As we work to develop this hydroelectric project for you we will periodically send out anupdate like this letter to our members in Old Harbor. We remain optimistic that thishydroelectric project will be permitted by the government and will prove to be a veryimportant and wise investment for the long term well being of Old Harbor.

Sincerely,

~~~~,,~~Charles Y.~President & CEO

cc: AVEC Board of DirectorsGovernor Tony KnowlesSenator Ted Stevens

Our agcncle& have been contacted by Walt Sbell, counsel to Old Harbor Native COIpOration,who has requested clarification for you conceming the effect of the Con.servation Basementgranted by OHNC to the United States and the State of Alaska on your application fol' the OldI:Ial'bor Hydroelectric Project.

As part of the .restoration program for the &ron Valia oil spill, OHNC sold and donated tothe United Suues and the State of Ala.ska certain interests in lands. We are advised byMr. EbeU that under tlm project you currently ea:vision. there would be no disturbance of, oractivities CDndUCted on, the land! purchased by the United SUs in fee. The project would,however, involve a portion. of the lands which are subject to the ConservaEion Easementgnnted by OHNC to the United States and the SlaV: of Alaska Dn September 27, 1995, as wellas other lands within the Kodiak National WUdlife Refuge. By letter of Februaty 22, 1996,the Department of the Interim wrote to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. requestingthat the project. applicant undertake certain fish, wildlife and habitat studies to asse!S the.impact of the proposed project.

Prior to your undertaking the expenditure of funds for these studies, you dc:iirc c1arifi.cationwhether the ConselVation Easement is an absolute bar to this projecl. We are pleased to adviseyou that the Conservation Easeme:nt does contain provisions which would pmnit the approvalof the project, assuming that lhe results of the studies are favorable and that recommendedmitigation measures are implemented.

DRAFT BNR. 4/15/96

JUH-24-96 MON 02:1B PM AG'S AND EMVIRONMENTAL P.02FAX NO, 907 27B 1022


FISH AND wn..DLIPE SERVICErOt t B. Tudor Rd.

Ancl1oTugC. Ala:ska 99.5Q3~6199

Mr. Charles Y. WallsGeneral ManagerAlaska Village Electri.c Cooperative6831 Eagle StreetAndl0nlJc, Alaska 99501-7497

Dear M1:. Walls:

ooo'0'

ooooooDooooJ]

J]

------------------ -- _._-

(c) The Grantor may undertake activities upon the Protected Ptoperty that areotherwise prohibited under subsection (a)(U)-(vii), only if such activities havebeen authori2ed iD. writing at the discretion of the Grantee after a detenninationby the Refuse MaIIager that they ate compatible wllh tbe purposes of thisEasement.

The ability of the Kodiak Refuge Manager to gxant such approval is thus dependent upon the.reSults of the requested studies. In the event that the aetiviti=l for this project wcr= to bemodified durinB the licensing process, you should also be aware that the terms of the deeds forthe lands sold by OBNC to the United States and the State of Aluka arc somewhat different,and that there is no provision in the deeds which is diIcct1y comparable to the foregoing.

Section 3. Prohmited Use'!!

We have enclosed for your reference a copy of the entite Conaervation Easement. Thefollowing provision is responsive to your conccms:

P. U3FAX NO, 907 276 7022JUN-24-96 MON 02:19 PH AG'S ANC ENVIRONMENTALooooonoo

Should you have any queslions, please do not hesitate to conmct Jay Bellinger) JidugeManager, Kodiak National. Wildlife Refuge, 907487~2600.

Both. the State of AIuka and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would be pleased to workwith you in designing the ne:c:essary studies u well as to avoid any impacts on the 3:estorationof the natural resources injured by the oil spill.

DoDooJJJ]

j

]

CommissionerAlaska. Department of Fish &. Game

Enclosure

CC: Walt EbeIl, Esq.

SincerelYJ

J)~,rQh-Regional Director, :Region 7U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

N:\ADMPROJ\OLDHARBO.MM 1

No action is required on your part at this time. We simply wanted to take the opportunityto advise you these preliminary documents have been submitted. Please let me know if youhave any questions.

MEMORANDUMSTATE OF ALASKA

-...

AK9512-21 AA

March 29, 1996

Old Harbor HydroelectricIssued Preliminary PermitProject No. 11561-000

SUBJECT:

ACMP Reviewers DATE:

Ariene Murph~ FILE NO:Project Review Coordinator

FROM:

TO:

At the first stage of consultation, there is usually not an "application", and reviewers areasked to respond to the applicant by identifying concerns, issues, what further informationwill be needed, and what studies may need to be done. At the second stage of consultation,the applicant submits a draft application, and another informational review occurs duringwhich reviewers evaluate how the issues they identified in phase one were addressed.

Office of Management and BudgetDIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION3601 "C" Street, Suite 370Anchorage, Alaska 99503Telephone: (907) 269-7475 Fax: (907) 561-6134

Attached, for your information, please find copies of the notice that the Federal EnergyRegulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a preliminary permit to Alaska Village ElectricCooperative, Inc for their proposed hydroelectric project at Old Harbor. The Division ofGovernmental Coordination (DGC) typically routes these preliminary notices to reviewers, foryour information.

At this point, the applicant takes any comments from the second phase of consultation andmakes any necessary changes to the application before submitting a revised application toFERC. We receive these revised applications, and consider them "draft" until FERC acceptsthem and issues the public notice.

As you may know, FERC licenses go through a long, three-phased consultation processbefore review actually begins. Phases one and two of the consultation process areinformational only; the consistency review will begin during phases three when FERC has'formally accepted the application and has issued a public notice.

o

ooD

ooooo

0..·..·..·,f·

i

oooo01 '

',,>

o,.r]'.

9]

ooooooQ

Booo

D

Old Harbor HydroelectricAK9512-21 AA

cc:· Don Kuhle, COEAlice Iliff, DNRClaire Holland, DNR, DPORTim Smith, DNR, SHPOGary Saupe, DECWayne Dolezal, DFGLinda Freed, KIBSteven Horn, DOTPFU.L. Gross, Koniag, Inc.Kelly Simeonoff, Jr., KANACharles Walls, AVECMichael Strzelecki, FERC

-2- March 29, 1996Scoping

JJ)

]

3J N:\ADMPROJ\OLDHARBO.MMl

------------------------_._-

Date: 03/20/96FAX Number:


Anchorage, Alaska 99503-3661Phone: (907) 258-2420

FAX: (907) 258-2419

No. of pages including this page: 5

\V

~Earle AusmanSee BelowSee BelowAttn:

From:To:

Subject: OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT

Attn:

Arlene Murphy ADGC ~ 561-6134

Wayne Dolezal ADF&G ~ 267-2464

Gary Wheeler USFWS ~ 271-2786

Brad Smith NMFS ~ 271-3030

Don Kuhle USCOE ~ 753-5567

Linda Freed KIB(teleconference) ~ 486-9374

'"'ear Attendees:

F9603181

cc:Mark Teitzel, AVEC

un behalf of AVEC, thank you for attending last Wednesdays meeting regarding the Old Harbor Hydroelectricproject at the Division of Governmental Coordination. The meeting was very helpful in identifying your concernsand ob~aining suggestions on how to proceed through the variety of permitting issues.

Attached is a recount of the issues discussed and suggestions. Please take a moment and read this memo foraccuracy. Mail or fax additional comments you might have to our office.

If there are any other questions about the project that I may clarify, do not hesitate to call.

sm~

Earle Ausman, EPOLARCONSULT

oooDDDQ

[]

o[)

oo[J

[]

ooop[]

]

polarconsult alaska, inc.F:NGINEERS • SURVEYORS • ENERGY CONSULTANTS

PURPOSE OF MEETING

• To acquaint involved agency personnel with the project.• Identify agency requirements in order to obtain a pennit for this project.

BACKGROUND

PCA provided slides, photographs and written infonnation that included drawings of theproject's features. The various features were discussed and included the following:

• A narrow trail will provide access to· the powerhouse by four-wheeler or lighttracked vehicle. The Refuge's assistance with selecting the trail alignmentwas solicited.

• Construction is intended to be perfonned using a helicopter to move materialsin place.

• A permanent road is not intended for use to construct the pipeline.• Heavy equipment work is intended to be performed using a small tracked

backhoe that would make one trip up the pipeline route and work its waydown.

• Wherever practical the pipeline will be buried. In some locations it will bepartially buried.

• For some gully crossings the pipeline will be placed on a trestle.• The intake will consist of a small diversion.• This pipeline will be 16 inches in diameter, black polyethylene and steel.• This plant will have a load governor that will run the plant at full output de

pending on the amount of water available.


ATTENDEES:

Arlene MurphyMark TeitzelWayne DolezalGary WheelerBrad SmithDon KuhleLinda FreedEarle AusmanDavid AusmanMissingMissing

oooo[]

J]

uo[J

Jo[J

oo[J

UDj

]

SUBJECT:

DATE:

MEMO

Old Harbor Hydroelectric ProjectGovernmental Coordination Meeting

March 13, 1996, 13:30 PM

ADGCAVECADF&GUSFWSNMFSUSCOEKIB(teleconference)PCAPCAADECADNR

OId-har1FERCIDGC1M960313

Page 2

• The plant's maximum estimated flow will be about 7.5 cfs which can be carried by a 3.5 foot wide, 8 inch deep tailrace channel.

• Electricity in excess of the communities usual needs is proposed to be used toheat water or public buildings.

Polarconsult (PCA) explained that the hydroelectric plant is small and the project/communitycannot afford to spend much for environmental studies. Therefore, it would be appreciated if theagencies will keep this in mind and keep the cost of requests low while still meeting their requirements.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Land StatusExxon Valdez Land: Of particular concern is the Exxon Valdez parcel and its covenants. A copyof the covenants was provided by Mr. Dolezal.

The Refuge has stated they do not believe there will be a problem getting right-of-way (ROW)over their land as long as the environmental requirements are met. Mr. Wheeler stated that Fishand Wildlife Services (FWS) would remove the land from potential wildness status. This wouldbe an internal process with public comment.

Walt Ebel, attorney for Old Harbor Native Association, has assured AVEC they support the project. and will contribute land if needed. It is presumed that the State of Alaska will support thismmoruse.

OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTGovernment Coordination MeetingMarch 18, 1996

It appears that the single greatest uncertainty is the legality of building this project within thecovenants on the Exxon Valdez land. An environmental lawyer in the State Attorney General'soffice, Alex Swiderski, 269-5100, was cited by Mr. Dolezal as a point of contact. Mr. Wheelerwas asked if he had received any information from the Solicitors office in Washington. No information has been provided as of this time.

AVEC does not want to move forward with permitting since it is not appropriate to spend OldHarbor's money unless there is reasonable assurance a project is legally possible. To resolve thisissue, it was suggested that AVEC solicit a letter from Interior that states a ROW can be legallygranted for this purpose. A letter will be written requesting this assurance.

Zoning Concerns:Ms. Freed of the Kodiak Island Borough (KIB) stated that the borough supports hydroelectricprojects as an appropriate and beneficial land use. This project is split by the KIB boundary withconservation land zoned to the North and SFR zoning to the South. A conditional use permitusually takes 1-2 months to obtain where a re-zone requires 3-4 months.

Fish ConcernsThe agencies agreed with the January 18th letter from USDFG and the February 22nd letterwritten by the Dept ofInterior.

Fish Survey: The quantification of fish in the tributary to Barling Creek and in Lagopn Creekneeds to be performed.

oQ

ooooD8ooooo]

JJ]

j

]

Old-harIFERCIDGC/M960313

Page 3

Mr. Dolezal said that salmon ascend Lagoon Creek almost a mile above the powerhouse locationas reported from aerial surveys. A ground survey is needed to check this. A baseline surveyneeded for salmon and for other resident species such as Dolly Varden. Mr. Dolezal suggestedthe survey include adults, juveniles; particularly silver salmon fry and eggs. Such a survey shouldaddress erosion effects, life functions, and incubation. Mr. Dolezal offered to supply a list of biologists for this purpose.

We discussed the fact that Mayor Rick Berns has reported the tributary as going dry and thatparts ofLagoon Creek were dry as well when Mr. Ausman visited it.

Mr. Dolezal stated that the tailrace will require barriers to prevent fish from spawning in it toavoid potential de-watering of eggs.

Mr. Wheeler's concerns are in part a function of how far do fish extend up the drainage and theamount of water diverted as a percentage of the total nonnal stream flow. If fish are in this area,the survey should be able to predict the effects of a 10-12 cfs reduction in flow will have on thewetted·perimeter. Ifthere are not many fish in this location or the percentage is small, then Mr..Wheeler indicated he would not be as concerned. Mr. Wheeler would like water samples to becollected during the winter and summer seasons to compare water chemistry. Since the dividebetween the streams is close, the general consensus was that there will be no significant differences.

Stream Gauging

A gauge exists just below the confluence of the two branches of the Barling Creek Tributary.Last fall the State put a gauge at the proposed intake site on the east fork as well. Mr. Ausmanstated that it appeared that the diversion would drain about 25% of the area with the balancedraining to the tributary of Barling Creek. Also, since the plant used a maximum of 7.5 cfs mostof the time, the withdrawal will have little effect on water flows. The only exception to this iswhen flows at the diversion drop below 7.5 cfs during cold periods in the winter. These are alsothe periods of maximum demand. However, during this period Lagoon Creek will be augmentedwith added water and should increase in productivity.

Vehicular Access ConcernsAlthough there are currently ATV trails that run in the vicinity it was agreed that all roads andtrails associated with the hydroelectric would be closed off and restricted from access by gates,fences or other means.

Wildlife ConcernsThere will need to be a discussion about bears, and a survey for birds which include HarlequinDucks, Marbled Murrelets, and eagles. Summer is the time to be concerned with them. Mr.Ausman asked if it is better that the Refuge conduct this survey. Mr. Wheeler said he wouldcontact the bear representative in the area and that the bald Eagle survey should be focused oncottonwood trees near the power plant.

Plant ConcernsMr. Ausman asked if the Refuge had a botanist that could perform this work under reimbursement. Mr. Wheeler said he would check to see if an agency botanist is available.

FERC Filing Issues

OLD HARBOR HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTGovernment Coordination MeetingMarch 18, i 996

Q

80,koDDIT[J[]

oooooo~J

9]

Drinking Water System: The community's water system does not meet the regulations under theSurface Water Treatment Act since it removes shallow water from under the mouth of LagoonCreek. The community would like the hydroelectric plant to provide domestic water. Water fromthe project will be taken well above the area frequented by people and can provide enough pressure to run the extra filtration without pumping that is otherwise required. If this is implemented,Ms. Freed said that the Borough could provide special zoning to restrict access to the project inrecognition of it as a part of the local watershed.

Mr. Smith asked if the intent that there be an applicant environmental assessment (EA). The answer is yes but it would be prepared with very close coordination with the agencies, particularlythe Refuge as it will save time and should save costs.

Wetlands and 404 Permit IssuesMr. Kuhle said that less than 10 cyd of concrete in intake does not require a permit, 25 cyd requires notification and above this will need a 404 permit. Additionally wet lands up to 1/2 acrecan be crossed. When pipeline and trail alignment have been established it will be furnished tothe Corps for their appraisal. It appears the pipeline may be able to proceed under a nation widepermit.

Community InterestsHabitat Enhancement: Mr. Ausman reported the community had expressed an interest in converting the lagoon to all fresh water. The agencies were asked what their opinion was on this,apart from the practicable problems of embankment· and property ownership. There was nodefinite answer to this question; however, this was suggested as a method of enhancing the productivity of the area. The agencies were asked for their suggestions in general of how this project could be used to improve the environment.

Economic Enhancement: The community has also expressed an interest in putting in a smallfreezer which offers local value-added processing. Lower power costs will help in achieving thisgoal.

Q

oooooo8ooooonU

Government Coordination MeetingMarch 18, 1996

OLD HARBOR HYDROELECfRIC PROJECf/

]

]

Jj

]Old-harIFERCIDGC/M960313

Page 4

Both upstream and downstream passage must be provided

Dear Secretary Cashell:

MAH ~.~ 199B

RECflVf. r .

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Marine Fisheries Service

- 222 W. 7th Avenue, 4#43Anchorage, Alaska 99513·7577

March 14, 1996

Re: FERC No. 11561,000Old Harbor Project

Hon. Lois D. CashellSecretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission888 First StreetWqshington, D.C. 20426

We have recently met with the applicant for Federal EnergyRe9ulatory commission (FERC) Project 11561-000, Old Harbor project.The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has also discussedthis proposal with the Alaska Department of ~ish and Game, U.S.Fish and wildlife Service ... and the Kodiak Island Borough. i'hroughthese discussions, we believe the proposed Old Harbor project ~ay

adversely. impact the fish-and wildlife resources within the projectarea. The proposed facility is a cross-basin diversion which wQuldremove water from an unnamed waterway (Barling Bay tributary) nearOld Harbor and divert flows through an intake structure andpenstock to another unnamed creek, (locally called Lagoon ~eek).

Both waterways contain spawning populations of pacific salmon.Pink, coho, and ohum salmon and Dolly Varden occur. in thesestreams, although there is little site-specific information on thenumber or extent of use. The project has the potential to impactfishery resources through flow reductions within the Barling Baytributary, flow reductions or elimination within the by-pass reachof Lagoon Creek, and through increased flows below the tailracewithin Lagoon Creek. The applicant must conduct studiQS todescribe the extent of fish use within these affected waters. Thisshould include surveys to enumerate adult spawning populations,juvenile studios to describe rearing habitat Use, and .apping ofspawning habitat. Flow studies of these drainages must also bedone to describe the relative changes of the project on naturallyoccurring tlo~ patterns.

NMFS's primary fishery concerns regarding this project includeupstream and downstream passage; provision of adequate instreamflow regimes for spawning, rearing, and miqration; and maintenanceof water quality for anadromous fish. Each of these areas isdiscussed below.

8oQ

oQ

ooooDJJJ]

JJj

J------ ---

DooBoD[]

BooouJJ]

J]

j

]

project structures or operations 'Would. cause delay I injury f orexcessive stress to migrating fish. Required passage facilitiesmust be installed during project construction and must be operatedat all times that fish are present at the project. In order tosatisfy these objectiveE; I it is necessary that the applicantdevelop a proposal for any necessary fish passage facilitiesacceptable to NMFS as part of the license application. Theproposal should define type, location, size, method of operation,and. other pertinent facility characteristics. It should reflect

._state and federal fisheries'agency input and design crite.ria. NMF'Sstaff are available to meet with the applicant to discuss passagerequirements, design criteria, and other aspects of fish passagefacilitie.s. All passage facilities must .be designed and lUaintainedto function properly through the full range of flollts normallyoccurring during fish migration periods. Also; the facili tiesproposed should reflect tbe results of site-specific studiesconducted under the preliminary permit as well as consultation withappropriate fishery agencies.

Adequate. flow regimes and water quality are critical for anadromousfish. consequently, flow regimes and water quality sufrfcient forsuccessful spawning, rearing, and migration must be established andmaintained through and downstream of pruject area where needed. Ifflow reduction, diversion, or modification of fl.ow regimes areanticipated in the operation scenario for this project, anadromousfisheries could be adversely affected not only in the inunediateproject area but in the entire system downstream or the facility.To address these matters, flow stUdies must be performed under thepreliminary permit to determine tlow regimes· through thG proj9ctthat will conserve and protect stocks of anadromous fish in theaffeoted drainages. specific flow regime proposals based onstUdies and acceptable to NMFS must be submitted as part or thelicense application.

Adequate water quality is also essential to the continuedproduction of' salmon. possible impacts to water quality from thisproject may include several or all of the following:

A. Construction impacts such as siltation of spawninggravels. Constructipn should proceed at times of leastimpact (consultation with NMFS or state biologists willidentity critical periods for fish protection).

B. Temperature elevation or reduction which may causereduced fisb growth or disease.

C. Disruption of flow patterns necessary for adult andjuvenile fish mi.gration and survival including rapid orlarge flow fluctuations.

D. Lack of gravel accretion downstream of any diversions'orimpound~ents due to blockage of gravel movement whichresUlts in reduced spawning habitat in the future.

oooooDU8oo]

J]

]

JJ.J

~

J

During the term of the preliminary permit, these and any otherimpacts anticipated with 'the construction and operation of thisproject should be identified and specific solutions proposed.

Effective fish passage, flo~ regimes, and water quality conditionsare intended to avoid losses to existing and potentjal.anadromous~ish resources. Despite ~aximum use of these mitigation methods,unavoidable losses to fish resources may occur either during orafter construction.. Compensation in the form of fish habitatimprovements" artificial production. or s i1l1ilar methods is requiredto fully replace such unavoidable losses~ An initial plan whichrecognizas contingencies such as unanticipated construction impactsmust be developed as part of the license application. Subsequentrefinements or modification of this plan may be necessary once theproject hegins operation and success of mitigation measures may beassessed.

We are providing the above criteria to assist tne applicant indeveloping the work plan for preliminary permit investigationsspecified in Article 10.· We request the applicant provide us acopy of all draft work plans to meet preliminary .permitrequirements, including expected completion dates for majorelements. To assist us in our review, we also request copies ofany periodic progreSs reports as specified by Article g of thepreliminary permit.

We are looking forward to working with your staff and the applicanton the Old Harbor Project. Mr. Brad Smith of my staff has beenassigned to this project and can be contacted at (907) 271-5006.

sincerely,

orris ,aska Office SupervisorReSources Management Division

cc:,USFWS,ADFG Anchoragec. '{. Walls - Alaska Village Electric cooperative, ,Inc.Michael Strzelecki - FERC, Washington, D.C.

L-J Ll...-J L-J r~ iJ (---] c ) ,------,!I...--.)

C~--) CJ CJ C---J CIJ c:J IJ C---) OJ c=J ·C""""~] [)


Alaska Village ElectricCooperative, Inc.

( 4 EERCf Q, 12 6

projeot No. 11561-000Alaska

the proposed project. Should any other parties intend to holdduring the term of any license issued any of these proprietal.·yrights necessary for project purposes, they must be included ,18joint applicants in any application for license filed. In suchan instance, where parties other than t.he permittee are added "Rjoint applicants for license, the joint application will not beeligible for any permit-based priority. ~ City ofFayetteville. 16 FERC , 61,209 (1981).

On October 25, 1995, the Alaska Village ElectricCooperative, Inc., filed an application for preliminary permitunder section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (Act) for theproposed Old Harbor Project. The project is described in theattached public notice.

The purpose of any preliminary permit is to maintainpriority of application for a license during the term of thepermit while the permittee conducts investigations and securesdata necessary to determine the feasibility of the proposedproject and prepares an acceptable' application for license. Apreliminary permit does" not authorize construction of any projectworks. This permit does require the permittee to conduct certainstudies to address the technical, environmental, and economicfeasibility of the proposed project, but these studies will notcause significant adverse environmental impacts. Should thepermittee find the project to be feasible and file a developmentapplication, notice of the application will be published and allinterested persons and agencies will have an opportunity topresent their views concerning the project and the effects of itsconstruction and operation. Issuance of this preliminary permitis therefore not a major federal action significantly affectingthe quality of the human environment.

There were no motions to intervene filed for this project.Comments filed by interested agencies and individuals have beenfully considered in determining whether to issue this permit.All comments dealing with the potential effects of actuallyconstructing and operating the proposed project are premature atthe preliminary permit stage and thus are not addressed here.

The named permittee is the only party entitled to thepriority of application for license afforded by this preliminarypermit. In order to invoke this permit-based priority in anysubsequent licensing competition, the named permittee must filean application for license as the sole applicant, therebyevidencing its intent to be the sole licensee and to hold allproprietary rights necessary to construct, operate, and maintain

ORDER ISSUING PRELIMINARY PERMIT(Issued March 11, 1996)

o((u{ l'-~ (Muv{c(.{ IThe Director orders:

(A) A preliminary permit is issued for this project tothe Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc., for a periodeffective the first day of the month in which this permit isissued, and ending either 36 months from the effective date or onthe date that a development application submitted by thepermittee has been accepted for filing, whichever occurs first.

(8) This permit is subject to the terms and conditions ofthe Act and related regulations. The permit io also subject Loarticles 1 through 6, set forth in the attached Form P'l, and thefollowing special articles.

Article 7. A liaison officer must be designated to act forthe permittee in keeping appropriate federal, state, and localagencies specified in this permit informed about the progress ofinvestigations throughout the term of the permit. In theinterest of protecting and developing the natural resources andother environmental values of the project. area, the permitteeshall consult with the appropriate federal, regional, state, andlocal agencies in their fields of responsibility and expertise,shall conduct its project investigations in a manner thatprotects the environmental integrity of the area, and shall fUllyexplore all reasonable alternatives to the project andalternative project designs, taking into account impacts onnatural resources and other environmental values. Theseresources and values include but are not limited to thefollowing: forests, land management and treatment, fish,wildlife, recreational and public use, flood regulation, waterand air quality (including water supply, groundwater studies,waste treatment and disposal), public health and safety,archeological, historic, Indian religious and cultural sites,threatened or endangered species of flora and fauna, and scenicand aesthetic values. The permittee shall initiate and conductany studies necessary to determine the impact of the constructionand operation of the proposed project on these natural resourcesand values and to determine measures needed to protect anddevelop them or to provide for their mitigation or replacement,including alternative designs and operational measures, and shallutilize the results of these studies in the preparation of therelevant exhibits or reports required to accompany anyapplication for a license to construct and operate the project.

2

OC-A-3

L-J LLJ L.J LlJ (---J r ) c=J c:::J C~-l CJ CJ c::o [--I CJ c=J r~·n [-0 cr-] [ )

In connection with studies pertaining to archeological, historic,and Indian religious and cultural sites, the permittee shallconsult with the State Historic Preservation Officer for eachstate in which any part of the project would be located and withthe National Park service of the Department of the Interior.

Article 8. At the close of each 6-month period from theeffective date of this permit, the permittee shall file fourcopies of a report with the Secretary, Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, orwith any other officer the Commission may designate, and shallprovide a copy to any entity specified in this order to beconsulted during the permit term. Proof of service on theseentities shall accompany each copy of the report filed withofficers of the Commission. Specifically, the report shalldescribe the purposes and scope of all conferences andinvestigations, identify participants, summarize decisions andconclusions, provide a schedule for completing remaining work,and contain copies of important correspondence and studies orsummaries thereof. Each report shall include a statementsummarizing the permittee'S anticipated date for submitting alicense or exemption application, as appropriate. The firstreport shall include a specific schedule, showing when studytasks will start and when they will be completed. In particular,the report shall address the following items: (1) the studiesconducted during the past 6-month period (copies of studies orsummaries thereof shall be furnished); (2) a summary ofconsultation with the agencies and copies of correspondence andmeeting notes, verifying that such consultations took placeduring the past 6-month period; (3) an outline and summary ofengineering, environmental, and other investigations to beconducted during the ensuing 6-month period to determine thefeasibility of the project, as delineated by article 1; (4) asummary of the consultations with the appropriate federal, state,and interstate resource agencies, and any Indian Tribe affectedby the project that will take place during the ensuing 6-monthperiod, as outlined by articles 7 and 9; and (5) an assessment ofthe feasibility of the project. The appropriate federal, state,and interstate resource agencies, and any Indian Tribe affectedby the project shall be contacted, pursuant to section 4.38 ofthe Commission's regulations (18 C.F.R. 4.38).

Article 9. During the initial period of the permit, thepermittee shall consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serviceof the Department of the Interior, the state fish and gameagencies, and the National Marine Fisheries Service of theDepartment of Commerce, if the project affects anadromous fish,to obtain the agencies' views and recommendations on studies tobe conducted during the term of the permit to assess the effectthat the proposed project might have on fish and wildliferesources and the facilities or measures that may be needed toconserve and develop those resources. A copy of the report on

3

the permittee'S study shall be filed as part of the fiflh ilndwildlife exhibits or reports of any subsequent application forlicense. The permittee shall also consult with and seek theviews and recommendations of any Indian Tribe or Nation withrecognized treaty interests in fish and wildlife resourceD th"t.could be directly affected by the proposed project.

(C) This order is issued under authority delegated to theDirector and constitutes final agency action. Request forrehearing by the Commission may be filed within 30 days £I·olII thedate of issuance of this order, pursuant to 18 C.P.R. 385.713.

~=l. ()l.Q.l~John ClementoDirector, Division

of Project Review

4

L.....J U-J L--.J L.JJ L-J L-J L-.J CJ L...J L.:J C:J [TTl C"OW] CJ CJ [T] r_n,] CT'~] ill "J

PUBLIC NOTICE(ISSUED NOVEMBER 9, 1995)

a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit

b. Project No.: 11561-000

c. Date filed: October 25, 1995

Form P-l(Revised June, l'lB'1)


TERMS AND CONDITIONS OFPRELIMINARY PERMIT

Location:

d.

e.

f.

g.

h.

1.

j.

k.

Applicant: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.

Name of Project: Old Harbor Project

Partially within the Kodiak National WildlifeRefuge (administered by the U.S Fish and WildlifeService), on an unnamed tributary to SitkalidakStrait, near the town of Old Harbor, on KodiakIsland, Alaska. Sections 12, 13, 16, 19, and 20in R26W, T34S.

Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C.§79l(a) - 625(r)

Applicant Contact: Charles Y. WallsGeneral ManagerAlaska Village Electric Cooperative4631 Eagle StreetAnchorage, Alaska 99503-7497(907) 561-1616

FERC Contact: Mr. Michael Strzelecki, (202) 219-2627

Comment Date: January 16, 1996

Description of Project: The proposed Old Harbor Projectwould consist of: (1) a four-foot-high concrete diversionstructure with an intake on the unnamed tributary toSitkalidak Strait; (2) a 3,293-foot-long, 16-inch-diameterHOPE pipeline; (3) an 10,259-foot-long, 16-inch-diametersteel penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing one generatingunit with an installed capacity of 330 kW; (5) a 4,270-footlong transmission line interconnecting with an existingtransmission line in the city of Old Harbor; and (5)appurtenant facilities.

Article 1. The Permittee shall make such engineering an,lother investigations, secure such data, and perform such acts asare necessary to determine the feasibility of the proposed project and, if said project is found to be feasible, to prepare anapplication for license for the project that will be in conformance with current rules and regulations of the Commission. Incarrying out the requirements of this permit the Permittee shall:

A. Install as soon as practicable, and thereaftermaintain, such stream gages and stream-gaging stationsas the District Engineer of the United States Geological Survey having charge of stream-gaging operationsin the region shall designate as 'necessary and bestadapted for the purpose of determining thp. st.ate andflow of the stream or streams affected by the proposedproject, and shall provide for the required reading ofsuch gages and for the adequate rating of such stations. The number, design, location, and time ofinstallation of gages and stations, the rating of suchstations, and the determination of the flow of theaffected stream or streams, shall be made under' thesupervision of, or in cooperation with, the DistrictEngineer of the United States Geological Survey havingcharge of stream-gaging in the region of said project;and the Permittee shall advance to said GeologicalSurvey the amount of funds estimated to be necessaryfor such supervision, or cooperation for such periodsas may be mutually agreed upon. The Permittee shall,to the satisfaction of the Commission, keep accurateand sufficient records of the stage and flow of theaffected stream or streams, and shall make such recordsavailable to the Commission at such times as the Commission may prescribe.

No new access roads will be required to conduct the studies.

1. This notice also consists of the following standardparagraphs: AS, A7, A9, AI0, D, C, and 02.

B. Sink such test pits or make such boring of otherfoundation explorations, and make such detailed geologic studies and t.p.sts on foundations and fillmaterials, as are necessary t.o support preliminaryengineering designs and cost estimates.

C. Begin the required investigations within 60 days

--.

L-J LU l-J LJJ L--.J L:=.J r~-~~ 3 C--l C~-J C] c:.:J CrJ c- ] c::J c:.:::J c'r) CJ ,co C J

available water, storage possibilities, and hcad willbe maintained.

F. Whether the applicant is financially able to carryout the development.

D. Whether proper provfsion is made for preFlent orfuture electrical interconnection with other projectBor systems in order to take advantage of diversit.y of:streamflow and of power demands.

G. Whether the conotruction, maintenance, and opera··tion of the proposed project worko will interfere e)]: beinconsistent with the purpose for which any reservation, as defined in the Federal Power Act, was createdor acquired.

Whether the use to which the power will be devotedin general, in accord with the public inLerest.

E.is,

C. Whether said project will be in general accord withthe most beneficial utilization of the water for navigation, water power, irrigation, the adequateprotection, mitigation, and enhancement of fish andwildlife, water supply, recreation, or other publicuses, and for aiding flood control, reclamation, andsimilar developments.

Article 3. The priority granted under the permit shall belost if the Permittee fails to fulfill the requirements of t.hepermit, if the permit is canceled by order of the Commission, 01:

if the Permittee fails, on or before the expiration date of thepermit, to file with the Commission or its designated agent anapplication for license for the proposed project in conformitywith the commission'S rules and regulations then in effect.

Article 4. The Permittee shall keep accurate records ot allexpenditures made for the purposes authorized by the permit,together with all vouchers and other supporting data relat.ing t.osuch expenditures, which records and related materials shall heretained by the Permittee.

Article S. The permit confers no authority upon thePermittee to undertake construction of the proposed project, orany part thereof, or to occupy or use lands or other property ofthe United States for the purposes of construction, unless specific permission is given by the Commission for such occupancy oruse; and neither the granting of Buch authority nor the performance of construction work, whether with or without such authority, shall be deemed to have created any equities or to haveestablished any rights with respect to issuance of a license forthe proposed project, beyond what would have been created or

D. Furnish with any application for license subsequently filed with the Commission copies of engineeringand geologic reports, results of tests and analyses,and any other information secured in connection withthe investigations, examinations and surveys conductedunder this permit.

(3) That all unnecessary energy losses,whether in hydraulic works or in mechanicalor electrical equipment, will be avoided.

B. Whether in relation to existing or probable futureprojects upon the same or adjacent streams, the potential for the fullest practicable utilization of the

after acceptance of the permit, and thereafterprosecute said investigations in such manner and atsuch rate as in the judgement of the Commission willensure their completion within the period of thepermit.

A. Whether the maps, plans, and specifications are such:

(1) That full, practicable utilization willbe made of the water, storage possibilities,and head at the site to be developed;

(2) That the structures will be safe andconstructed in accordance with good engineering practice; and

E. Exercise appropriate measures at all times duringfield studies to prevent irreparable damage to theenvironment of the proposed project. All test sitesshall be restored as closely as possible to theiroriginal condition, and to the satisfaction of theCommission's authorized representative, or, whereFederal lands are affected, to the satisfaction ofthe agency administering such lands.

Article 2. A license will be issued for the proposedproject only if in the judgement of the Commission said projectwill be best adapted to a comprehensive plan for the improvementor development of a waterway or waterways for the use or benefitof interstate or foreign commerce, for the improvement and utilization of water power development, for the adequate protection,mitigation, and enhancement of fish and wildlife (includingrelated spawning grounds and habitat), and for other beneficialpublic uses, including irrigation, flood control, water supply,and recreational and other purposes referred to in section 4(e).In reaching a decision on the desirability of issuing a license,the Commission will consider, among other things:

2 3

~ .

L.-J LLJ L-J LJJ L-J L.:J r~~~J (CC] c:J r~] CJ c~r~] r"'] r'C~J CJ r~~J C~'~J ['1'''] C~]

established had such authority not been given or such work notbeen performed.

Article 6. The permit is not transferable and may becanceled by order of the Commission upon failure of the Permitteeto begin in good faith, or to prosecute diligently, the investigations, examinations, and surveys contemplated under the permit,or to comply with any other conditions therein, or for any othergood cause shown after notice and opportunity for hearing.

~.---------

4

BooBooooooooooooooo


O~CEOFTHESECRETARY

Office of Environmental Policy ond Compliance'889 C Street, Room 119

Anchorage, Alaska 99501·612e

ER 95/845

FEB 22 1926Ms. Lois D. CashellSecretaryFederal Energy Regulatory Commission888 rll'st Street, N.E.Washington, D.C. 20426

Dear Ms. Cashe1l:, I

In response to your request ofNovember 9, 1995, we have reviewed the Notice ofPreliminaryPermit Application for the Old Hatbor Project (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission No.11561-000) on Kodiak Island, Alaska. We offer the foIIowing comments for your consideration.

We understand the project consists of'the (ollowing: (1) a 4-foot high concrete diversionstructure with an intake on the unnamed tributary to SitkaJidak Strait; (2) a 3,293-foot long, 16inch diameter high density polyethylene pipeline; (3) a 10,259-foot long, 16-inch diameter steelpenstock; (4) a powerhouse containing one generating unit with an installed capacity of330 kW;(5) a 4,210-foot long transmission line interconnecting with an existing transmission line in thecity ofOld Harbor; and (6) appurtenant facilities.

Wr, -believe that there are several significant problems to be addressed before a license could beissued for construction and operation ofthe proposed facility. The lands covered by the licensingapplication include certain lands which were acquired by the United States from Old HarborNative Corporation as part ofthe comprehensive federal and State ofAlaska program forrestoration ofthe natural resources injured by the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The purchase agreementcovering those lands was executed by the parties in May 1995, resulting in the-United States andthe State ofAlaska acquiring these particular lands in October 1995.

The lands which the penstock would cross are subject to certain restrictive covenants. Underthese covenants, construction ofbuildings, changes in the topography ofthe land, removal ordestruction ofplants, and manipulation or alteration ofnatural water courses are prohibited. Useofthese lands in a manner that is inconsistent with the maintenance ofa national wildlife refugemay result in the invocation ofadditional reversionary provisions in the deed, as required by theseller. The acquisition of these lands by the United States was also subject to a conservationeasement granted to the State ofAlaska by Old Harbor Native Corporation, which authorizes theState to independently enforce these restrictive covenants.

Booooooooooooooooo]

Also, sections 12 and 13 ofT3SS, R26W are within an area the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)has formally proposed Cor wilderness designation, under the precess outlined in the Alaska~ational Interest Lands Conservation Act. That proposal is currently under review in theDepartment oCthe Interior. Hydroelectric projects are not allowed on refuge lands designated aswilderness. Proposed wilderness areas are assigned a minimal management category in theKodiak National Wildlife Refuae Comprehensive ConSemtiOD PhmlEnyironmentaJ ImpagStatement. The minimal management category does not allow for hydroelectric projects. Inorder ior the project to go forward, it would be necessary for the applicant to pursue with FWS aland management category boundary change and revision ofthe Kodiak National Wildlife Refu~e

Comprehensive ConseryatiQD Plan.

A long-term project involving installed equipment on refuge property will require a right-oi-waypennit from the FWS's Realty Division in Anchorage. Sharon Janis, Chief, R.ealty Division, (U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 E. Tudor R.oad, Anchorage, AK 99503-3635, (907) 786-3498) isthe appropriate contact. '

We do not object to issuance oCa preliminary permit to conduct fish, wildlife, and habitat studieswithin the project area, provided the stipulations identified in the Attachment become terms andconditions oClhe preliminary permit. Representatives ofFWS, the Department, and the AlaskaAttorney General met last year with legal counsel for Old Harbor Native Corporation to begindiscussions oCthe issues raised by the application (which was filed after the sale ofthe lands to theUnited States and the State ofAlaska). We continue to encourage the applicant to meet with theFWS Realty representatives as soon as possible to address land status conce~s and discussKodjak Natjonal WjldJife RetUae Comprehensive Conservation plan revisions.

In addition, we urge the applicant to meet with the FWS Ecological Services Division to scope forbiological resource related studies, and to consult with the FWS Regional Archeologist. TheAttachment describes our trust resources in the project area, suggested studies to address thoseresourccs, and stipulations to include if a preliminary permit is issued. These studies are alsoessential so that the determinations required by 16 U.S.C. § 3120 can be made on the effect oitheproposed project on subsistence activities on federal public lands.

Until land status and plan revision issues are satisfactorily resolved, we request that the FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission not consider licensing for the proposed project. We lookforward to our continued work with you on the Old Harbor Hydroelectric project.

Sincerely,

Attachment

2

Boo[J

ooooooooo[]

[J

D

JJ]

ATTACHMENT

Biological Resources AfTected, Suggested Studies,and Stipulations (or Preliminary Permit

for the Proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric l'roject

There is limited information about the fisheries resources in the project area. The lower mile ofthe unnamed tributary ofBarling Creek, on which the proposed diversion structure is located,provides spawning habitat for pink, chum, and eoho salmon. The diversion structure would belocated about 2 miles beyond the upper limit ofdocumented anadromous fish habitat; however,the upper portions ofthe stream have not been surveyed on the ground for fish use. It is likelythat Dolly Varden, slimy sculpin, and possibly juvenile coho salmon occur in the vicinity ofthediversion structure. Water passing through the powerhouse would be discharged into Old HarborCreek (local name used by the Alaska Department offish and Game for salmon escapementsurveys), which is known to support Dolly Varden and provide spawning habitat for pink, chum,and coho salmon.

The proposed project site provides habitat 'for brown bear, Sitka black-tailed deer, and mountaingoat. Bird species nesting in the area may include marbled and Kittlitz's murrclet, harlequin duck,golden eagle, and surfbird.

The lower reaches ofBarling Creek are frequented by brown bear, beaver, waterfowl, bald eagles,and wintering concentrations ofdeer. During the latter part ofthe summer, brown bearsconcentrate in the area to feed on returning salmon.

Bald eagles and wintering deer may be found in the vicinity ofthe proposed powerhouse on OldHarbor Creek. Since bald eagles are known to concentrate in areas near fish-bearing waters, wesuggest that the permittee incorporate measures in the design ofthe transmission line to avoidavian collision and electrocution. There are several designs for increasing the transmission Jine'sphase-spacing, which will minimize taptor electrocution. We suggest the report entitledSuggested Praetiees For Raptor Protection On power Lines, The State OfIhe Art In 1981 fortechnical assistance in designing and constructing these facilities. Another publication, MitjgatjniBird COIljSjODS with power LiDes; The State ofthe Art in 1994, provides useful information insiting and design ofpower Jines to reduce the potential for collision mortality. Information onacquiring these reports can be obtained from the FWS Anchorage Field Office identified below.

In accordance with Section 7 ofthe Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, FWS hasdetermined that no threatened or endangered species are present in the vicinity of the project area.Several Species ofConcern are perceived to be declining; however, FWS lacks sufficientinformation to propose listing these as threatened or endangered. These species are:

Harlequin.duck (Histriollicus hJstrionicus)Kittlitz's murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostri.'i)Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphu.'i marmoratus)

3

oooB'~ ....

oooo[]

ooooo[J

oooo

We believe the proposed Old Harbor Project could have significant adverse impacts on importantfish, wildlife, and habitat resources. As a result, we suggest studies be designed to provide thefollowing information:

• Distribution and abundance ofspecies found in the vicinity ofthe project and allproject features;

• Seasonal use of the project area by fish and wildlife;

• Purpose for species use ofthe area;

• Mean annual and mean monthly discharge rates and monthly high and lowdischarge rates for the streams impacted by the project;

• Description ofhow the project would affect flow rates and aquatic resources in theimpacted streams;

• Designs to be used to avoid entrainment offish in the diversion and provisions toprovide upstream and downstream fish passage;

• Expected changes in water temperature and quality;

• E."(pected water treatment and discharge;

• Provisions to be made to pass stream gravels past the diversion structure; and

• Construction and reclamation/revegetation techniques and the need to provideaccess for project construction and maintenance.

We believe the applicant should conduct studies to verify the quantity and quality ofsalmonidspawning and rearing habitat aft"ected by the projcct. An instream flow study, such as InstreamFlow Incremental Methodolosy. should be conducted to determine flows necessary to maintain orenhance habitat supporting resident and anadromous fish populations during construction andoperation. The permittee should also prepare plans, we believe, to mitigate impacts by avoiding,minimizing, andlor compensating for losses to fish, wildlife, and their habitats. We suggest thatmonitoring studies may be needed to determine the extent ofproject impacts, the effectiveness ofmitigation measures, and the need for additional mitigation.

Prior to conducting studies, we suggest the applicant prepare a plan for FWS approval, detailingthe methods, policies, and techniques that contractors and project personnel will use to minimizebearlbuman interaction and conflict.

4

BooBoooooooooooo[J

oo

We do not object to the proposed preliminary permit, providing the following conditions areincorporated to protect fish and wildlife resources:

The permittee shall within 60 days ofpermit issuance, consult with the FieldSupervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage Field Office, 60S West 4thAvenue, Room G·62, Anchorag~ Alaska 99501, (907) 271-2888. Consultationwill include: (1) reviewing project plans and determining what studies are neededto provide the fish and wildlife information necessary to adequately assess potentialadverse impacts upon those resources; and (2) determining appropriate measuresto mitigate any adverse impacts.

The applicant shall conduct a cultural resource survey and contact the FWSRegional Archaeologist, Chuck Diters, at (907) 786-3386. Mr. Diters will consultwith the State Historic Preservation Officer, in accordance with the NationalHistoric Preservation Act. of 1966, as amended, and 36 CPR 800. The applicantshould also examine the potential for the project to enhance long-term publicrecreation opportunities.

It is our intent to work with the applicant to resolve concerns relating to fish and wildliferesources and identify means by which resources will be protected or enhanced. Ifit isdetermined that the proposed project will result in adverse impacts, we will assist the applicant inmodifying the project's design to alleviate or mitigate such effects.

5

Dear Mr. Robinson:

AA-779222344 (931)

FEB - 8 1996

This letter is to acknowledge receipt of an application for a preliminary permit filed forthe proposed Old Harbor Hydropower Project No. 11561-000. The proposed project is onan unnamed creek which drains into Barling Bay on Kodiak Island, and is located nearOld Harbor, Alaska. We have established BLM casefile AA-77922 for this project, and theapplication will be noted to the records.

PECErVFt:

FEB 12 1~"F.... ~.

AVEc

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENTALASKA STATE OFFICE

222 W. 7th Avenue, #13ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99513-7599


Mr. J. Mark RobinsonDirector, Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionDivision of Project Compliance & AdministrationMail Code: HL21.3825 North Capitol Street, N.E.Washington, D.C. 20426

oooooooo

oooo

A review of the status of the area, as described in the application and depicted on thecopy of the Notice of Preliminary Permit Application dated November 9, 1995, has beencompleted. According to the most current Master Title Plats (MTP) (copies enclosed), thearea affected by the proposed project is almost entirely within the boundary of the KodiakNational Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). Please note, however, that the MTP for T. 34 S.,R.25 W., Seward Meridian (SM), which indicates that a portion of the proposed project ison land that has been interimly conveyed (IC No. 165), does not reflect current status ofthat land. The land has been returned to the Federal government as a result of a 1995agreement between the Old Harbor Native Corporation and the U.S. Fish and WildlifeService. The MTP is currently being updated to show the correct status. The portion ofthe project that is not within the Refuge boundary (within sec. 20, T. 34 S., R. 25 W., SM)has been conveyed out of Federal ownership.

o If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at(907) 271-3266.

ooJJ]

Sincerely,

lsi SHIRlEY J. MACKE

Shirley J. MackeLand Law ExaminerDivision of Lands, Minerals, and Resources

EnclosuresMTP's (2)

8ooD

oD

ooolJoooooouo

cc: U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceRegional Director1011 East Tudor RoadAnchorage, Alaska 99503(w/encl)

Kodiak National Wildlife RefugeJay R. Bellinger, Refuge Manager1390 Buskin River RoadKodiak, Alaska 99615(w/encl)

Kodiak Island BoroughJerome M. Selby, Mayor710 Mill Bay RoadKodiak, Alaska 99615(w/encl)

City of Old HarborRick Berns, MayorP.O. Box 109Old Harbor, Alaska 99643(w/encl)

Old Harbor Native CorporationEmil Christiansen, PresidentP.O. Box 71Old Harbor, Alaska 99643(w/encl)

Tony AzuyakOld Harbor Tribal CouncilP.O. Box 15Old Harbor, Alaska 99643(w/encl)

Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.4831 Eagle StreetAnchorage, Alaska 99503-7497(w/encl)

2

~OlT11l0:r

C:l

IlISI1lI1l

lTS0

:rl1ln11

11l:l0>3lQ

I1lTS:r....

o 1ll;!.11lIII

o Qolll HI"0

:lClllO0

QoI1l .......~

.... 0'"I1l

lTlT:lO11

.... 0 E:o :r ....

n

:llTllI:l0

..,III gllllQ

S l'l

'"C

.... Qo.... %III l'l

::l1111l111 0::l ~

I1l 0 >3'<

g:O .... 1lI ..... r-c:

I1lQo ()I~

l'l~~ 11l::l11l"'~ l'l

R

g. %lTQo~ f»' 0

%>3l'll'l

I

en III • OC:llTlT ::l .., I~~C

1"

I1l 1100 Co C ~ IT< 0 III l'l

t<en

'"

11-' :rI1lI1lHl 11 >< :oS!I1l 11l11>C '< >3

~O t ."~. · - l'l>3

III III lllSI1l'< .... %C:ll'l

'1111 lTCD::lQo \II encen

'<:r c:::l QoI1 ....."0 5:0

e. ::llTlTg .... ~110 CS..,

.- ..... ...,:r..... \0 Cf.I.....

lTCCDCD \IICD ~~

CDI1 0 '" 00

Qo ... QolT - ..,IT nt'l

o III '10"

enClT.... >3%

lt lQ CD 0 ....0 !iQ

IT:rlll 3:UI ...

I1l"HI~ l'len

1ll::l00 '"en

Qo'1 ......... ...

lTlT~U1 0... %

:r:rlTI

CDCDUI0....

CD HI HI ~>C .... 0IT'''l1 I~'1>-11l::l~S lQ :rCD .... I~

00HI:r

2

Project Issue Issuance Date NewDate Expires Date

North Georgia DEIS comments 10/27/95 12/28/95 1/27/96P-2354-018

Bliss, P-1975-014 Tendering 1/4/96 2/19/96 3/20/96(additional studies)

Lower Salmon Falls Tendering 1/4/96 2/19/96 3/20/96P-2061-004 (additional studies)

Upper Salmon Falls Tendering 1/4/96 2/19/96 3/20/96P-2777-007 (additional studies)

Snake Creek, P-1994-004 Tendering 11/25/95 1/16/96 2/15/96(additional studies)

West Hill, P-11564 Tendering 12/18/95 1/28/96 2/27/96(additional studies)

Therm II, P-11565 Tendering 12/18/95 1/30/96 3/1/96(additional studies)

Hasley Forebay, P-11560 Application for 11/9/95 1/18/96 2/17/96Preliminary Permit

Old Harbor, P-11561 Application for 11/9/95 1/18/96 2/17/96Preliminary Permit

Icy Gulch, P-l1562 Appication for 11/9/95 1/18/96 2/17/96Preliminary Permit

Upper Monroe, P-1517-008 Scoping 11/20/95 11/19/96 2/18/96

[

oDoocoooooooooBooo

,

3


Flambeau DEIS DEIS COlDJllents 12/8/95 2/6/96 3/7/96Big Falls, P-2390Pixley, P-2395

10(j) 12/4/95 2/19/96 3/20/96Lower, P-2421Crowley, P-2473Thornapple, P-2475 Section 7 12/4/96 1/3/96 2/19/96Upper, P-2640

Irving Dam, P-11516 Intervenor 12/15/95 2/13/96 3/14/96Middleville, P-l1120 Intervenor 12/15/95 2/13/96 3/14/96Lower Androscoggin DEIS DEIS 12/8/95 1/22/96 2/21/96Gulf Island, P-2283 COlDJllentsMarcal, P-11482

10(j) 12/1/95 2/14/96 3/15/96

Section 7 12/1/95 1/2/96 2/19/96Boyd Dam, P-I1072 Intervenor 12/12/95 2/12/96 3/11/96

Scoping 12/13/95 1/12/96 2/12/96COlDJllents

Carlyle Dam, P-11214-001 Public Notice 11/20/95 1/22/96 2/22/96Gainer Dam, P-11282-001 Notice Seeking 12/18/95 1/20/96 2/20/96

Studies

Inglis Lock By-Pass Public Notice 10/27/95 12/26/95 1/26/95P-10893-002

P-1962-000, Rock Creek REA 12/29/95 2/16/96 3/18/96Cresta

4

I


Menominee River DEIS 12/1/95 1/16/96 2/15/96Basin

P-2433-004, Grand RapidsP-2357-003, White RapidsP-2394-006, Chalk HillP-2536-009, LittleQuinnesec Falls

P-460-001, CUshman DEIS 12/15/95 2/13/96 3/14/96

P-1988-007, Haas-Kings DEA 11/30/95 11/16/96 2/15/96River

P-11557, Coleman Ranch Application for 11/1/95 1 1/ 11/ 96 2/11/96Preliminary Permit

P-1864-003, Bond Falls Scoping Document I 12/5/95 11/31/96 3/1/96

cooooocoooooooooooo

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the notice of applicationfor the Old Harbor Hydropower Proje:t referenced above. We understand that the proposedstudies are aimed at determining the feasibility of producing an electrical generating capacitynear the village of Old Harbor on Kodiak Island, Alaska.

Dear Secretary cashel1:

Re: CO.M:MENTS and RECo.MMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONSPROJECT NO. 11561-000PRELIMINARY PERMIT FOR OLD HARBOR HYDROPOWE..~

Prelimina.ry' project plans call for construction of a 4-foot high water diversion structtlre onan unnamed tributary flowing into Sitkalidak Strait. Water would be tarried via a 3.293-footlong, 16-inch diame1;ei' HDPE pipeline and a lO,259-foot long, 16-inch diameter steelpenstock to a powerhouse located southeast of the point of water withdrawal. After use, thewater would be discharged into a completely different watershed. A single 330 kWgenerator would produce electricity and a 4,270-foot long transmission line wouldinterconnect the powerhouse with the existing City of Old Harbor transmission line.


33~ Ff/lSPBERRY ROADANCHORAGE, ALASKA 00518·1599PHONE: (9D7) 344.()541

Pcst.W. brand fax tra.nsmittal memo 7671 III crl pailes ..

I'" EQrle fltt.MJtII1nvm~.L .- ~i!.r:eJ

ICo. fl?/~"~!$,,€ tr "0. //b~!tl- lIi.RD2pt._ phcmu f#h7 'Z '3:y3

"~f 2.'5"8'.2r/f FIDIi -:z61zyt-r

DEPARTlllEl\"T OF FISH AND GAlVm


January 18, 1996

Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionAttn: Secretary Lois D. Cashe1l888 First Street, N.E.Wa.shington~ D.C. 20426

At this time we have only a limited amount of infonnation relative to the fish resources thatrna}' be found in the project area.. The proposed water diversion structure is located near theheadwaters of a tributary to Barling Creek (local named used by ADF&G for salmonescapement surveys). The ttibutary is identified as anadromous fish stream number 258-5210020-2002 (hereinafter called stream 2002). Stream 2002 enters Barling Creek: from thenorth about Va mile upstream from Barling Creek's mouth at Barling Bay. The lower mile ofstream 2002 supports spawning pink, chum, and coho salmon. The lower Va mile of BarlingCreek also provides salmon spawning habitat. The water diversion will occur approximately2 miles upstream of the currently documented upper limit of anadromous fish presence instream 2002. However, the upper reaches of the stream have not been surveyed on theground to determine fish habitat and fish use of the strum. Based on fish surveys in similar

ooo8ooo

nu

ooo

oooooooo

To adequately~ the potential affects of the proposal on fish snd wildlife resoun:es foundin the area, site specific and species specific use info:rmation must be gathered. Werecommend that the studies of the projeet's environmental impacts be designed and therelevant information collected so that the following questions can be answered.

1. What is the distribution and abundance of fish and wildlife species found in andaround the project site? Included in the area defmed as the project site should be thewatershed of the areas that will be flooded by any reservoirs, the pipeline andpenstoe:k routes. the powerhouse, the transmission line facilities and appurtenantstructures, the cleared powerline easements, and roads required to access the facilityfor construction and long·term maintenance purposes.

types of streams found elsewhere on Kodiak Island it is likely that juvenile coho salmon rearin the upper reaches of the stream and it is likely that resident fish (e.g., Dolly Varden andslimy sculpin) would be found almost to the headwaters of the system.

After running through the turbines, the water is proposed to be discharged into Old HarborCreek (local named used by ADF&G for salmon escapement SUIVeys). Old Harbor Cn:ek(a.k.a. Lagoon Cre=k) is identified as anadromous fish stream number 258-52-1001S and isknown to provide habitat for spawning pink, chum, and coho salmon as well as DollyVarden. A small scale local effort has been made to enhance the coho salmon production inOld Harbor Creek to supplement the sport fishing opportUnity and to encourage commerciallodge development in the community.

We recommend that any proposal to dam or divert the headwatets of stream 2002 andthereby modify the natural :flow regime consider and provide for adequate seasonal instreamflows during botb the reservoir filling period and the post construction op=ation phase of theproject to support the salmon spawning. incubation! and.rearing requirements in the streamreaches downstream of the strucntI'e. This requirement would also apply to olb=rwateJ:bodies discovered to support :fish populations in the project area.

The proposed project site is found in an an:a that curr=ntly provides habitat used by brownbear~ Sitka black-tailed deer, and several species of birds including bald eagles. The lowerelevations of the Barling Creek valley are used by waterfowl•. beavers! and concentration! ofdeer during the winter. The area surrounding the powerhouse provides habitat.known tosupport winter concentrations of deer.

Secretary Lois D. Cashell

For what pwpose(s) do the fish and wildlife species use the habitats found in theproject area? Include information pertinent to species specific life function

Ja."1uary 18, 1996...-,/."

During what time(s) of the year and where are the fish and wildlife species distributedin and around the project site~

3.

2.

BooBooooo[]

ooooooooo

Sincerely,

,/~~~-e.P"c. WaYTle~lezal ~Habitat BiologistRegion nHabitat and Restoration Division(907) 267-2285

requirements (e.g., feeding, denning~ rotting, perching, nesting, migration, spawning~

etc.) and time of yr::ar the uses occur.

4. What are the volumes of water flow including the long-term mean annual and monthlyaverage flow rates as. well as the monthly high and low flow rates of the watcrbodiesin the project area and how do they relate to energy production requirements? Whatis the basic water balance of input versus output of these systems:? How will theproposed project affect these flows and any fish resources found in the streams?

S. If f1Sh arc found in the headwaters upstream of the proposed diversion, whatprovision(s) will be included in project design to prevent entrainment of the fish in thediverted water and what provisions will be included to provide for unhinderedupstream and downstream movement of fish put the diversion sttueture?

S. What changes in water temperature and water quantity are lllre1y to occur from anyincreased reservoir capacities and stream flow modifications'

6. After usc, how will waters be treated and discharged? Items of concern include theaffea of increased water temperatures, stream bed and stream bank erosion/scour atpoint of discharg~ and avoidance or attractant response in fish to any tempemturechanges.

The data gleaned from the site specific studies should be used to develop an active projectmitigation pmgmm aimed first at a.voiding then, sequentially minimizing, restoring orrebabilitating, and finally, if necessary ~ replacing fish and wildlife resources and habitats thatate impacted by the project. We appreciaIe the opportunity to comment and would like toparticipate in the planning associated with the design of the environmental studies. Inaddition~ some of the brown bear information gathc:rcd by ADF&G during the environmentalstudies for the T=ttOr Lake Hydropower project may be useful for this project site and isavaila.ble for use. Should you have any questions please contact me at either the letterheadaddress or can me at (907) 267-2285.

8oo§

ooooooooooooooo

Secretary Lois D. Cashell -3- Jan1W)l 18, 1996

BooBooooooOri

oo[]

ooono

Secretary Lois D. Cashell -4-

cc: J. Clemens, DPR-FERCM. StIze1ecki, PERC ContactC. Walls, AVEeI. Westlund, ADF&GR. Smith, ADF&G ..W. Donaldson. JJJF&GD. Prokopowich, ADF&GL. Scbwuz, ADF&GC. :Estes. ADP&GA. R2ppoport. USF\VS-WAmI. Bellinier, Kodiak NWRR. Morris. NMPSA. MurphYt OMB/DGCL.Preed,KPB .A. Swiderski, DOUAG

(].;Wh-L-e:,/~r ~ r't:J raJ.

January 18. 199~:

R

ooBoooooooooooooo

'l6i1yof(jjUr~p.o. BoxlOlJ R FeE' V F. n.

Old Harbor, Alaska 99643

CITY OF THE TIIREE sAINTS m·"f. 1 ij 1995

(907) 286-2203 OR 286-2204 AVEC

FAX: 2Rfi..227fl

RESOLUTION 95-.J.2.DYDRo-PROJ.ECT

TlfLE~ RIi1ilOLIH10N STJPPOH.'llN'G HYDRO ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENTTO PROVIDE 'HIE ELECTRI(~NEEDS OF or.D lIARBOR

WHEREAS: Electricity is one of the most widel)' used sources of energy forre!Jidential and commercial pUrpOSCL

WHEREAS: The prodution of electl'ieity in Old Harbor is :100% by dieselgeneration.

WHEREAS: The eosts involved in tile continued production of powet by dieselgeneraton are projected to i.crease,. d.e to environmental l't.'gulatioJi.and (pel eosts i. the Deaf future.

WHE.REAS: A feasible s.ite for tile development uf a Hydro-eleetric pJant exilmnear Old Harbor.

WDEREAS: This utilization ofHydro power for eledricity 1dl"S an reBewablerHouree to provide for 2Ul environmentaUy clean ,and less expensivemethod of producing electricity.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVE'D, the City of Old Harbor is ill support ofthe Alaska Village 1i;leetneal Oroperative'5 efforts to proceed with the permittin~

sceuring ot' fundiq, and the development of a Hydro-eleetric plant to provide theeleetriad needs of the community ofOld lIarbor.

PAS1' AND APPROVED by the City of Old R~rbor this pf-.. day of .November,1995.

Rick. Berns, Mayor

8ooBooooooo

ooooooD

RBS(>I,UTION 95~16

IlYDRO-PROJECf

TITLE: RBSOLtJTION SUPPORTING HYDRO ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT TOPROVIDE THE ELECTRIC NEEDS OF nm NATIVE VILLAGE OF _.

OLD llARBOR

WHEREAS: Electricity is lhe ouly source ofenergy lor rcsidentinl and commercialpurposes.

WHEREAS: The production ofelectricity in Old Harbor is lOOO!o by diesel generation.

WHEREAS: The l:~.lsts involved itl the conlinued production ofllOwer by dieselg~ncrators arc projected to illCrCa!l~. due to environmental regulafionand ruel COSL') in the near future.

WHEREAS: A feasible site for the development ofa Hydro-eJectric plant exists ncarOld Harbor.

WHEREAS: This utili7,ation ofHydro power for eJcl.-1ricity uses a renewal resoW'ce toprovide for an environmentally clean, and less expensive method ofproducing electricity.

NOW THEREFORE BE 11' RESOLVEl>, the Old llarbor Tribal Council is in support ofthe AI~ska Village Electric COl,perative's effurt to proceed with the permitting, securingoffund ing, and the dl."Vclopmcnt ofa Hydro-Electric plant ·to provide the electrical needsofthe Native Vmage of Old Harbor.

PAST AND APPROVED by the Native Village ofOld Harbor this 7#rd.1Y of~...embcr, 1995.

"-7~ ~ ~~~.Tony Azuyak, Sr., ·friba(;residentOld Harbor Tribal Council

Attest;4~~((;Iy Christiansenl Tribal ClerkOld Harbor Tribal Council

\

c=J c=J C~J CJ C~'l Ci~] C l ['.':U C··] r~:J CJ C··] CJ [~'] C~'] OJ] c:J CJ CD

project No. 11561-000 - 2 -"

'.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICAFEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMIssrON

NOTICE OF PRELIMINARY PERMIT APPLIC;\TION

(December 7, 1995)

Take notice that the following hydroelectric application hasbeen filed with the commission and is available for pUblicinspection:



c. Date filed: october 25, 1995

d. Applicant: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.

e. Name of project: Old Harbor project

f. Location: Partially within the Kodiak National WildlifeRefuge (administered by the U.S Fish and WildlifeService), on an unnamed tributary to Sitkalidakstrait, near the town of Old Harbor, on KodiakIsland, Alaska. Sections 12, 13, 18, 19, and 20in R26W, T34S.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C.§791(a) - 825(r)

h. Applicant Contact: Charles Y. WallsGeneral ManagerAlaska Village Electric cooperative4831 Eagle StreetAnchorage, Alaska 9950]-7497(907) 561-1818

i. FERC Contact: Mr. Michael Strzelecki, (2021 219-2827

j. Comment Date: February 16, 1996

k. Description of Project: The proposed Old H,lrbor Projectwould consist of: (1) a four-foot-high conc'~ete diversionstructure with an intake on the unnamed tributary toSitkalidak Strait; (2) a 3,293-foot-long, 16-inch-diameterHDPE pipeline; (3) an 10,259-foot-long, 16-inch-diametersteel penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing one generating

~-I\-?r;

unit with an installed capacity of 330 kW; (5) a 4,270-footlong transmission line interconnecting with an existingtransmission line in the city of Old Harbor; and (5)appurtenant facilities.


1. This notice also consists of the following standardparagraphs: AS, A7, A9, A10, B, C, and D2.

A5. Preliminary Permit -- Anyone desiring to file a competingapplication for preliminary permit for a proposed project mustsubmit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent tofile such an application, to the commission on or before thespecified comment date for the particular application (see18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows aninterested person to file the competing preliminary permitapplication no later than 30 days after the specified commentdate for the particular application. A competing preliminarypermit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.

A7. Preliminary Permit -- Any qualified development applicantdesiring to file a competing development application must submitto the commission, on or before a specified comment date for theparticular application, either a competing developmentapplication or a notice of intent to file such an application.Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a developmentapplication allows an interested person to file the competingapplication no later than 120 days after the specified commentdate for the particular application. A competing licenseapplication must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.

A9. Notice of intent -- A notice of intent must specify theexact name, business address, and telephone number of theprospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement'of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, eithera preliminary permit application or a development application(specify Which type of application). A notice of intent must beserved on the applicant(s) named in this public notice.

A10. proposed Scope of studies under Permit -- A preliminarypermit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term ofthe proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The workproposed under the preliminary permit would include economicanalysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and astUdy of environmental impacts. Based on the results of thesestUdies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with thepreparation of a development application to construct and operatethe project.

B. comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene -- Anyone maysubmit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in

L..-J r-'~l (H J ['- ) c=J reeD CJ 1 M

'] c:J c:::J r'~-J CJ [] ;~J CJ CIO c.:J r::n CIJ

project No. 11561-000 - 3 -

:::::: .~J r:~:

~:E:.: ::::~ :::::~

<]: ::::

::.!':l !~~~ C::: <I:

,'.

_#0.'-.0'-0...:.I

"':1I~I

I,':'(r'IT

........,...

'-~"

::I:..-,

•..(:

c:")"·0

C?··

(:')

<::::)'"

1.-.:.:.:<r.: <I

<1: <}: ::::~

,.:::.. .~ .. .:

L;.JZ:-;-:::::_:

z~~~~;

it:; O:~ ::::::: L:,J~ :~l~ =:0:>

Cr-,! ~::~ :-:

r····. :-~.:

;::::cn -.'''0 w.l <I

:8;'~;~~~

en!enw~!liii!!!;:)~IDa:

~~O~i!:~IL..I0<1:

Zw...

ZQenen:i:E01,0UN

~~g.:5~;:) ~

c:JZwga:c:J>Zc:Ja::E:wenffi~~a:wQ

~

Lois D. CashellSecretary

accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice andProcedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determininq theappropriate action to take, the commission will .:onsider allprotests or other comments filed, but only those who file amotion to intervene in accordance with the commi 's Rules maybecome a party to the proceeding. Any comments, ':s, ormotions to intervene must be received on or befo 1ecifiedcomment date for the particular application.

C. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents - .ingsmust bear in all capital letters the title "CO~ .'iOTICE OFINTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION", "COMPET. .CATION","PROTEST", "MOTION TO INTERVENE", as applicable. . che ProjectNumber of the particular application to which the filing refers.Any of the above-named documents must be filed bl' providing theoriginal and the number of copies provided by the commission'sregulations to: The secretary, Federal Energy Regulatorycommission, 888 First street, N.E., Washington, II.C. 20426. Anadditional copy must be sent to Director, Division of projectReview, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at theabove-mentioned address. A copy of any notice OJ: intent,competing application or motion to intervene must also be servedupon each representative of the Applicant specif:,ed in theparticular application.

02. Agency Comments -- Federal, state, and local agencies areinvited to file comments on the described application. A copy ofthe application may be obtained by agencies direetly from theApplicant. If an agency does not file comments \lithin the timespecified for filing comments, it will be presumHd to have nocomments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent tothe Applicant's representatives.

r~-~~J I --~J c=J c=J r I iT] r-'--J c=J r~] c::::J c:J r--~'] r':J c:J

project No. 11561-000

r~:J

- 2 -

em [-'~J C'] LIJ


NOTICB OF PRELIMINARY PERMIT APPLICATION

(November 9, 1995)

Take notice that the following hydroelectr : application hasbeen filed with the Commission and is available ;or pUblicinspection:



c. Date filed: October 25, 1995

d. Applicant: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.

e. Name of Project: Old Harbor project

f. Location: Partially within the Kodiak National WildlifeRefuge (administered by the U.S Fish and Wildlifeservice), on an unnamed tributary to sitkalidakstrait, near the town of Old Harbor, on KodiakIsland, Alaska. Sections 12, lJ, 18, 19, and 20in R26W, T34S.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C.5791(a) - 825(r)

h. Applicant Contact: Charles Y. WallsGeneral ManagerAlaska Village Electric Cooperative4831 Eagle streetAnchorage, Alaska 99503-7497(907) 561-1818

i. FERC Contact: Mr. Michael Strzelecki, (202) 219-2827

j. Comment Date: January 18, 1996

k. Description of project: The proposed Old Harbor projectwould consist of: (1) a four-foot-high concrete diversionstructure with an intake on the unnamed tributary tositkalidak strait; (2) a 3,293-foot-long, 16-inch-diameterHOPE pipeline; (3) an 10,259-foot-long, 16-inch-diametersteel penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing one generatingunit with an installed capacity of 330 kW; (5) a 4,270-foot-

DC-A-12

long transmission line interconnecting with an existingtransmission line in the city of old Harbor; and (5)appurtenant facilities.


1. This notice also consists of the following standardparagraphs: A5, A7, A9, A10, B, C, and 02.

A5. Preliminary Permit -- Anyone desiring to file a competingapplication for preliminary permit for a proposed project mustsubmit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent tofile such an application, to the Commission on or before thespecified comment date for the particular application (see18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows aninterested person to file the competing preliminary permitapplication no later than 30 days after the specified commentdate for the particular application. A competing preliminarypermit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.

A7. Preliminary Permit -- Any qualified development applicantdesiring to file a competing development application must submitto the commission, on or before a specified comment date for theparticular application, either a competing developmentapplication or a notice of intent to file such an application.Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a developmentapplication allows an interested person to file the competingapplication no later than 120 days after the specified commentdate for the particular application. A competing licenseapplication must conform with 18 CrR 4.30(b) and 4.36.

A9. Notice of intent -- A notice of intent must specify theexact name, business address, and telephone number of theprospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statementof intent to sUbmit, if such an application may be filed, eithera preliminary permit application or a development application(specify which type of application). A notice of intent must beserved on the applicant(s) named in this pUblic notice.

A10. Proposed scope of Studies under Permit -- A preliminarypermit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term,· ofthe proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The workproposed under the preliminary permit would include economicanalysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and astudy of environmental impacts. Based on the results of thesestudies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with thepreparation of a development application to construct and operatethe project.

B. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene -- Anyone maysubmit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene inaccordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and

i I

project No. 11561-000

c=J c=J CJ c:.J CJ

- 3 -

CD c=J c=o 1 "] c::.J c::.J <f~:n 17 f"m')UI' r""jl c;. '-rn~l'''''' DD"Pro"tc.t 8()u"dcuy }-tAp

r~"~l r""~] CD

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining theappropriate action to take, the Commission will consider allprotests or other comments filed, but only those who file amotion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules maybecome a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, ormotions to intervene must be received on or before the specifiedcomment date for the particular application.

C. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents -- Any filingsmust bear in all capital letters the title "COMUENTS", "NOTICE OFINTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION", "COMPETItlG APPLICATION","PROTEST", "MOTION TO INTERVENE", as applicable, and the ProjectNumber of the particular application to which the filing refers.Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing theoriginal and the number of copies provided by the Commission'sregulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. Anadditional copy must be sent to Director, Division of ProjectReview, Federal Energy RegUlatory Commission, at the .above-mentioned addreos. A copy of any notice of intent,competing application or motion to intervene must also be servedupon each representative of the Applicant specified in theparticular application.

02. Agency Comments -- Federal, state, and local agencies areinvited to file comments on the described application. A copy ofthe application may be obtained by agencies directly from theApplicant. If an agency does not file comments within the timespecified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have nocomments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent tothe Applicant's representatives.

Lois D. CasheHSecretary

.., ~.:::-;-i' ..~ '-I'

<$I .,.. /:

~...~o\ ~

S

'~

".

p.Y~

y\ \~,/-p. ~~S~

I I

Dear Sirs:

October 18, 1995

Sincerely yours,

OLD HARBOR HYDROPOWER

Tony AzuyakOld Harbor Tribal CouncilP.O. Box 15Old Harbor, Alaska 99643

Mayor, Rick BernsCity of Old HarborP.O. Box 109Old Harbor, Alaska 99643

President, Emil ChristiansenOld Harbor Native CorporationP.O. Box 71Old Harbor, Alaska 99643

1

Refuge Manager, Jay R. BellingerKodiak National Wildlife Refuge1390 Buskin River RoadKodiak, Alaska 99615

Mayor, Jerome M. SelbyKodiak Island Borough710 Mill Bay RoadKodiak, Alaska 99615

SECRETARY

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COM:MISSION

825 North Capitol Street, N.E.Washington, D.C. 20426

Charles Y. Walls, General ManagerAlaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.

Enclosed for filing is an Application by Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC)for a preliminary permit in accordance with Part I of the Federal Power Act. The OldHarbor Hydropower Project is a proposed hydroelectric project on an unnamed creekwhich drains into Barling Bay on Kodiak Island, Alaska. The nearest community is OldHarbor, located approximately 2 miles to the South.

4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503-7497fhone: (907) 561-1818

~,. f

cc:Regional Director, Arthur C. MartinFederal Energy Regulatory CommissionPortland Regional Office1120 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 1340Portland, Oregon 97204

Enclosures: Original and fourteen copies.1. Initial Statement, 1 page.2. Exhibit 1 - Project Description and Land Description, 3 pages.3. Exhibit 2 - Description of Proposed Studies, 2 pages.4. Exhibit 3 - Costs, Financing, and Marketing, 1 page.5. Exhibit 4 - Project Map and Land Description Map, 2 drawings.

8ooooooooo~u

o[]

o[J

[]

ooo

D

ooQ

oDooDooD

ooD

oJJ]

Draft Environmental Assessment / Qld Harbor Project, FERC #11690-000

APPENDIXD

General Comments

Dear Mr. Hertrich:


RECEIVED_: ?hs 1'1~

March 11, 1999

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARYOffice of Environmental Policy and Compliance

1689 C Street, Room 119Anchorage, Alaska 99501-5126

Mr. Dan HertrichPolarconsult Alaska, Inc.1503 West 33rd AvenueAnchorage, Alaska 99503

ER 99/13

Re: PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ON DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION ANDPRELlMINARY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, Alaska Village ElectricCooperative, Inc., Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11561 .

In response to your notice ofDecember 31, 1998, we reviewed the Notice ofDraft LicenseApplication and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for a minor unconstructedproject located partially on the Kodiak National WIldlife Refuge, on Mountain Creek, a tributaryto the East Fork ofBarling Creek, and Lagoon Creek near Old Harbor, Alaska. We offer thefollowing comments for your consideration. We request that these issues be addressed prior topreparation ofa final EA.

Sufficient information needs to be provided for people unfamiliar with the project site toadequately understand the resources being evaluated, or the logic used to arrive at the variousconclusions. The EA should be written to allow the general public to fully understand theproposed actions, a reasonable array ofalternatives, the expected environmental consequences,and the logic and rationale used to determine these consequences, without referring to otherdocuments. We believe it is not sufficient to simply say that the proposed project is not expected

We believe that revisions should be made to ensure that the Final EA contains a full disclosure ofenvironmental effects, and that alternatives designed to minimize environmental effects areconsidered. This will help to ensure that the consequences ofthis project are properly consideredin the decision making and public review process.

Definitive statements are represented in the Draft EA as fact without any supporting logic orrationale for their determinations, or data supporting their analyses. We recommend this becorrected in the Final EA. Additionally, we believe that the limitations offield data noted inspecialists' reports should be identified in the body ofthe Final EA. Specific examples are notedbelow.

Boog

ooooooooooooo

'1J

Boog

oDooruooooooo[J

oJ

to affect a resource-a description ofhow the specialist arrived at that conclusion, as well as adocument or reference of supporting information, should be in.corporated.

We suggest the relative importance ofthe Barling and Lagoon Creek fisheries be put intoperspective with tables and data, in addition to text. The conclusions may be the same but thereader needs to be able to clearly identify the differences.

The proposed project should, we believe, be consistent with the management plan for the area andwith community interest. We also suggest the licensee provide the appropriate enhancement ofpublic recreation opportunities.

Specific Comments

Initial Statement The land ownership in the proposed project area, as described in this section,needs to be completed. Although the project is located within the boundaries of the KodiakNational Wildlife Refuge and all of the subsurface estate is owned by the United States, theproject affects surface estates owned both by the U.S. as part ofthe Kodiak Refuge, and by theOld Harbor Native Corporation. Master Title Plats accurately describing the land status ofthearea proposed for the project can be obtained from the Bureau ofLand Management.Additionally, before this project can be developed on Refuge lands, the applicant must obtain aright-of-way permit from the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).

The table shown under outline bullet #8, titled "Lands ofthe United States affected (shown onExhibit G)," does not clearly describe the status ofFederal lands affected by this project. Wesuggest the table be modified to clarify the land ownership and conservation easement status asfollows:

Under ownership, all lands currently listed as KNWR should be listed as owned by theUnited States. Ifadditional clarification is desired, these lands can also be identified asadministered by the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge.

Several different conservation easements affect various parcels in the project area. A noteshould be added to the key for this table identifying the specific conservation easementdescribed.

The package we received did not contain the map identified as ''Exhibit G." The mapidentified as C-l appears to have some ofthe information described in "Exhibit G," but theinformation presented is difficult to interpret. It is unclear which portions ofthe land wereconsidered Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge and which were Old Harbor NativeCorporation. We suggest clarifying this by outlining and labeling all land ownerships inthe vicinity ofthe project.

2

8

ooooooooo

ofJl.

ooU

J]

Attached Maps and Figures We believe including a better vicinity map and map showing the landownership over the entire project site would be helpfuL We suggest these maps be inserted earlyin the document. Use ofvarious line types for outlines ofpolygons, color or high qualityshading, and more complete labeling would make these maps easier to read.

Exhibit E - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment for Hydropower License OldHarbor Project

3. Proposed Action and Alternatives The only alternatives presented are the applicant's proposaland the no action alternative. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process mandatesthat a reasonable number ofalternatives be evaluated. We suggest that other alternatives beevaluated, such as different sites, different project sizes, or storage projects, be discussed and therationale for their rejection explained.

3.1.1 Project Description We believe that a more detailed project description is needed to assessproject impacts. We suggest including, for example: 1) describe ifthe pipeline will"be buriedbetween the diversion structure and the powerhouse; 2) describe the width ofthe constructionright ofway needed; 3) and describe the dimensions ofthe access road to the powerhouse and thetypes ofstream crossings proposed, etc.

3.1.3 Proposed Environmental Measures The Draft EA states: "Environmental investigationsreveal that Mountain Creek is at best a marginal fishery habitat. Lagoon Creek is a much moreviable fishery habitat." This is a strong statement considering the limited fisheries studies thathave been conducted. We believe this sentence should simply state that Mountain Creek appearsto provide some rearing habitat for juvenile coho salmon, rather than to broadly categorize it asmarginal fishery habitat.

Unauthorized use ofAll-Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) on the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge is oneof our most significant concerns. ATV access can allow for an increased take ofwildlife, such asbrown bear and deer. ATV trails in alpine tundra areas are particularly destructive and can causesoil compaction, elimination ofvegetation, rutting, erosion, destruction of steam banks, and longterm scars upon the land, which in tum degrade fish and wildlife habitat. We recommend theFinal EA discuss in more detail how access to Project lands will be prohibited, what steps will betaken to monitor compliance with restrictions on access, and, in the event ATVs continue toaccess Project lands, what additional actions could be taken to restrict"access.

The Draft EA states: "A tailrace barrier will be constructed that will prevent migrating fish fromentering the tailrace." We suggest the document describe what size, species, and life stage offishwould be prevented from entry by the tailrace barrier.

4.6 Section 18 Fishway Prescription The Section 18 Fishway Prescription will be determined bythe fisheries agencies, not the project applicant-we suggest this be corrected.

3

ooofJooooooooo9ooo[]

o

5.1 General Description ofthe Lagoon and Barling Bay Drainage Area We recommend that thissection include a description ofthe eagle nests present in the vicinity ofthe access road andpowerhouse, including the known history ofnest use. It should also include approximatedistances between the nest sites and the access road and powerhouse.

Furthermore, we suggest that this section also contain a general description ofthe fish populationsand habitat present in Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek.

5.3 Issues Not Addressed The Draft EA states, "Water quality issues are not ofa concern withthis Project." However, there are several letters in our correspondence files indicating that waterquality is ofconcern to various agency representatives, most notably from the United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency (see letter dated July 2, 1997). We suggest the Final EAdescribe how the project will affect water quality. For example, will the project alter factors suchas temperature, dissolved oxygen, and others identified in agency letters, and ifnot, why? Wehave particular concerns regarding the effect the project may have on dissolved gases in the waterand the potential for the project to lower the water temperature in Lagoon Creek. In Table 2, wenote that the water temperature at the intake is 10 degrees colder than the temperature at thepowerhouse. Ifwater temperatures in Lagoon Creek are substantially reduced, it could affect fishspawning, incubation, and rearing in the stream. We recommend including a description ofthelikely temperature differential between Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek, the temperaturedifferential at the powerhouse, and the distance (stream miles) it would take for the dischargedwaters to reach the normal ambient temperatures ofLagoon Creek. Ifthere would be atemperature difference between the powerhouse discharge waters and Lagoon Creek, we suggestdescribing the impacts ofthis temperature difference on the fish resources ofLagoon Creek.

5.3.2 Vegetation Disturbance We believe there should be a discussion regarding why this issuewas not addressed. There is a discussion ofthe short-term physical changes that construction ofthe pipeline will have on vegetation (elimination ofvegetation in a corridor approximately 50'wide along the length ofthe pipeline), but no evaluation oflong-term impacts at this site. Itappears that the statement "It is estimated that in 2 years grasses will be fully re-established in thedisturbed area." is expected to adequately address these effects. However, this assumes thatrevegetation ofgrasses (native or exotic species) of any sort along the corridor will function asrecovered habitat. The description ofvegetation along the proposed pipeline route varies fromgrass/mossllichen environment, to willow/alder, dense alder thickets, and Kenai birch. From a soilstability standpoint, revegetation with grass may be suitable. This issue, however, appears tofocus on the vegetative community. Ifthe vegetation is changed and not expected to fullyrecover, we believe this should be identified. Furthermore, we suggest that the long-term effectson vegetation should be identified. Ifthe alteration ofvegetation on 18 acres is not consideredsignificant, the document should state this and explain the rationale for this determination.

In addition, we suggest the document include a discussion ofmeasures to replant vegetation forsoil stabilization. It is likely that the FWS will require revegetation ofthe construction right ofway with a mixture ofnative grasses and forbs. This mitigation measure should be discussed.

4

oooPtj

ooooD

oooooo[J

ooo

5.3.5 Threatened or Endangered Species "The species of concern that could potentially be in theProject area (Harlequin Duck, Kittlitz's Murrelet, and Marbled Murrelet) were not found either.Therefore, this analysis will not consider impacts to those species." Since these species are notlisted, we suggest this discussion should be moved to section "5.3.6, Impacts to Birds." Theabove statement is based on the fact that these species were not located during the 3 days whengeneral bird surveys were conducted at the site (1 day August 1996 and 2 days ~une 1998).There is insufficient data to conclude that these species do not use this habitat at some time. Wesuggest the document discuss whether or not habitat that would support these species ofconcernis present in the project area. After walking the project site from the powerhouse to the diversion(June 20, 1998, site visit by FWS biologist Gary Wheeler), we concluded that habitat likely tosupport marbled or Kittlitz's murrelet is not present in the project area. However, habitat whichmay support nesting harlequin ducks is present on Lagoon Creek. We believe that this furtheranalysis ofbird impacts should be considered in the Final. EA.

5.3.6 Impacts to Birds We suggest consideration ofhabitat alteration and impacts to neotropicalmigrant birds as a result ofthe project pipeline and transmission corridor be recognized anddescribed. While no neotropical species ofconcern were identified, these avian species may losethe use ofa variety ofhabitats for nesting and foraging.

5.3.7 Wetlands Wetlands are generally highly productive habitats for fish and wildlife.Consequently, we believe that the applicant should avoid wetlands whenever possible. Inaddition, we suggest the document address whether or not the penstock will be routed throughthe floodplain ofLagoon Creek. Ifthe penstock is planned to be routed though the floodplain, wewould be concerned about destabilization and removal offloodplain vegetation, as well as thepotential for damage to the penstock from channel movement and changes within the floodplain.

5.4.1.1 Geology and Soil Resource Issues - Mitigation We recommend clarifying which fishspecies and life stages will not be able to pass through the grating, and suggest including adiscussion ofwhether tailrace velocities will impede fish from migrating upstream past the tailracestructure.

In areas where there will be soil disturbance on steeper slopes, we encourage the use of straw orcoconut fiber matting to stabilize soils until vegetation can take hold. Stream banks that must bedisturbed for construction should be restored using bioengineering techniques. We suggestdiscussing these mitigation efforts in the Final EA.

5.4.2.1 Mountain Creek Fishety The discussion offish resources in Mountain Creek focusessolely on spawning habitat for salmon. However, it is stated that juvenile Coho salmon wereidentified in isolated pools within Mountain Creek on several occasions. While spawning habitathas historically been the focus offish habitat considerations, the importance ofrearing habitat forjuvenile fish is also very significant. IfMountain Creek provides important rearing habitat or lowvelocity refugia for juvenile fish during key times (such as during high flow periods in otherstreams), Mountain Creek may have important values for fish habitat. Juvenile fish are obviously

5

ooo[1

o0_-l

oooooooBooooJ

using Mountain Creek during some life stages. Ifall their habitat needs are provided by BarlingCreek, it would be unlikely that they would be using this area in significant numbers. The value ofthis stream should be evaluated for all life stages, not just spawning habitat. Mountain Creekmay, in fact, be oflittle value as fish habitat, but we believe the rationale for this conclusion needsto be fully documented in the Final EA.

The Draft EA asserts that "regardless ofwhere Mountain Creek empties into Barling Creek,Barling Creek fish do not generally benefit from the waters ofthe Mountain Creek basin since thewater usually goes subterranean well before it reaches the mouth." We believe that this assertioncannot be made without a better understanding ofthe hydrology ofthe stream. Water flowingsubsurface during a portion ofits travel is not necessarily lost from the system. On the contrary,it seems likely that the water flowing out ofMountain Creek is directly contributing to BarlingCreek. Ifthere is a substantial portion ofwater flowing subsurface into Barling Creek and thiswater is removed, it could substantially lower the water table, in turn reducing the level ofBarlingCreek. This could dewater portions ofBarling Creek, rendering it unusable or impassable to fishduring parts ofthe year. In light this, we believe that the conclusion that removal ofwater fromMountain Creek would not affect the Barling Creek fishery is questionable without additionalevidence and analysis, and should be further discussed.

We suggest that tables be included showing when surveys were conducted and the historicalabundance of spawners in Barling Creek and Mountain Creek. These- tables would help representthe net effect ofdewatering Mountain Creek on Barling Creek. We also recommend including atable describing fish harvest in Alaska Department ofFish and Game statistical area 258-52.Although not all fish harvested from this area are from Barling Creek, it will give someperspective to the fishery.

5A.2.2 Lagoon Creek Fishery The Draft EA states that "receiving up to 13 cfs from MountainCreek will probably draw more salmon into the mid-section ofLagoon Creek, which is currentlyunderutilized because it dries up at times." We believe that this statement makes the followingquestionable assumptions:

That providing an additional 13 cfs to this stream will not affect existing spawning habitatin portions ofthe stream currently suitable for spawning. The suitability ofspawninghabitat is based on a variety offactors including substrate size, substrate consolidation,water velocity and oxygenation. Doubling the average annual flow rate to this stream asproposed by the project would undoubtably affect all of these factors in Lagoon Creek.Existing spawning habitat may become less suitable, or the additional flow may alter thesubstrate regime in the creek. Stream channels self-regulate their size based on thesubstrate and the amount ofdischarge. The document should discuss the ability ofLagoon Creek to carry the additional 13 cfs without altering its channel and evaluate theseeffects on existing habitat. (Also refer to our comments above regarding watertemperatures under Section 5.3.1.)

6

R[J

oBoooooooooooo[J

o

That by increasing the water in the stream, the dry portion ofthe streambed will becomesuitable spawning habitat. This statement makes three assumptions. First, it assumes thatan additional 13 cfs would raise the water table enough to exceed subsurface flowcapacity. Second, it assumes that because water is present, the hydrologic conditions andsubstrate available would be suitable for spawning. Third, it assumes that increasing theavailability ofspawning habitat would result in an increase offish numbers. Withoutidentifying the limiting factor for fish populations in Lagoon Creek, we believe theseassumptions are invalid. Ifspawning habitat is known to be the limiting factor for salmon,we suggest this be documented, along with the rationale for reaching this conclusion. Ifnot, the assumption that providing additional water is a benefit to the Lagoon Creeksalmon fishery is unsubstantiated.

That increasing water depth in the lower portions ofLagoon Creek would improve habitatfor salmon. We believe the previous discussion above also applies to this assumption.

The Draft EA provides no rationale for these assumptions, and references no supporting data.Measuring the cross sections ofthe dry creek bed and extrapolating "potential spawning habitatvalue" to this area is, we believe, a questionable approach due to the extensive number ofecological variables which likely have not been evaluated for these streams. Ifthis project isimplemented, these assumptions should be evaluated through careful monitoring of suitablehabitat and the fisheries populations using the entire stream.

5.4.2.4 Monitoring Plans The Draft EA suggests that monitoring fish habitat affected by thisproject is unnecessary because any effects to fisheries would be positive. However, as discussedin the comments above, we believe this conclusion is not supported by the current evaluation.Furthermore, the Draft EA states that "Through visual inspection, stream gauging and fishstudies, it has been concluded that Mountain Creek does not sustain a fish population." We believthis statement to be inaccurate, considering the presence ofjuvenile Coho noted in the fieldreports. In light ofearlier comments, Mountain Creek may in fact provide habitat values to fishusing Barling Creek, and monitoring may be appropriate. Additionally, substantially changing thewater flow regime and temperature may be either beneficial or detrimental to the existing LagoonCreek fishery. A thorough monitoring plan to insure that the existing fishery is not negativelyimpacted should be considered in the Final EA.

5.4.3 Terrestrial Resource Issues The bald eagle territory in the project area consists of aminimum ofthree historic nest sites, all within a small area (-.5 km). Early spring, prior to May15, appears to be the period when Kodiak-nesting bald eagles are the most vulnerable todisturbance. Pairs will readily abandon a nest site when disturbed during this period.Disturbance during incubation (generally after May 15) and the early hatching period (up to July1) can cause nest failure, although the adults will usually continue to occupy the territory. AfterJuly 1, fledglings are not as susceptible to exposure and can tolerate minimal disturbance.However, minimal disturbance does not include direct helicopter overflights for setting

7

BooooooooooooBoo[J

oo

transmission line poles. Therefore, activity around a nest in April or earlier can often be moredetrimental than later in the season. We suggest the Final EA discuss these considerations.

5.4.5 Land Ownership We suggest the first sentence be modified to read "The majority oftheProject is located within the boundaries ofthe Kodiak: National Wildlife Refuge."

The second sentence also needs to be corrected. The lands were not "conveyed ... via aconservation agreement;" we recommend this be revised to read "Part ofthe lands that the Projectwould occupy were recently sold by the Old Harbor Native Corporation to the United States forinclusion as part of the Kodiak National WIldlife Refuge, subject to a conservation easement heldby the State ofAlaska. "

5.4.5.1 Mitigation The construction and operation ofthe proposed project is contingent uponobtaining a Right-of-Way permit from the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, through the KodiakRefuge. Issuance ofRight-of-Way permits is governed by regulations at 50 CFR 29 and 43 CFR36. We suggest this be clarified in the Final EA

We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft License Application andPreliminary Draft Environmental Assessment for this project. Please contact Gary Wheeler, Fishand Wildlife Service, Anchorage Field Office, at (907) 271-2780, ifyou have any questionsregarding these comments. Please contact Paul Hunter, National Park Service, at (907)264-5431, ifyou have any questions pertaining to recreation opportunities.

Sincerely,

aul . GatesRegional Environmental Officer - Alaska

cc. David P. Boergers, Secretary FERC

8

Booooooo]

oooooooooJ


January 27, 1999

Daniel HertrichPolarconsult Alaska, Inc.1503 W. 33 rd Avenue, Suite 310Anchorage, AK 99503

RE: -Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project-Preliminary Comments and Recommendations-FERC License Number 11561-000-Notice of Draft License Application, Preliminary DraftEnvironmental Assessment (PDEA), and Soliciting PreliminaryTerms, Conditions, and Recommendations.

Dear Mr. Hertrich:

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has reviewed theDraft License Application, Preliminary Draft EnvironmentalAssessment (PDEA), submitted by Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. for theproposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 11561-000).Our comments and recommendations are presented below. Thesepreliminary recommendations are offered for the protection,mitigation, and enhancement of fish and wildlife resources asprovided for under Section 10 (j) of the Federal Power Act.Final recommendations for terms and conditions will be presentedin our comments on the FERC EA and application. Because we aremaking recommendations and implementation of theserecommendations by the applicant have not been finalized, we mayhave additional concerns and recommendations which we are unableto identify at this time.

3.1.1. Project DescriptionDetailed construction plans should be included in the document.Include bridge plans, powerhouse plans, road/transmission linelocation, culvert locations, etc., etc.

3.1.2. Project OperationThe document states, ~AVEC proposes to use the natural flow ofthe East Fork of Mountain Creek to generate power." Thestatement implies that East Fork and Mountain Creek arerelatively unaffected by the use of natural flow. These creekswill be significantly altered. Low flows in East Fork often arelower than the 13 cfs that will be diverted, so at times 100% ofthe flow will be removed from East Fork. Since the East Forkmakes up 40-50% of the flow in Mountain Creek, Mountain Creek

~f~~)~~-

"l~r\ff... r o~ ;,.,:,;'"

Booo0:f

ooD

ooooooooDoJ

will also be affected. A more appropriate sentence would be,"AVEC proposes to divert the East Fork of Mountain Creek togenerate power."

5.3.2. Vegetation DisturbanceIt is stated that vegetation grows very rapidly in the Projectarea and it is estimated that in two years grasses will be fullyre-established in the disturbed areas. Although it is expectedthat disturbed areas will naturally revegetate, a detailedmonitoring and revegetation plan should be included in thedocument. It should have short and long term monitoring anddefinitions of success. If natural revegetation does not occurwithin two years, planting should be done. The revegetation planshould include planting densities, use native plant species, andoutline other erosion control measures that may be needed.

5.3.7. WetlandsPlease include wetlands acres impacted.

5.4.1. Geology and Soil Resource IssuesBuried line installation should be included in this section. Thedocument should contain location and construction specifics. Thestream crossing should be addressed. Directional boring is thepreferred method of laying the cable under the stream. Arevegetation and monitoring plan should be included in themitigation section.

5.4.1.1. Mitigation1. Include the culvert diameter, calculated tailrace velocities,the size of substrate that will be moved, the amount of expectederosion and the size of the scour pond.

2. What will be done with extra soil when the pipeline isburied?

5.4.2.1. Mountain Creek FisheryThe document states, "Note that, regardless of where MountainCreek empties into Barling Creek, Barling Creek fish do notgenerally benefit from the waters of the Mountain Creek basinsince the water usually goes subterranean well before it reachesthe mouth." Although the water may be subsurface it stillcontributes to the estuary, altering salinity and perhapscontributing to intergravel flows and intertidal spawning, sostating that there are no benefits to Barling Creek fish is anerroneous statement.

The document states, "It is also concluded that Mountain Creekdoes not have a fishery to impact." Surveys have documentedjuvenile fish use of Mountain Creek. The fish using the creekhave a use for that habitat during a particular life stage.

ooooooooooooooooUJJ

Please restate as, "Mountain Creek contains marginal fisheryhabitat and doesn't contribute significantly to fisheriesproduction."

5.4.2.2. Lagoon Creek FisheryThe applicant states, "Lagoon Creek has a total measured usefulspawning area in the mid-section of 92,250 sq. ft capable ofsupporting 17,140 salmon if dependable, consistent flows areprovided from the project year round." This implies that theproject will provide this flow. Does the applicant have the datato support this? In actuality, 13 cfs may help to expand acertain percentage of the available dry habitat. Please includethe data and calculations that predict the amount of increasedspawning and incubation habitats and the resultant increase infishery production.

The average flow in Lagoon Creek is stated to be 13.4 cfs. Theproposed project will add an additional 13cfs when availablefrom East Fork. Does the applicant anticipate any erosion causedby almost doubling the average flow and raising peak flows by 13cfs? There are already gabions in the river at the road crossingwhere bank erosion is a problem. Please include expectedadditional erosion estimates and design or mitigation measures toalleviate bank erosion and down cutting. The analysis shouldinclude probable impacts to bank stability and fish habitat ..

5.4.2.2.1. MitigationAlthough the applicant feels that the project is likely anenhancement to the Lagoon Creek fishery, this needs to beverified through monitoring (see section 5.4.2.4). If theproject does not prove to benefit fisheries, or in factnegatively impacts fisheries (perhaps through erosion) acontingency mitigation plan should be developed and included inthe document that clearly outlines the applicant'sresponsibilities throughout the life of the project. Suchresponsibilities may include flow alteration, flume redesign,stream bank rehabilitation and erosion control.

5.4.2.3.1 MitigationMeet all Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) timingrestrictions for preventive or routine maintenance andconstruction activities.

5.4.2.4. Issue - Monitoring PlansWe agree that monitoring is needed on Lagoon Creek.

5.4.2.4.1. MitigationThe analysis states the Lagoon Creek fish resource may beenhanced by the Project. To verify this, the applicant shoulddevelop a detailed monitoring plan on Lagoon Creek that should:

4. A stream gage should be operated in Lagoon Creek for aminimum of five years of project operation.

3. Document changes in stream morphology and bank stabilityby redoing cross sections during years three and five ofproject operation.

1. Document changes in surface flow through the dry sectionduring spawning and incubation during years one through fiveof project operation.

Monitoring may point out the need for mitigation in Lagoon Creek(Section 5.4.2.2.1), or the need for redirected, or more specificmonitoring. Monitoring results should be sent to the NMFS forreview in a timely manner for comments and recommendations.

an EssentialMagnuson-Stevens(16 U.S.C. 1801

2. Verify increased fish production in Lagoon Creek byconducting spawning surveys during years one through five ofproject operation during appropriate times for pink, chumand coho salmon. Separate the formerly ~dry section" as aseparate section with discreet numbers.

Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

The Environmental Assessment should also includeFish Habitat (EFH) assessment as required by theFishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA)et seq.).

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

o

Booooo

oJoo

o[J

Do

SinCere~lY'.J '',.---''''~ -'~ ~

J(Jne.L~Hansa:Field Office SupervisorHabitat Conservation Division

NMFS Contact: Daniel J. Vos

cc: USFWS, EPA, ADGC, ADFG, ADEC - AnchorageFERC

[J

oo

n[J

[J

nu[J

oLl1]

']

]

]

J]

Draft Environmental Assessment· Old Harbor Project, FERC #11690-000

EXHIBITF & G

noJnJJlJ[J

JUJJ]

J]

]

Exhibits F & G are 24"x36" drawings that are not attached to this document. They havebeen sent separately.