The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFERC notice E: •r� ��c� rJ.;� �m��" .l� �"tiCxf. , i��fihJie' : �ri��, eU,I�� r u nrir;iu; r w 'RAL ENERGY � ��a��9 �n�i�w L/ i C iniiairaiivo iiiar iiiiaamiafn ui p n a nf' k NP a s b �' u` LArORY COMMISSION � � " rst Street NE tl x" Nl Id f �;ww ngtdn,DC 20426 YI"�r tt°u u o;a�m,.��rvurn.�lnuik 9nm„�Wtv'muiN�, 0 S.3 0"A 'e16 5".1'Cl” ,. .' Docket No.: F-619 BUMCOUNTY BUTTE, COUNTY OF NISTRATIcN' BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OCT 2 8 20116 25 County center Dr Orovi le, CA 95965-3316 OROVILLE,�; �.,br-1ahr11r� p aJ C y eS q c 'C ti � Rb csw � b oo � � .rLN a � wo � �� oGvo V o G � y ar n C, p M a to w a y u .� > ix3 i w p CL uV c o a m y oo a ° W 0 to aj p C0J o T 'D z U COOLa y .� c " a a ❑ Q °� aci r. OHo p 044 Q) x - ash o c o sa 3 0O U nu to V p _ e c •� 'C a °? 'o � v a � � a p w C O y 7•, .O '5 o Q Ua a a •nOo ' a'z N aca o .p� eG) N oca ma 3 to T u T ayO� X .c cc cp, 4.� r¢r, T C � •C_ O .y .G] O. `U rn 'a o U = o c y K �-' •� V A V y c «� O n Q21 Q v C U •c� `' 'y O `� O y 0. w wys 'd aa. a ch .% to o f .O v a U rS C �ID -Q. r W 'O O 'O M -) .2 = , c3 U rNs iR• y C a w N o oa p o C m ° q o a •`-' .� cs o E b E a 3 o y ° 00 ow ° a.� � � °' oAoTa W c° U roq G. oo "m a y V sr1 U qj ci n� .5 2 ami cs `c cCa 4i v ?+ v y 3 a ,O .a 3 .-. .� a. U a 2 � 2 ) § \ 3 ( 3 \ f0 \ \ / / \ § }\ & N .0 2 k 2.1 ; me2 § j 7f) \ k ] § \ e $] 2 § § / &k / / _ ƒ$ ) K } a } 5 � � r ` « a 2 / \\ � k . 7 to CU 0 : $ § § Q \ ) / 0C) \ u J e0 ' \ §( 7 \ 2 & /\ k ° ate [ 7 \ a4 , x // ® — _ to.j \ƒ ® k ® $ � & % j ) § a3 k \ 3 APPENDIX A COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION FOR THE BUCKS CREEK PROJECT,FERC NO.619-158 Commission staff has identified that your draft license application(DLA)did not contain some of the information that will be required by our regulations for a final license application(FLA)(§5.18). In our comments,we note the areas of the DLA where more specific information will be needed for a complete license application. Exhibits B,D,and F (1) The Exhibit B should also include monthly flow duration curves. (2) Add a Short Run Avoided Cost reference to Table D.8.1-1. (3) You do not include a Supporting Design Report in section F-3 because you believe the recent Part 12 Independent Dam Safety Inspection Reports(October 29,2015)fulfills .the requirements of the regulations. You should ask for a waiver of this requirement for the reasons you give. Exhibit E Genera! (1) Many sections within the DLA state that existing,relevant,and reasonable available information for the resource is described in the pre-application document(PAD)of the DLA. Note that the Commission's regulations,§5.18(b)(5)(C)(ii)(A-13),require a detailed description of the affected environment or area(s)to be affected by the proposed project by each resource,including the affected environment information filed in the PAD,developed under the applicant's approved study pian,and otherwise developed or obtained by the applicant. While much of this information is provided in the PAD and summarized in the DLA,the FLA should include a more detailed description of the resources. (2) The preliminary proposed protection,mitigation,and enhancement(PM&E) measures for the Bucks Creek Project are listed in a table that starts on page E-371 of the DLA. Per the Commission's regulations,§5.18(0),this section also should detail how each proposed measure would protect or enhance the existing environment and,when possible,describe any anticipated benefits in non-monetary terms. (3) Several of the PM&E measures listed in the table on page E-371 involve the development of plans;however,the details of these proposed plans are not included in 4 the DLA. It is the Commission's goal to have resource-specific protection plans Filed prior to license issuance. We expect,therefore,that detailed plans be filed with the FLA application. At a minimum,these plans(including the vegetation management plan; recreation management plan;transportation management plan;and fire prevention plan) should include the following details: • The objectives of the plan • The mitigation/monitoring/management techniques to be employed in the plan • A description of how the mitigation/monitoringlmanagement techniques for the plan will incorporate conservation/avoidance measures • An implementation schedule Aquatic Resources (1) On page E-30,you state that a flow release of approximately 0.25 cubic feet per second would be made from a fixed diameter pipe at Milk Ranch conduit diversion no.3 on South Fork Grouse Creek. In the FLA,please provide a detailed plan,implementation schedule,and conceptual design drawings of the fixed diameter pipe. (2) On page E-30,you state that a number of diversions along Milk Ranch Conduit would be rendered inoperable and no longer divert flows but would continue to be managed for safety. In the FLA,please provide a detailed plan describing how each of these diversions would be rendered inoperable and managed for safety,and an implementation schedule. (3) On pages E-55 and 56,you propose to release channel maintenance flows in Bucks Creek and Grizzly Creek as required in the existing license and you state that project operation would have no significant adverse effects on channel condition and large woody debris. In the FLA,please provide evidence or scientific reasoning to substantiate the assertion that project operation would have insignificant effects on channel conditions and large woody debris in Bucks Creek and Grizzly Creek. Please provide a detailed technical discussion with any relevant data,figures,or tables to support your assertions. (4) On page E-98,you state that water temperatures in the North Fork Feather River are not substantially altered by inflow of project-affected stream reaches,and you refer to Figure E.7.2.2-4 as evidence. In the FLA,please provide evidence or scientific reasoning to substantiate the assertion that project operation would have insignificant effects on water temperature in the North Fork Feather River. Please provide a detailed technical discussion with any relevant data,figures,or tables to support your assertions. (5) On page E-100,you state that water temperatures in the project-affected stream reaches are generally suitable For cold water fish,even though water temperatures in Grizzly Creek exceed 20 degrees Celsius in July and August. In the FLA,please provide 5 the results of the temperature model being developed for Grizzly Creek as evidence to substantiate the assertion that water temperatures in Grizzly Creek affected by project operation are suitable for cold water fish and habitat. Please provide a detailed technical discussion with any relevant data,figures,or tables to support your assertions. (6) On page E-142,you propose to release minimum instream flows at Lower Bucks Lake dam and Grizzly€orebay dam as required in the existing license. You refer to graphs of weighted usable area(WUA)for various life-stages of brown and rainbow trout from a 1991 instream flow study and you state that project operation with these minimum instream flows would result in no significant adverse effects on aquatic and fish habitat. In the FLA,please provide a detailed technical discussion using the WUA results from the 1991 study to substantiate the assertion that the proposed minimum instream flows in the project-affected reaches below Lower Bucks Lake dam and Grizzly Forebay dam would have insignificant adverse effects on brown and rainbow trout habitat. Please provide any relevant data,figures,or tables to support your assertions. (7) On page E-142,you state that the proposed instream flows in Milk Ranch Creek below Three Lakes and at Milk Ranch conduit diversions nos. I and 3 would result in no significant adverse effect on aquatic habitat. In the FLA,please provide evidence or scientific reasoning to substantiate the assertion that these instream flows would result in insignificant effects on aquatic habitat in Milk Ranch Creek. Please provide a detailed technical discussion with any relevant data,figures,or tables to support your assertions. (8) On page E-195,you state that the proposed instream flows in Milk Ranch Creek below Three Lakes and at Milk Ranch conduit diversions nos. I and 3 would have less than significant effect to populations of back juga snail. In the FLA,please provide evidence or scientific reasoning to substantiate the assertion these instream flows would result in insignificant effects on the black juga snail in Milk Ranch Creek_ Please provide a detailed technical discussion with any relevant data,figures,or tables to support your assertions. (9) In Section E.7.3.3.1,you should describe the location of the designated critical habitat for the California red-legged frog and Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog in relationship to the project and any potential effects on that habitat. Terrestrial Resources (1) References to Table E.5.2-1 (Current Operation and Maintenance Practices within the Project Area)(e.g.,page E-243,248,and 25 1)should be corrected to Table E.5.2-2 (Current Maintenance Practices within the Project Area)throughout Exhibit E. (2) On page E-215,you indicate that no avian electrocution or collisions have been observed in association with the transmission line. In the FLA,please include the time 6 period,if known,covered by these observations. (3) On page E-375,you propose to develop measures to protect ripariantwetland/littoral habitats and botanical resources. More information is needed on the specifics of your measures to protect riparian and wetland habitats,rare natural communities,and special- status plant species and control invasive plant species,including the use of herbicides. Ideally,you should include a draft vegetation management plan and transportation management plan in the FLA. (4) On page E-376,you propose to continue to implement the Bald Eagle Management Plan that was filed in 2006. In the FLA,please discuss the specific measures to protect and monitor bald eagle bald eagles that are outlined in the plan. (5) On page E-376,define the breeding season for bald eagle and osprey. (6) On page E-376,you propose to evaluate consistency of the existing transmission line facilities with APLIC design criteria and upgrade hazardous facilities within 10 years of the new license but provide no information on potential effects of the line on avian electrocution or collision. In the FLA,please include existing information on the general design of the power poles,number of power poles,presence or absence of a static or shield wire,suitability of avian habitat surrounding the line,flight paths,and other factors that can contribute to or lessen potential effects. In addition,describe aspects of the PG&E's Avian Protection Program(page E-215)that are relevant to the Bucks Creek Project and explain what is meant by"hazardous"and how would it be determined. (7) The link to Nesting Birds: Species-specific Suffers for PG&E Activities on page E- 423 is incorrect. Please either file that document with the Commission or include as appendix to the FLA.