HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.23.20 Board Correspondence - FW_ Annual Water Quality_Minimum Flow submitted in FERC P-619-000 by Pacific Gas and Electric Company,et al.
From:Schuman, Amy
To:Alpert, Bruce;Bennett, Robin;Clerk of the Board;Connelly, Bill;Cook, Holly;Lambert, Steve;Lucero, Debra;McCracken, Shari;Paulsen, Shaina;Pickett, Andy;Ring, Brian;
Ritter, Tami;Rodas, Amalia;Sweeney, Kathleen;Teeter, Doug
Subject:Board Correspondence - FW: Annual Water Quality/Minimum Flow submitted in FERC P-619-000 by Pacific Gas and Electric Company,et al.
Date:Monday, November 23, 2020 4:47:28 PM
Good afternoon,
Please see the email below from FERC.
Amy Schuman
Associate Clerk of the Board
Butte County Administration
25 County Center Drive, Suite 200, Oroville, CA 95965
O: 530.552.3300 |D: 530.552.3308 | F: 530.538.7120
Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Pinterest
-----Original Message-----
From: 'FERC eSubscription' <eSubscription@ferc.gov>
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2020 3:55 PM
Subject: Annual Water Quality/Minimum Flow submitted in FERC P-619-000 by Pacific Gas and Electric Company,et al.
.ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening attachments, clicking on links, or replying..
On 11/23/2020, the following Filing was submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Washington D.C.:
Filer: Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (as Agent)
Docket(s): P-619-000
Lead Applicant: Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Filing Type: Annual Water Quality/Minimum Flow
Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits a Petition for Reconsideration of the State Water Resources Control Board's Water Quality Certification re the
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project under P-619.
To view the document for this Filing, click here https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/filelist?accession_num=20201123-
5131__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!RbFe1Z4gOqFM6jGBC1mcJW6yqagz9fl_WXs0KYDuumbjAsS7QKeU-clPrPp6rGf6verABXcRIYk$
To modify your subscriptions, click here:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ferconline.ferc.gov/eSubscription.aspx__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!RbFe1Z4gOqFM6jGBC1mcJW6yqagz9fl_WXs0KYDuumbjAsS7QKeU-
clPrPp6rGf6verAus_EG1I$
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not respond to this email.
Online help is available here:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.ferc.gov/efiling-help.asp__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!RbFe1Z4gOqFM6jGBC1mcJW6yqagz9fl_WXs0KYDuumbjAsS7QKeU-
clPrPp6rGf6verA6z9_ADk$
or for phone support, call 866-208-3676.
Pacific Gas and
TM
Electric Company
Mailing Address
Annette Faraglia
P.O. Box 7442
Chief Counsel, Hydro Generation
San Francisco, CA 94120
Law Department
Street/Courier Address
Law Department
77 Beale Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 973-7145
Fax: (415) 973-5520
Email: Annette.Faraglia@pge.com
November 20, 2020 Via E-Mail To:
WaterQualityPetitions@waterboards.ca.gov
Adrianna.Crowl@waterboards.ca.gov
State Water Resources Control Board
Office of Chief Counsel
Adrianna M. Crowl
nd
1001 I Street, 22 Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re:
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project
Dear Ms. Crowl:
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) has efiled today the enclosed Petition for
Reconsideration of the Water Quality Certification (WQC) for the Bucks Creek Hydroelectric
Project, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project No. 619.
The Executive Director of the State Water Resources Control Board issued the WQC on
October 22, 2020, so this Petition for Reconsideration is timely filed.
As a courtesy, a hard copy of this Petition will be sent to Eileen Sobeck, Executive Director
and to Patrick Pulupa, Executive Officer by U.S. Mail.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at (415) 973-7145 or
annette.faraglia@pge.com. If I am unavailable, please contact Jo Lynn Lambert at
(909) 793-4942 or JoLynn.Lambert@pge.com. You can also reach out to Tony Gigliotti, the
Bucks Creek project manager at (925) 357-973-7120 or tony.gigliotti@pge.com.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Annette Faraglia
Chief Counsel, Hydro Generation
Enclosures
State Water Resources Control Board
Office of Chief Counsel
Adrianna M. Crowl
November 20, 2020
Page 2
cc: Chase Hildeburn (via E-Mail)
Patrick Pulupa (via E-Mail and Regular Mail)
David Rose (via E-Mail)
Eileen Sobeck (via E-Mail and Regular Mail)
Tony Gigliotti (via E-Mail)
Jo Lynn Lambert (via E-Mail)
FERC Service List for Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project No. 619 (via E-Mail)
BEFORE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
In the Matter of
Water Quality Certification for the FERC Project No. 619
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project
_____________________________________
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA
PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
OF THE WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
FOR THE BUCKS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Annette Faraglia, Chief Counsel
Law Department
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
77 Beale Street, B30A
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 973-7145
Facsimile: (415) 973-5520
Email: annette.faraglia@pge.com
Jo Lynn Lambert
LAMBERT LAW
300 East State Street, Suite 600
Redlands, CA 92373
Telephone: (909) 793-4942 or (415) 973-5248
Facsimile: (909) 792-5150
Email: JoLynn.Lambert@pge.com
Dated: November 20, 2020
BEFORE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
In the Matter of
Water Quality Certification for the FERC Project No. 619
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project
_____________________________________
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA
PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
OF THE WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
FOR THE BUCKS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
INTRODUCTION
On October 22, 2020, the Executive Director of the State Water Resources Control Board
), acting pursuant to Section 401 of the federal Clean
Water Act (, 33 U.S.C. § 1341, issued a Water Quality CWQ
Pacific Gas and Electric Company co-
licensed Bucks Creek
Project No. 619 No draft of the WQC was circulated for comments before the final
was issued. Experts from PG&E and Santa Clara (collectively have reviewed the
final WQC and determined, from an operational and regulatory perspective, certain conditions
are problematic. Consequently, PG&E and Santa Clara are filing, pursuant to Title 23, Section
3867(c), of the California Code of Regulations, this Petition for Reconsideration
1
I. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONERS
Annette Faraglia, Chief Counsel
Law Department
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
77 Beale Street, B30A
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 973-7145
Facsimile: (415) 973-5520
E-Mail: annette.faraglia@pge.com
Steve Hance
Silicon Valley Power
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Telephone: (408) 615-6601
E-Mail: shance@santaclaraca.gov
II. SPECIFIC ACTION OF THE STATE WATER BOARD
As noted above, on October 22, 2020issued
a Section 401 Certification for Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project
No. 619. A copy of the WQC is attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated by reference.
III. DATE ON WHICH THE STATE WATER BOARD ACTED
The Executive Director of the State Water Board issued the WQC for Petitioners Bucks
Creek Hydroelectric Project on October 22, 2020. PG&E and Santa Clara are filing this Petition
for Reconsideration on November 20, 2020, in compliance with the 30-day deadline for filing
this Petition with the State Water Board set forth at Title 23, Section 3867(c), of the California
Code of Regulations.
IV. STATEMENT OF REASONS WHY THE ACTION WAS INAPPROPRIATE OR
IMPROPER
On December 12, 2016, PG&E and Santa Clara filed their final license application for a
new license with FERC for the Project. PG&E and Santa Clara subsequently filed an
updated application for a new license on May 22, 2018, and an errata to that update on
2
July 27, 2018. On August 14, 2018, PG&E and Santa Clara filed with the State Water Board an
application for water quality certification for the Project pursuant to Section 401 of the federal
CWA, 33 U.S.C. § 1341. On August 13, 2019, the State Water Board denied without prejudice
the 2018 application for certification. Then, on October 23, 2019, PG&E and Santa Clara
submitted a new application for certification.
After examining the final license application, FERC issued a Final Environmental Impact
Santa Clara, as lead agency under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.\]) and pursuant to the
CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), released a draft CEQA Supplement
to the FERC Final EIS on June 3, 2020, with the comment period concluding on July 20, 2020.
The CEQA Supplement determined that all impacts associated with the Project are less than
significant and no mitigation measures were required. No substantive comments were received
on the draft CEQA Supplement, and as such, there was no need for revision or responses to
City Council
on September 29, 2020, and signed by the City Manager on October 5, 2020.
The Executive Director of the State Water Board issued the WQC for Petitioners Bucks
Creek Hydroelectric Project on October 22, 2020. Because there was no draft WQC circulated
for review, Petitioners did not have the opportunity to review and comment on the conditions of
the certificate or correct any factual inaccuracies prior to issuance. The licensing of a
hydroelectric project is necessarily complex and highly technical. Petitioners experts have
carefully reviewed the conditions of the WQC and believe they contain several unintentional
conflicts ederal Power Act Section
4(e) conditions or other
conditions recommended by FERC staff in the Final EIS. As explained further below, these
3
conflicting requirements are operationally problematic, confusing, and/or infeasible. Other
conditions are outside the narrow certification authority of the State Water Board and should be
removed. For these reasons, Petitioners have filed this Petition for Reconsideration of the final
WQC.
If such an approach is acceptable to the State Water Board, Petitioners remain committed
to resolving these issues without the necessity of a formal hearing.
V. APPLICABLE LAW FOR THE PETITION TO RECONSIDER
A new FERC license may not be issued without a Section 401 certificate under the CWA
agency responsible for water quality compliance. In general, the
icate become part of the new license issued by
FERC. In California, issuance of the certificate requires CEQA environmental review. See Pub.
Resources Code, § 21065.
A. EPA Regulations Implementing Section 401 and Other Federal Standards
The FPA preempts State authority over FERC-jurisdictional hydroelectric projects,
See 16 U.S.C. § 821; First Iowa Hydro-Electric Cooperative v. FPC, 328 U.S. 152, 176 (1946).
Section 401 of the C
effluent limitations and
requirements of State law that address water quality issues. See PUD No. 1 of Jefferson County
v. Wash. Dept. of Ecology, 511 U.S. 700, 712 (1994); see also 40 C.F.R. § 121.3 (the scope of a
CWA section 401 certification is limited to assuring that a discharge from a Project will comply
with specific water quality requirements applicable to point source discharges).
4
The U.S. Environmental Protection , and its rules
implementing Section 401 establish the appropriate scope of certification conditions. 40 C.F.R.
Part 121. Conditions included in a certification are assuring that a discharge from a
Federally C.F.R.
§ 121.3. Under E
C.F.R. § 121.1(n). In order to ensure that conditions included in State certifications are within
the scope of Section 401 of the CWA, certifying agencies like the State Water Board are required
explaining why the condition is necessary to
assure that the discharge from the proposed project will comply with water quality requirements;
121.7(d)(1). FER
these requirements. 40 C.F.R. § 121.9(b).
Moreover, EPA definitively clarified in the preamble to its final rule adopting regulations
ation conditions must be directly related to water quality
impacts from the prop Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule, 85 Fed.
Reg. 42,210 at 42,257 (July 13, 2020). The EPA provides examples of conditions that are
unrelated to water quality and have been inappropriately included in water quality certifications,
such as provisions for constructing biking and hiking trails, payments to State agencies, and
public access improvements for fishing and other activities. Id. According to the EPA, these
provisions do not address water quality impacts or relate to water quality requirements and thus
are inconsistent with the authority provided by Congress. Id.
State Water Board authority is further constrained by U.S. Constitutional mandates,
which allow the Water Board to impose conditions on a project only if there is a direct causal
5
rel
proposed project. Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) 483 U.S. 825, 837; see also
CEQA Guidelines § 15126.4(a)(4). The proposed condth in nature and
Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994) 512 U.S. 374,
391. The record in the proceeding must support this essential nexus.
B. CEQA Standards
The State Water Board must also comply with CEQA, a statute designed to give the
public and government agencies the information needed to make informed decisions. In this
way, CEQA is intended to protect not only the environment but also informed self-government.
See, e.g., Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California, 47
Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Cal. Code Regs., tit.
, at § 15201. The purposes of CEQA public review process
include, inter alia, disclosing agency analyses, checking the analyses for accuracy, and
discovering public concerns. See CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15200 (b), (c) and (e).
A central question under CEQA is whether the project being proposed will create a
significant impact on the environment, because CEQA authorizes a lead agency to impose
mitigation only to address project impacts. CEQA Guidelines §15126.4(a)(4). The baseline
against w
time the notice of preparation is published, or . . . at the time environmental analysis is
CEQA Guidelines, §15125(a); see Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition
Metro Line Construction Authority, 57 Cal.4th 439 (2013), Communities for a Better
Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist., 48 Cal.4th 310, 320-322 (2010)
(baseline is existing conditions rather than hypothetical conditions that could have existed under
6
existing regulations). CEQA expressly incorporates the U.S. Constitutional mandates requiring
and rough proportionality between the condition and an impact caused by
the proposed project. See CEQA Guidelines § 15126.4(a)(4).
The State Water Board should evaluate the measures in the WQC issued for the Bucks
Creek Project that are the subject of this Petition for Reconsideration in light of these legal
standards.
VI. MANNER IN WHICH THE PETITIONERS ARE AGGRIEVED
A. The WQC Conditions Conflict with the USFS FPA 4(e) Conditions and Other
Requirements, Creating Confusion, Unnecessary Additional Work, and Compliance
Challenges
Requested Change: Please conform timing and other logistical requirements with the 4(e)s
The WQC contains
enforce conditions included in the license, such as timing requirements for submission of plans,
notification periods and conditions that are inconsistent with other resource agency
recommendations including FPA 4(e) conditions filed by the USFS and the management plans
filed with FERC. While these piecemeal changes in the WQC conditions may appear harmless,
they render compliance difficult or, in some cases, impossible. The terms of the 4(e) conditions
are interconnected and were carefully developed in the relicensing process with the participation
of stakeholders including the State Water Board. will cause
unintended consequences that create unnecessary confusion, burdensome additional work, and
challenges with compliance.
1. Conflicts in the Timing Requirements (WQC Conditions 1, 3, 6, 9, 25)
Many of the timing requirements in the WQC conditions conflict with those in the final
USFS FPA 4(e) conditions. Such conflicts will create implementation headaches for Petitioners
and regulators, as well as unintended consequences, if they are not corrected.
7
For example, WQC Condition 3, Annual Drawdown of Three Lakes, contains several
timing requirements that conflict with the flexibility provided in the USFS FPA 4(e) conditions.
Rather than adopting the language in USFS FPA 4(e) condition 37, which requires the drawdown
(Final USFS Terms and Conditions (October 7, 2019),
p. 31)The Licensees
shall verify the water surface elevation of Lower Three Lakes on August 15 of each year, or the
shortest amount of time before August 15 if conditions prevent access See WQC, at 28
(emphasis supplied). USFS FPA 4(e) condition 37 allows important flexibility for not just
weather but operational needs; Condition 3 does not. USFS 4(e) condition 37, while flexible,
still ensures that the intent of the itiation of the annual
drawdown of Three Lakes in mid-August to avoid impacts to spawning and rearing habitat of
brook trout(WQC, at 14), is carried out. Petitioners urge the State Water Board to conform the
timing requirements of WQC Condition 3 to those more flexible requirements in FPA 4(e)
condition 37.
As another example of an unintended consequence, WQC Condition 9, Milk Ranch
Conduit Closure, is interconnected with the drawdown of Three Lakes (WQC Condition 3).
USFS FPA 4(e) condition 33 specifies that the Licensees shall temporarily close (i.e., bypass)
the following Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions within two business days, or as soon as reasonably
accessible, from the publication date of the April Bulletin 120 forecast through August 15, or
when the Licensees initiate the annual Three Lakes drawdown (Final USFS Terms and
Conditions, p. 24 (emphasis added)). WQC Condition 9, in contrast, requires closure by August
15 without reference to the Three Lakes drawdown. This will preclude coordinating the opening
of the diversion with the drawdown of Three Lakes because, in some instances, the drawdown of
Three Lakes will need to start earlier than August 15to ensure it is empty by September 15 as
8
required by WQC Condition 3. This lack of the ability to coordinate would prevent Petitioners
from optimizing efficiency and conserving water rather than spilling the drawdown. To avoid
this conflict and inefficiency, Petitioners request conforming WQC Condition 9 with WQC
Condition 3 and FPA 4(e) condition 33.
WQC Condition 6, Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake, is
equally problematic. First, this condition veers from the FPA 4(e) condition 35 concerning
managed spill dates by business days or the last
two business a seemingly innocuous change that makes
consistency with the USFS 4(e) condition virtually impossible and does not further the stated
intent of the condition. See Final USFS Terms and Conditions, p. 27. Specifying business days
is usually done for noticing or publication purposes, which is not an issue here. Rather, the State
WQC Condition 6 is mprove conditions for foothill yellow-
legged frogs and allow recruitment of woody riparian vegetation. See WQC, at 15. Since
neither frogs nor vegetation care about business days, the goal should be meeting the intent of
the condition, while reducing the confusion of having two separate dates. Adoption of the FPA
4(e) language would accomplish these dual objectives.
WQC Condition 6 contains another example of a seemingly-minor language change that
creates an inconsistency with USFS FPA 4(e) condition 35 and would create confusion and
compliance challenges. WQC Condition 6 requires a draft report concerning instream flows be
n five years after issuance of the new FERC license(WQC, at 34), rather
than as specified in USFS FPA 4(e) condition 35 (Final USFS Terms and
Conditions, p. 29). Since the intent of this report is to review the effects of this condition on the
instream flow for the five-year period (id.), it is infeasible for the report to be filed before the 5-
year period is over. If this provision of WQC Condition 6 is not corrected, Petitioners will need
9
to prepare and submit separate reports analyzing data from two different time periods to comply
with the State Water Board and FERC requirements, a time-consuming and expensive result that
produces no benefits for the Water Board, FERC, or the resources. To avoid the doubled efforts
required to provide reports at different times, Petitioners request that timing provisions in WQC
Condition 6 be conformed with those in USFS FPA 4(e) condition 35.
These scenarios are repeated in several other conditions where timing conflicts between
the WQC conditions and USFS FPA 4(e) conditions exist. Petitioners have identified the
conflicts described above as well as the additional timing conflicts in the table attached as
Exhibit C. Petitioners urge the State Water Board to revise the WQC conditions to eliminate
these timing conflicts and the difficulties they will cause.
2. Conflicts with other USFS FPA 4(e) Conditions (WQC Conditions 4, 24, 26)
The State Water Board has also included other requirements that conflict with the
carefully-developed provisions of the 4(e) conditions and management plans, which could make
compliance difficult or impossible. These unnecessary conflicts will create confusion and
complicate implementation of the license.
For example, in WQC Condition 4, Channel Maintenance Flows, the State Water Board
adopted the language in USFS FPA 4(e) condition 34, requiring the Petitioners to release specific
channel maintenance flows. However, in doing so, the Water Board also revised the condition in
a seemingly ministerial manner that will have profound consequences, failing to recognize that
controlling flows is complex, highly technical, and dependent on weather and the capabilities of
existing equipment. Specifically, whereas the USFS FPA 4(e) condition 34 requires that the
Petitioners WQC Condition 4
requires that the Petiti
the language of WQC Condition 4 ultimately creates a situation that may not be feasible. In fact,
10
1
WQC Condition 4 goes on to recognize that such precision may not be feasible. Other
provisions in WQC Condition 4 are also rendered potentially infeasi
implementlanguage in 4(e) condition 34. As
noted above, controlling flows is complex, highly technical and dependent on weather and the
capabilities of existing equipment. Accordingly, Petitioners request that WQC Condition 4 be
conformed to FPA 4(e) condition 34 to acknowledge the technical nature of managing the flows
and to allow Petitioners a modicum of flexibility needed to perform channel maintenance flows.
Another example of a conflict is WQC Condition 24, which is inconsistent with USFS
FPA 4(e) condition 62 and results in different consultation requirements for extremely dry
conditions. As stated in WQC Condition 24, Petitioners must consult Relicensing
Participants,include: United States Department of Agriculture, USFS, United States
Department of the Interior, USFWS, CDFW, American Whitewater, the Bucks Lake
Homeowners Association, and State Water Board staff. WQC, at 13, fn 6. However, USFS FPA
4(e) condition 62 requires consultation only with stakeholders, not with members of the public at
large. Because the stated goal of WQC r shortage issues during
consecutive Dry or Critically Dry water year types or drought years. This condition provides
flexibility for adaptive implementation during times of ex, at 20),
the stakeholder group contains the appropriate decisionmakers for determining how to best use a
limited resource. To avoid differing consultation requirements and infusion of special interests
in adaptive management decisions affecting public health and safety, Petitioners ask that WQC
Condition 24 be aligned with the consultation requirements of USFS FPA 4(e) condition 62.
1
The Licensees are not required to implement a High Spill if flows at Gage NF57 in
excess of 3,000 cfs are not available or the Licensees cannot reasonably accommodate a High Spill at a time when
3,000 cfs may be available due to safety or emergency conditions that exist at the time
11
Finally, WQC Condition 26 conflicts with the revision process for the management plans
2
that were filed with FERC by allowing the Deputy Director to unilaterally modify an existing
management plan. These plans and their contents were discussed, developed and agreed upon
with participating stakeholders, giving everyone a seat at the table. Without exception, they
require stakeholder consultation and the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations.
See, e.g., Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan, p. 7-1, §7.2. Providing for modification
of the plans outside of the collaborative process and without consultation with other stakeholders
or recourse for Petitioners is not an appropriate action. The proposed modifications may not
coincide with the existing management plan approved with FERC, leaving Petitioners with an
inability to comply with all conditions of the License. Petitioners request that WQC Condition
24 be aligned with the language in the management plans filed with FERC so that all
stakeholders have notice and an opportunity to comment on revisions to the plans.
B. WQC Conditio
Plans for Work Not Covered by the State WaGeneral
Permit is Overly Burdensome, Duplicative and Legally Unjustified
(Condition 48)
Requested Change: Please delete requirement for individual WQMP Plans for minor work
For minor construction and maintenance work that is not large enough to require a State
Water Board National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for
Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
(Construction General Permit), WQC Condition 48 requires the preparation and implementation
of labor-intensive, site-specific Water Quality Monitoring and Protection Plans for activities
with the potential to impact water quality or beneficial uses. Petitioners have already filed
multiple Management Plans with FERC that provide measures to protect water quality for
2
See, e.g., Licensees September 20, 2019 filing (FERC Accession No. 20190920-5141).
12
various operations and maintenance activities. This condition would require Petitioners to
repackage the same information and prepare additional plans whenever minor work is planned.
Reorganizing information already contained in other plans is duplicative, burdensome, and
unnecessary and may not even be feasible. Moreover, given that FERC and the City of Santa
Clara, in their separate environmental processes, have already determined that impacts to water
quality would be less than significant without these additional plans, the requirement is not
legally justified.
Under existing FERC licensing requirements, all operation and maintenance activities
including those that do not trigger the need for a Construction General Permit require
compliance with a number of plans developed in consultation with resource agencies.
Furthermore, the development of plans is included in the USFS FPA 4(e) conditions as well.
Each of these plans contain numerous, detailed requirements to protect water quality. They
include the following:
Erosion Management Plan (see Licensees September 20, 2019 filing, Enclosure 12
\[(FERC eLibrary Accession No. 20190920-5141\], as required by USFS 4(e) Condition
60) containing, inter alia, requirements for temporary erosion prevention, erosion and
non-stormwater best management practices, and National Forrest Services best
management practices.
Hazardous Materials Management Plan (see Licensees September 20, 2019 filing,
Enclosure 11 \[(FERC eLibrary Accession No. 20190920-5141\], as required by USFS
4(e) Condition 21) containing, inter alia, requirements for maintaining Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures Plans and Hazardous Materials Business Plans at the two
powerhouses (and content requirements), Hazardous materials best management
practices, and contractor SPCC Plan requirements.
Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (see Licensees September 20, 2019 filing,
Enclosure 6 \[(FERC eLibrary Accession No. 20190920-5141\], as required by USFS 4(e)
Condition 45) containing, inter alia, general management measures to protect aquatic
habitat, preventive measures for vegetation management and road maintenance,
revegetation plans, and pesticide best management practices.
13
Recreation Management Plan (see Licensees October 3, 2019 filing \[(FERC eLibrary
Accession No. 20191003-5160\], as required by USFS 4(e) Condition 55) containing,
inter alia, construction plan requirements for recreation improvements.
Transportation Management Plan (see Licensees September 20, 2019 filing, Enclosure 9
\[(FERC eLibrary Accession No. 20190920-5141\], as required by USFS 4(e) Condition
59) containing, inter alia, requirements for road maintenance and other road
improvements.
The measures to protect water quality are explicitly outlined in the above management plans and
will be required to be implemented as a condition of the License. See summary of management
plan water quality requirements attached as Exhibit B. For this reason, the additional Water
Quality Monitoring and Protection Plans required under WQC Condition 48 are unnecessary and
unlikely to yield new information that would justify the effort. Logistically, preparing these
plans for all minor operations and maintenance activities would not only be burdensome for the
staff of the Water Board to review, but may be infeasible, as many routine maintenance activities
are not, and cannot be, planned far in advance to allow for this labor-intensive requirement.
Paperwork delays could potentially compromise the safety of the hydroelectric facilities if basic
maintenance cannot continue to be performed on demand.
Further, this requirement is wholly unjustified under State law because the State Water
Board does not have authority under CEQA to impose a burdensome extra requirement on the
routine operations and maintenance work too small to require a Construction General Permit.
Final EIS found no
significant adverse effects related to water quality and determined that the management plans
detailed above would reduce most minor, temporary impacts on water quality. See Final EIS,
Section 5.2 Unavoidable Adverse Effects. The CEQA Supplement itself confirmed Santa
finding that no additional mitigation measures are necessary to address impacts to water
quality from minor operations and maintenance work, or any other licensing activities. See
14
Resolution 20-8888 (adopted 9-29-2020), City Council of the City of Santa Clara.
Because there are no significant impacts from these minor activities, the State Water Board lacks
authority to impose additional mitigation under either CEQA or U.S. Constitutional mandates.
See authorities in Sections V.A and V.B above.
C. The Water Board Lacks the Authority to Include Conditions Allowing Unilateral
Deputy Director Modifications to the WQC (WQC Conditions 1 and 11)
Requested Change: Please delete provisions allowing Deputy Director WQC Modifications
Several conditions in the WQC allow the Deputy Director to modify important
certification requirements unilaterally and outside of normal legal parameters, even requirements
that have been carefully developed with other State and Federal agencies and interested parties or
are n WQC Condition 1, for example, enables the Deputy
Director to require the licensees to take specific corrective actions to prevent future deviations in
instream flows and allows the Deputy Dir flow modifications or
implement other actions as part of the temporary flow modifiSee WQC, at 22-23.
Deferring the temporary flow modification or requiring additional action could have unintended
and potentially dangerous consequences. Facilities and operations may not be designed for
the modifications mandated by a Deputy Director, who may not have expertise in hydroelectric
facility safety or engineering matters. The result of this could be a spillway failure cascading
into an uncontrolled release, flooding, and even dam failure.
WQC Condition 11, which is also problematic for other reasons (see Section D below),
contains a similar provision allowing the Deputy Director to unilaterally require modifications to
the Fish Stocking Plan. In contrast to this provision, the current Fish Stocking Plan developed
with stakeholders in the FERC proceedings and recommended by the USFS under Section 10(a)
15
3
of the FPA and by FERC staff in the Final EIS provides that CDFW will determine the
numbers and species of fish that will be stocked annually by the licensees. Thus, the
determination of fish stocking species is beyond the realm of Petitioners. In effect, WQC
Condition 11 as written would either place the Petitioners in a tug-of-war between two State
of species. Petitioners do not believe that
this was the intent of the condition. Moreover, questions might arise as to whether the species
selection is within the scope of the State Water Boathe EPA
regulations cited above. The State Water Board participation in this process is clearly
problematic because it creates the potential for conflicts in implementing the existing Fish
Stocking Plan.
California regulations identify the means by which a WQC can be modified. The WQC
provisions described above would allow unilateral and potentially major modifications to be
made to the WQC by the Deputy Director without following these regulations. Title 23, Section
3867(b)(1), of the California Code of Regulations, referenced in Condition 45 of the WQC,
requires notice to all interested persons, including the licensees, and the opportunity to submit
information and comments. The conditions imposed by the State Water Board would exceed its
authority because the regulations do not authorize the Water Board to amend provisions of the
WQC except by following its own rules.
Moreover, such modifications are inconsistent with the State Water Board
under Section 401 because the State Water Board lacks authority to modify or enforce
certification requirements after they have been incorporated into a FERC license. Section 401
does not provide authority for the State Water Board to unilaterally modify a certification, either
through certification conditions that purport to authorize it to reopen the certification, or any
3
US Forest Service 10(a) Recommendation 1, FERC Final EIS Staff Recommendation Article 404
16
condition therein, in the future, or through any other mechanism. Clean Water Act Section 401
Certification Rule, 85 Fed. Reg. 42,210 at 42,279 (July 13, 2020) CWA Certification
. Additionally, once FERC incorporates valid conditions into a license, the CWA does not
provide independent authority for the State Water Board to enforce the conditions that are
included in a certification, including those conditions that are based on State water quality
requirements. Id. at 42,275; 40 C.F.R. § 121.11(c). As described in Section V.A, absent such
to modify or enforce
license requirements is preempted by the FPA.
D. The Water Board Lacks the Authority to Impose Conditions Unrelated to Water
Quality (Condition 11)
Requested Change: Please delete Condition 11
WQC Condition 11, concerning fish stocking, presents an operational problem. It
requires that trout stocking must not impair native fishWQC Condition 11 defines as
wild fish, mollusk, crustacean, invertebrate, amphibian, or part, spawn, or ovum of any of those
animals with California Fish and Game Code section 45. This condition is
problematic because the Bucks Creek basin (inclusive of all Project waters) is historically devoid
of trout. Therefore, any trout species stocked in Project waters would not be native and, since
trout consume native aquatic invertebrates, would inevitably impair the beneficial uses related to
.the Fish Stocking Plan provides for CDFW to determine which trout
species will be stocked (and WQC Condition 11 referking
is
creates further confusion. To avoid any conflict in execution, WQC Condition 11 should at a
minimum be revised to be consistent with proposed Article 404.
17
In any event, WQC Condition 11 is
certification authority because the condition does not address the water quality issues of a
discharge. As stated in Section V. authority over water quality issues is
limited to imposing conditions related to effluent limitations and requirements of State law that
address water quality issues associated with point source discharges. See CWA Certification
Rule at 42,257. As the WQC itselStocking is necessary to maintain
See WQC, at 17. The EPA specifically identified public
access improvements for fishing and other activities as being outside of Section 401 authority.
See CWA Certification Rule at 42,257. According to the EPA, these provisions do not address
water quality impacts of discharges or relate to water quality requirements. Fish stocking, with
its similar purpose to provide recreational fishing opportunities, is also not related to water
quality impacts .
Moreover, the State Water Board failed to include in either WQC Condition 11 or the
rationale for WQC Condition 11 a statement explaining why the condition is necessary to assure
that the discharge from the proposed project will comply with water quality requirements and a
citation to the federal or State law that authorizes the condition, as required by 40 C.F.R. §
121.7(d)(1). See section V.A above. Pursuant to the EPA regulations, FERC is required to
waive conditions that are not supported with this information. 40 C.F.R. § 121.9(b). Therefore,
no purpose is served by including a condition that has no relationship to water quality in the
certification for the Project, and it should be removed.
E. Miscellaneous Corrections and Clarifications
Petitioners have prepared a table showing proposed revisions to the conditions in the
WQC. It contains the revisions discussed above as well as minor additional corrections and
clarifications needed to facilitate proper implementation of the WQC. Brief explanations are
18
also included. See Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Petitioners request
that the WQC be further corrected and amended as indicated.
VII. SPECIFIC ACTION OF THE STATE WATER BOARD REQUESTED BY THE
PETITIONERS
Petitioners request that the Final WQC be modified in the manner described in Section VI
above and in Exhibit C attached.
VIII. LIST OF INTERESTED PARTIES
Please see the attached Certificate of Service representing designated parties to the State
Water Board proceedings.
IX. STATEMENT THAT COPIES OF THIS PETITION HAVE BEEN SENT TO THE
REGIONAL WATER BOARD
A true and correct copy of this Petition for Reconsideration was sent, via electronic and
regular mail, on November 20, 2020, to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control
Board at the following address:
Patrick Pulupa
Executive Officer
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
364 Knollcrest Drive, Suite 205
Redding, CA 96002
Also, please see the attached Certificate of Service.
X. A COPY OF A REQUEST TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO PREPARE
THE STATE WATER BOARD RECORD
Petitioners have submitted a request, dated November 20, 2020, to the Executive Director
of the State Water Board, Eileen Sobeck, for the preparation of the Staff Record related to the
Certificate, if available, in connection with this Petition. A copy of this Request for Preparation
of a State Board Staff Record, as required by 23 CCR ȴɎ 3867(d)(9), is attached as Exhibit D
hereto and incorporated by reference.
19
XI. SUMMARY OF THE MANNER IN WHICH THE PETITIONERS
PARTICIPATED IN ANY PROCESS LEADING TO THE ACTION IN
QUESTION
Petitioners explained their participation in the process leading to issuance of the final
Certification in Section IV above.
Respectfully submitted,
Annette Faraglia, Chief Counsel
Law Department
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
77 Beale Street, B30A
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 973-7145
Facsimile: (415) 973-5520
E-Mail: annette.faraglia@pge.com
Jo Lynn Lambert
LAMBERT LAW
300 East State Street, Suite 600
Redlands, CA 92373
Telephone: (909) 793-4942 or (415) 973-5248
Facsimile: (909) 792-5150
Email: JoLynn.Lambert@pge.com
By:
ANNETTE FARAGLIA
Dated: November 20, 2020
20
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
In the Matter of Water Quality Certification for the
ACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND CITY OF SANTA CLARA
P
BUCKS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION PROJECT NO. 619
Sources: Bucks Creek, Grizzly Creek, Milk Ranch Creek, and Unnamed
Milk Ranch Creek tributaries
County: Plumas
WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION FOR FEDERAL PERMIT OR LICENSE
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
1.0 Project Background and Description ............................................................... 6
1.1 Project Background ............................................................................................... 6
1.2 Project Description ................................................................................................ 6
1.3 Water Rights ......................................................................................................... 7
2.0 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Proceedings ................................... 9
3.0 Regulatory Authority .......................................................................................... 9
3.1 Water Quality Certification and Related Authorities .............................................. 9
3.2 Water Quality Control Plans and Related Authorities .......................................... 10
3.3 Construction General Permit............................................................................... 11
3.4 Aquatic Weed Control General Permit ................................................................ 11
3.5 State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill
Material to Waters of the State ............................................................................12
4.0 California Environmental Quality Act .............................................................12
5.0 Rationale for Water Quality Certification Conditions .................................... 13
5.1 Rationale for Condition 1: Minimum Instream Flows ........................................... 14
5.2 Rationale for Condition 2: Cease Diversions at Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No.
8 .......................................................................................................................... 14
5.3 Rationale for Condition 3: Annual Drawdown of Three Lakes ............................. 14
5.4 Rationale for Condition 4: Channel Maintenance Flows ...................................... 15
5.5 Rationale for Condition 5: Project Reservoirs Water Surface Elevations ............ 15
5.6 Rationale for Condition 6: Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks
Lake .................................................................................................................... 15
5.7 Rationale for Condition 7: Water Year Types ...................................................... 15
5.8 Rationale for Condition 8: Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions Management ............ 16
5.9 Rationale for Condition 9: Milk Ranch Conduit Closure ...................................... 16
5.10 Rationale for Condition 10: Woody Material Management ................................. 16
5.11 Rationale for Condition 11: Fish Stocking ........................................................... 17
5.12 Rationale for Condition 12: Bucks Lake Shoreline Management ........................ 17
5.13 Rationale for Condition 13: Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging ................. 17
5.14 Rationale for Condition 14: Gravel Augmentation ............................................... 17
5.15Rationale for Condition 15: Aquatic Resources Monitoring................................17
5.16Rationale for Condition 16: Sierra Nevada Yellow-Legged Frog Management..18
5.17 Rationale for Condition 17: Aquatic Invasive Species Management ................... 18
5.18Rationale for Condition 18: Integrated Vegetation Management........................18
5.19 Rationale for Condition 19: Hazardous Materials Management.......................... 19
5.20Rationale for Condition 20: Erosion Management..............................................19
5.21 Rationale for Condition 21: Recreation Management ......................................... 19
5.22Rationale for Condition 22: Annual Ecological Consultation Group Meeting......19
5.23 Rationale for Condition 23: Dewatering and Diversion Plan ............................... 20
5.24Rationale for Condition 24: Extremely Dry Conditions.......................................20
Rationale for Conditions 25 through 50 ..................................................................... 20
6.0Conclusion........................................................................................................20
ii
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
7.0 Water Quality Certification Conditions ........................................................... 21
CONDITION 1. Minimum Instream Flows ...............................................................21
CONDITION 2. Cease Diversions at Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 8 .......... 28
CONDITION 3. Annual Drawdown of Three Lakes ................................................28
CONDITION 4. Channel Maintenance Flows ..........................................................29
CONDITION 5. Project Reservoirs Water Surface Elevations .............................. 32
CONDITION 6. Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake .... 33
CONDITION 7. Water Year Types ............................................................................ 37
CONDITION 8. Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions Management .............................. 37
CONDITION 9. Milk Ranch Conduit Closure .......................................................... 40
CONDITION 10. Woody Material Management ....................................................... 40
CONDITION 11. Fish Stocking ................................................................................. 41
CONDITION 12. Bucks Lake Shoreline Management ............................................. 42
CONDITION 13. Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging ..................................... 42
CONDITION 14. Gravel Augmentation .................................................................... 42
CONDITION 15. Aquatic Resources Monitoring ..................................................... 42
CONDITION 16. Sierra Nevada Yellow-Legged Frog Management ....................... 42
CONDITION 17. Aquatic Invasive Species Management ....................................... 42
CONDITION 18. Integrated Vegetation Management ............................................. 43
CONDITION 19. Hazardous Materials Management ............................................... 43
CONDITION 20. Erosion Management .................................................................... 43
CONDITION 21. Recreation Management ............................................................... 43
CONDITION 22. Annual Ecological Consultation Group Meeting......................... 43
CONDITION 23. Dewatering and Diversion ............................................................. 45
CONDITION 24. Extremely Dry Conditions ............................................................. 45
CONDITIONS 25 – 50. .................................................................................................. 46
References ................................................................................................................... 52
List of Tables
Table A. Water Rights Held by PG&E and Santa Clara for the Project ...................... 8
Table 1. Bucks Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Below Bucks Lake by
Water Year Type (in cubic feet per second \[cfs\]), as measured at Project ID
BUCKS2..................................................................................................... 25
iii
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Table 2. Bucks Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Below Lower Bucks
Lake by Water Year Type (in cfs), as measured at USGS Gage No.
11403530 (also referred to as Project ID NF82) ........................................ 25
Table 3. Grizzly Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Below Grizzly
Forebay by Water Year Type (in cfs), as measured at USGS Gage No.
11404300 (also referred to as Project ID NF22) ........................................ 25
Table 4. Milk Ranch Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Below Three
Lakes by Water Year Type (in cfs), as measured at Project ID MR2 ......... 26
Table 5. Milk Ranch Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements at Milk Ranch
Conduit Diversion No. 1 by Water Year Type (in cfs), as measured at
Project ID MRC1 ........................................................................................ 26
Table 6. South Fork Grouse Hollow Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements at
Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 3 by Water Year Type (in cfs), as
measured at Project ID MRC2 ................................................................... 27
Table 7. Grizzly Powerhouse Load Changes for Spills at Grizzly Forebay Dam ...... 35
Table 8. Bucks Creek Powerhouse Load Changes for Spills at Grizzly Forebay Dam
................................................................................................................... 35
Table 9. Grizzly Powerhouse Load Changes for Spills at Lower Bucks Dam .......... 36
Table 10. Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions Status and Locations, 2017 ...................... 39
List of Figures
Figure 1. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project Facilities ................................................. 53
Figure 2. Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions ..................................................................... 54
Attachment
Attachment A - Detailed Project Description
iv
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Common Acronyms and Abbreviations
ac-ftacre-feet
msl Above mean sea level
AWAmerican Whitewater
BMI benthic macroinvertebrates
CDFWCalifornia Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQACalifornia Environmental Quality Act
CRLFCalifornia red-legged frog
CSPA California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
CWAClean Water Act
cfscubic feet per second
Deputy DirectorDeputy Director of the Division of Water Rights
DLADraft License Application
ESA Endangered Species Act
EAEnvironmental Assessment
EIREnvironmental Impact Report
EISEnvironmental Impact Statement
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FPA Federal Power Act
FYLFfoothill yellow-legged frog
FLAFinal License Application
IS Initial Study
LWD large woody debris
MIF minimum instream flow(s)
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NFNational Forest
NMFSNational Marine Fisheries Service
NPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
ND Negative Declaration
REA Notice of Application Ready for Environmental
Analysis
Regional BoardRegional Water Quality Control Board
SNYLF Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog
State Water BoardState Water Resources Control Board
BLM United States Bureau of Land Management
USEPAUnited States Environmental Protection Agency
USFWSUnited States Fish and Wildlife Service
Forest ServiceUnited States Forest Service
certification water quality certification
5
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
1.0 Project Background and Description
1.1 Project Background
The Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) Project No. 619 islocated in the North Fork Feather River
watershed in Plumas County, California. The Project is jointly owned by Pacific Gas
and Electric Company (PG&E) and the City of Santa Clara (Santa Clara).
In 1925, the Federal Power Commission (predecessor to FERC) issued a license to the
Feather River Power Company for construction and operation of the Bucks Creek
Development. In 1928, the Bucks Creek Development was completed and acquired by
the Great Western Power Company. Subsequently, the Bucks Creek Development was
acquired by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) in 1930. In 1988, FERC issued
the Grizzly Amendment, which authorized the construction, operation, and maintenance
of the Grizzly Development that was completed in 1993. In 1988, Santa Clara became
a joint licensee for the Project with PG&E.
1.2 Project Description
The Project has an authorized installed capacity of 84.8 megawatts. About half of the
Project facilities are located on federal land in the Plumas National Forest and almost all
of the remaining land is owned by PG&E. Private landowners own approximately 7.5
acres of land in the Project boundary. The Project is comprised of two developments:
(1) Bucks Creek Development; and (2) Grizzly Development.
The major components of the Bucks Creek Development include Bucks Lake Dam,
Bucks Lake Reservoir, Bucks Creek Penstocks, Bucks Powerhouse and Switchyard,
Three Lakes Dam, Three Lakes (i.e., Lower Lake, Middle Lake, and Upper Lake), Milk
Ranch Conduit, Lower Bucks Lake Dam, Lower Bucks Lake, Grizzly Forebay, Grizzly
Forebay Dam, and Grizzly Forebay Tunnel. The major components of the Grizzly
1
Development include the Grizzly Powerhouse Tunnel and the Grizzly Powerhouse. A
detailed description of the Project facilities can be found in Attachment A.
Water generally flows through the Project as follows:
The Project impounds Bucks Creek to create Bucks Lake, which is 105,605 acre-
feet (ac-ft) at its normal maximum water surface elevation. From Bucks Lake,
water is discharged immediately downstream into a short reach (approximately
0.25-mile) of Bucks Creek before flowing into Lower Bucks Lake. Lower Bucks
Lake has gross storage of 5,843 ac-ft.
1
Prior to construction of the Grizzly Development, water from Lower Bucks Lake was
conveyed into Grizzly Forebay via the now operationally abandoned Lower Bucks
Lake Tunnel located along Grizzly Creek. The Lower Bucks Lake Tunnelremains a
Project facility under the current FERC license.
6
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Three Lakes Dam impounds Milk Ranch Creek and diverts water into theMilk
Ranch Conduit, which also discharges into Lower Bucks Lake.
Water is conveyed from Lower Bucks Lake to the Grizzly Powerhouse and then
discharged into Grizzly Forebay.
Grizzly Forebay, with gross storage of 1,112 ac-ft, also impounds Grizzly Creek
before the water is diverted into the Grizzly Forebay Tunnel (maximum flow
capacity of 400 cfs), which discharges into Bucks Powerhouse.
Water is discharged from Bucks Powerhouse into the North Fork Feather River.
1.3 Water Rights
Table A lists the water rights held by PG&E and Santa Clara for the Project.
7
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project October 2020
Water Quality Certification
Table A. Water Rights Held by PG&E and Santa Clara for the Project
Water Right Direct
Priority Storage Type of
Application Diversion Season of Use Source
Date (ac-ft) Use
Number(cfs)
A0021862/1/192170,000N/AOct 1 to Jul 1IrrigationBucks Creek
A003889 3/6/1924 23,000 N/A Nov 1 to Jul 1Power Bucks Creek
A004441 2/2/1925 40,000 N/A Nov 1 to Jul 2Power Bucks Creek
A004453 2/10/1925 736 N/A Jan 1 to Jun 15 Power Milk Ranch Creek
A0044913/5/1925N/A175Year RoundPowerBucks Creek
A004598 5/22/1925 N/A 105 Year Round Power Grizzly Creek
A004871 12/21/1925 N/A20 Year Round Power Grizzly Creek
A005997 7/27/1928 N/A 2.25 Year RoundIndustrial Muir Creek
Tributary to Milk
A006241 4/8/1929 N/A65 Year Round Power
Ranch/Bucks Creek
Tributary to Bucks
A01119210/25/1945N/A0.18Year RoundDomestic
Lake
A0297978/17/1990N/A400Year RoundPowerBucks Creek
A031499 4/5/2004 38,082 234 Year Round Power Grizzly Creek
A0021952/10/202155,000N/ADec 1 to Jul 1PowerBucks Creek
8
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
2.0 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Proceedings
The original license for the Project was issued by FERC on April 14, 1926 and expired
on December 31, 1968. A second license for the Project was issued on
December 19, 1974 and was originally set to expire on October 31, 2004. On
April 29, 1988, FERC issued an Order Amending License (known as the Grizzly
Amendment) that authorized construction, operation, and maintenance of the Grizzly
Development and extended the Project’s license term to December 31, 2018. Although
Santa Clara financed its construction, PG&E operates the Grizzly Development along
with the Bucks Creek Development. On July 10, 1990, FERC issued an Order
Approving a Settlement Agreement between PG&E and Santa Clara, which added
Santa Clara as a joint licensee for the Project. In 2006, the license was amended to
include minimum instream flows in parts of Bucks Creek and Grizzly Creek. Since
2006, PG&E has operated the Project as required by the second license (1974), Grizzly
Amendment (1988), and 2006 amendment. The second license expired on December
31, 2018. By letter dated December 12, 2018, FERC authorized the Project to operate
under an annual license until FERC acts on the application for a subsequent license.
On December 12, 2016, PG&E and Santa Clara filed their final license application for a
new license with FERC for the Project. PG&E and Santa Clara subsequently filed an
updated application for a new license on May 22, 2018, and an errata to that update on
July 27, 2018. FERC issued a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for the
Project on June 14, 2019. FERC issued the Final EIS for the Project on
January 28, 2020.
3.0 Regulatory Authority
3.1 Water Quality Certification and Related Authorities
The federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387) was enacted “to restore and
maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.”
(33 U.S.C. § 1251(a).) Section 101 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251(g))
requires federal agencies to “co-operate with the State and local agencies to develop
comprehensive solutions to prevent, reduce and eliminate pollution in concert with
programs for managing water resources.”
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1341) requires every applicant for a
federal license or permit which may result in a discharge into navigable waters to
provide the licensing or permitting federal agency with certification that the project will
be in compliance with specified provisions of the Clean Water Act, including water
quality standards and implementation plans promulgated pursuant to section 303 of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1313). Clean Water Act section 401 directs the agency
responsible for certification to prescribe effluent limitations and other limitations
necessary to ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act and with any other
appropriate requirements of state law. Section 401 further provides that certification
conditions shall become conditions of any federal license or permit for the project. The
State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) is the state agency
9
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
responsible for such certification in California. (Wat. Code,§ 13160.) The State Water
Board has delegated authority to act on applications for certification to the Executive
Director. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 3838, subd. (a).)
Water Code section 13383 provides the State Water Board with the authority to
“establish monitoring, inspection, entry, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements…
and \[require\] other information as may be reasonably required” for activities subject to
certification under section 401 of the Clean Water Act that involve the diversion of water
for beneficial use. The State Water Board delegated this authority to the Deputy
Director of the Division of Water Rights (Deputy Director), as provided for in State Water
Board Resolution No. 2012-0029 (State Water Board, 2012). In the Redelegation of
Authorities Pursuant to Resolution No. 2012-0029 memo issued by the Deputy Director
on October 19, 2017, this authority is redelegated to the Assistant Deputy Directors of
the Division of Water Rights (State Water Board, 2017).
PG&E and Santa Clara filed an application for water quality certification (certification)
with the State Water Board on August 14, 2018. State Water Board staff provided
public notice of the application pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 23,
section 3858, by posting information describing the Project on the State Water Board's
website on August 22, 2018. The State Water Board denied the 2018 application for
certification on August 13, 2019, and PG&E and Santa Clara submitted a new
application for certification on October 23, 2019.
On October 14, 2020, State Water Board staff requested comments from the Central
Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley Regional Water Board) on
the draft certification. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 53855, subd. (b)(2)(B).) On
October 16, 2020, the Central Valley Regional Water Board responded with no
comments.
3.2 Water Quality Control Plans and Related Authorities
The State Water Board’s certification for the Project must ensure compliance with the
water quality standards in the Central Valley Regional Water Board’s Water Quality
Control Plan for the Sacramento River Basin and the San Joaquin River Basin (Basin
Plan) (Central Valley Regional Board, 2018). Water quality control plans designate the
beneficial uses of water that are to be protected (such as municipal and industrial,
agricultural, and fish and wildlife beneficial uses), water quality objectives for the
reasonable protection of the beneficial uses and the prevention of nuisance, and a
program of implementation to achieve the water quality objectives. (Wat. Code, §§
13241, 13050, subds. (h), (j).) The beneficial uses, together with the water quality
objectives contained in the water quality control plans, and applicable federal anti-
degradation requirements, constitute California’s water quality standards for purposes of
the Clean Water Act.
The nine California Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Water Boards)
have primary responsibility for the formulation and adoption of water quality control
plans for their respective regions, subject to State Water Board and United States
10
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) approval, as appropriate. (Wat. Code,
§ 13240 et seq.) The State Water Board may also adopt water quality control plans,
which will supersede regional water quality control plans for the same waters to the
extent of any conflict. (Id., § 13170.)
The Central Valley Regional Water Board adopted, and the State Water Board and the
USEPA approved, the Basin Plan (Central Valley Regional Water Board, 2018). The
Basin Plan identifies existing beneficial uses for the North Fork Feather River watershed
as: municipal and domestic supply; hydropower generation; water contact recreation;
non-contact water recreation; canoeing and rafting; cold freshwater habitat; spawning,
reproduction, and/or early development of aquatic organisms (cold); and wildlife habitat
(Central Valley Regional Water Board, 2018). The beneficial uses of any specifically
identified water body generally apply to its tributary streams as well (Central Valley
Regional Water Board, 2018).
In March 2019, the State Water Board submitted to FERC the plans and policies
included in the State’s comprehensive plan for orderly and coordinated control,
protection, conservation, development, and utilization of the water resources of the
State. The submission includes the Basin Plan.
3.3 Construction General Permit
PG&E and Santa Clara may need to obtain coverage under the State Water Board’s
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for
Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
2
(Construction General Permit) and any amendments thereto. Coverage under the
Construction General Permit may be required for activities that disturb one or more
acres of soil, or that disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of
development that in total disturbs one or more acres. Construction activities subject to
the Construction General Permit include clearing, grading, and disturbances to the
ground such as stockpiling or excavation but do not include regular maintenance
activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility.
3.4 Aquatic Weed Control General Permit
The Statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit for Residual
Aquatic Pesticide Discharges to Waters of the United States from Algae and Aquatic
2
Water Quality Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ and NPDES No. CAS000002, as amended
by Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ, Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ, and any amendments
thereto. Available online at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/construction.html
Last Accessed October 15, 2020.
11
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
3
Weed Control Applications (Aquatic Weed Control General Permit) applies to
projects that require aquatic weed management activities. The Aquatic Weed Control
General Permit sets forth detailed management practices to protect water quality from
pesticide and herbicide use associated with aquatic weed control.
3.5 State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill
Material to Waters of the State
On April 2, 2019, the State Water Board adopted the State Wetland Definition and
Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State
4
(Procedures; State Water Board 2019)
. The Procedures provide the State’s definition
of wetland, wetland delineation procedures, and procedures for submitting applications
for activities that could result in discharges of dredged or fill material to waters of the
state. The Procedures ensure that State Water Board regulatory activities will result in
no net loss of wetland quantity, quality, or permanence, compliant with Executive Order
W-59-93. PG&E and Santa Clara will need to comply with the Procedures when
conducting Project-related dredge or fill activities, which may impact waters of the state,
including wetlands.
4.0 California Environmental Quality Act
Santa Clara is the lead agency for the Proposed Project for the purpose of compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000
et seq.\]) and CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.). Santa Clara
released a draft CEQA Supplement to the FERC Final EIS on June 3, 2020 with the
comment period concluding on July 20, 2020. The CEQA Supplement determined that
all impacts associated with the Proposed Project are less than significant and no
mitigation measures were required. No substantive comments were received on the
draft CEQA Supplement, and as such, there was no need for revision or responses to
comments. The final CEQA Supplement was adopted by the City of Santa Clara’s
Council on September 29, 2020, and signed by the City Manager on October 5, 2020.
3
Water Quality Order No. 2013 0002 DWQ and NPDES No. CAG990005, as amended
by Order No. 2014 0078 DWQ, Order No. 2015 0029 DWQ, Order No. 2016 0073
EXEC, and any amendments thereto. Available online at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/npdes/pesticides/weed_cont
rol.html. Last Accessed October 15, 2020.
4
The Office of Administrative Law approved the Procedures on August 28, 2019. The
Procedures became effective on May 28, 2020. Available online at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/cwa401/wrapp.html. Last
Accessed October 15, 2020.
12
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
5.0 Rationale for Water Quality Certification Conditions
The certification conditions were developed to protect and enhance beneficial uses of
5
California’s waters and achieve compliance with associated water quality objectives
.
Section401 of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1341) provides that the
conditions contained in this certification be incorporated as mandatory conditions of the
new license issued by FERC for the Project.
When preparing the conditions in this certification, State Water Board staff reviewed and
considered the following information:
(a) the final license application and supplemental filings to FERC, application for
water quality certification, and any updates thereto;
(b) comments submitted by agencies and interested parties on the draft license
application and certification application;
(c) Final Resource Management and Monitoring Plans developed by PG&E, Santa
6
Clara, and Relicensing Participants;
(d) FERC’s Final EIS prepared pursuant to National Environmental Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. § 4332);
(e) USFWS’s Biological Opinion;
(f) Forest Service Final Section 4(e) Conditions, Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project,
FERC No. 619 (Final 4(e)s), dated October 7, 2019;
(g) the Recommendations of the California Department of Fish and Game Pursuant
to Federal Power Act Section 10(j) for FERC Project No. 619 (CDFW 10(j)
Recommendations);
(h) Santa Clara’s CEQA Supplement; and
(i) other information in the record.
5
Designated beneficial uses and associated water quality objectives for surface waters
in the Project area are described in Section 3.2 of this certification, and in Section 2
of the Basin Plan.
6
Relicensing Participants that were involved in the development of PG&E and Santa
Clara’s proposed measures include: United States Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service (Forest Service), United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS); California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW); American
Whitewater (AW), the Bucks Lake Homeowners Association (BLHOA), and State
Water Board staff.
13
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
State Water Board staff also considered the following information: (a) existing and
potential beneficial uses; (b) associated water quality objectives in the Basin Plan; and
(c) Project-related controllable water quality factors
The following describes the rationale used to develop the conditions in thiscertification.
5.1 Rationale for Condition 1: Minimum Instream Flows
Condition 1 requires implementation of new minimum instream flows (MIFs) in: Bucks
Creek below Bucks Lake and below Lower Bucks Lake; Grizzly Creek below Grizzly
Forebay; and Milk Ranch Creek tributaries below Three Lakes. These Milk Ranch
Creek tributaries include proposed PG&E Diversion No. 1 on Milk Ranch Creek and
PG&E Diversion No. 3 on South Fork Grouse Hollow Creek. Due to the remoteness
and inaccessibility of some flow gages, minimum instream flow compliance will be
reported with manually collected data (see Tables 1, 4, 5, and 6). The approach for
developing MIFs focused on providing continuous wetted stream channel conditions for
benthic macroinvertebrate (BMI) in spring and summer months, enhancing the cold
water trout fishery using the weighted usable area rather than flow relationships for all
life stages, and supporting the protection and enhancement of aquatic and riparian
resources.
5.2 Rationale for Condition 2: Cease Diversions at Milk Ranch Conduit
Diversion No. 8
Bear Ravine is a tributary to Bucks Creek that contains USFWS-designated critical
habitat for Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog (Rana sierrae) (SNYLF). For most of the
year, flow in Bear Ravine is significantly reduced by flow diverted into Milk Ranch
Conduit. Condition 2 restores the full natural flow in Bear Ravine downstream of Milk
Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 8 in order to enhance critical habitat for the federally
endangered SNYLF. This condition is intended to improve microhabitat connectivity for
SNYLFs downstream of the diversion during drier months and eliminate any effects of
Project operations and maintenance on SNYLFs in the Bear Ravine watershed (e.g.,
entrainment and instream flow effects).
Additionally, this condition potentially increases available habitat by providing or
increasing surface water in shallow habitats for a greater proportion of the drier months.
The potential for adverse effects from increased storm runoff downstream of the
diversion is not well understood. Results of the SNLF population monitoring in Bear
Ravine over duration of the license (Condition 16) will inform adaptive management
actions, if necessary.
5.3 Rationale for Condition 3: Annual Drawdown of Three Lakes
Condition 3 requires initiation of the annual drawdown of Three Lakes in mid-August to
avoid impacts to spawning and rearing habitat of brook trout in the Lower and Middle
Three Lake. Having the lakes drawn down before mid-September will reduce the
potential of dewatering brook trout redds. Although BMI communities could be
potentially impacted from an influx of pea clams, these effects will be temporary. A
14
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
fixed flow drawdown will help maintain BMI populations until the valves are fully opened
7
as part of the Winter Setting operations.
5.4 Rationale for Condition 4: Channel Maintenance Flows
Condition 4 requires channel maintenance stream flows to recruit and redistribute
spawning gravels and remove fine sediment that may have accumulated in interstitial
areas, thus improving their suitability for fish spawning. Such flows also recruit,
transport, and redistribute large woody material (LWM) that can have a beneficial effect
on channel structure, habitat complexity, and aquatic food supply in Bucks Creek and
Grizzly Creek. In addition, channel maintenance flows benefit riparian habitat by
providing periodic scour and vegetation recruitment events, which are essential to
maintaining diverse native plants, vegetation age classes, and habitat structures.
5.5 Rationale for Condition 5: Project Reservoirs Water Surface Elevations
Condition 5 requires minimum water surface elevations at Project reservoirs for the
protection and enhancement of existing aquatic habitat over the winter and recreation
resources during the peak recreation season. This measure is a continuation of an
existing FERC license requirement and will not result in changes to current Project
operations. The minimum water surface elevations in Lower and Middle Three Lakes
are as in the 10-year period of 1957 through 1967.
5.6 Rationale for Condition 6: Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower
Bucks Lake
Large flow fluctuations below Grizzly Forebay Dam, particularly if out-of-season, have
the potential to negatively affect the foothill yellow-legged frog population in the NFFR
several miles downstream of the Grizzly Creek confluence. This condition will limit flow
fluctuations by extending the descending limb of the hydrograph in Bucks Creek and
Grizzly Creek to improve conditions for foothill yellow-legged frogs and allow
recruitment of woody riparian vegetation.
Condition 6 requires a gradual decrease of flows during high flow events at Grizzly
Forebay Dam and Lower Bucks Lake Dam using managed spills. Grizzly Forebay and
Lower Bucks Lake Dam have uncontrolled spillways and small low-level outlets
designed for minimum instream flow releases. Managed spills are the only method to
significantly affect the rate of change of Project spills at Grizzly Forebay and Lower
Bucks Lake by implementing load changes in each associated powerhouse (i.e., if
powerhouse flows are increasing, instream flows will decrease at a similar magnitude).
5.7 Rationale for Condition 7: Water Year Types
Condition 7 defines the four water year types for the Project. This classification will
simplify the determination of the water year, compliance with the condition, and
establish consistency across applicable conditions, including minimum instream flows
7
WinterSetting operations refers to whenthe low-level outlet valve is fully-open and the
natural inflow equals the outflow of the reservoir.
15
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
(Condition 1), channel maintenance flows (Condition 4), Project reservoirs water surface
elevations (Condition 5), and Milk Ranch Conduit Closure (Condition 9).For any given
year, the wateryear classification may be adjusted at three points in time subsequent to
the initial February designation by way of updates in the March, April, and May releases
of the California Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) Bulletin 120. DWR’s May
release of Bulletin 120 will determine the final water year type designation until the
following February Bulletin 120 forecast is released. This adjustment to the forecasted
water year type tracks variable snowpack and spring runoff conditions to inform
adjustments to the water year.
5.8 Rationale for Condition 8: Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions Management
Condition 8 provides protection and enhancement of aquatic and aesthetic resources at
six of the Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions that are currently inactive and no longer
needed for Project operations. Condition 8 also requires PG&E and Santa Clara to
identify the proposed disposition of these inactive diversions.
The diversion structures will be left in place as they are already effectively breached
(e.g., filled with sediment or no longer physically intact) and currently allow full year-
round stream flow below each diversion. Each of the diversions are located at varying
distances and elevations above the roadway and are generally very difficult to access
with vehicles and large equipment. As a result, removal of any inoperable diversion
could likely only be accomplished with hand equipment. Further, the removal of any
remaining structure could potentially compromise the integrity and stability of the
channel and result in the removal of established riparian vegetation in the vicinity of the
diversions. By leaving the diversions in place, the current channel and riparian
conditions will be maintained and construction impacts to these resources associated
with removal of the structures can be avoided. Concealing diversions that are currently
visible from Three Lakes Road (Plumas National Forest Road 24N24) will improve the
aesthetic appearance of the area.
5.9 Rationale for Condition 9: Milk Ranch Conduit Closure
Condition 9 will enhance seasonal aquatic and year-round riparian resources by
extending the duration and magnitude of wetted channel conditions downstream of the
diversions and increasing the frequency and magnitude of instream flows that would
flush fine sediment out of the channel. Currently, tributaries downstream of the Milk
Ranch Conduit only receive instream flows when the diversions are overflowing. During
Wet water years, this condition will return all spring and summer flows from two of the
largest diverted tributaries, PG&E Diversion Nos. 1 and 2 (Milk Ranch Creek and North
Fork Grouse Hollow Creek, respectively), to their stream of origin. In the absence of
this condition, water would be spilled at Lower Bucks Lake and would not be used for
hydroelectric power generation.
5.10 Rationale for Condition 10: Woody Material Management
Regulated flows and the capture of LWM by Project impoundments limits the distribution
and availability of woody debris in downstream reaches. LWM provides cover and
16
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
holding habitat for fish, influences sedimentstorage andchannel morphology, and
serves as substrate for the growth of algae and invertebrates. Loss of LWM can reduce
aquatic habitat complexity and subsequently reduce the carrying capacity for aquatic
biota. Condition 10 requires the passive and mechanical introduction of woody material
to Bucks Creek and Grizzly Creek to enhance habitat for fish and other aquatic
organisms.
5.11 Rationale for Condition 11: Fish Stocking
Although a historically fishless area, CDFW has stocked Bucks Lake and Middle and
Lower Three Lakes since the Project’s construction. The current stocking program,
along with an existing naturally reproducing population of trout in Grizzly Forebay,
provides significant angling opportunities and bolsters fish populations. Stocking is
necessary to maintain recreational fishing in Project waters. Condition 11 requires
PG&E and Santa Clara contribute to a trout fishery for recreation.
5.12 Rationale for Condition 12: Bucks Lake Shoreline Management
Condition 12 requires implementation of the Bucks Lake Shoreline Management Plan,
which establishes general policies for managing uses on both PG&E-owned and
National Forest Service areas of shoreline at Project reservoirs in the Project boundary.
The Bucks Lake Shoreline Management Plan maintains a balance among: recreation
interests; environmental, biological, and cultural resource protection; commercial resort
business needs; personal property rights; and the promotion of the general economic
vitality at and near the Project.
5.13 Rationale for Condition 13: Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging
Compliance with certification conditions (Condition 1, Condition 4, Condition 5, and
Condition 6) requires accurate and reliable gaging. Condition 13 requires PG&E and
Santa Clara to provide details regarding the location, operation, required maintenance
activities, and data collection and reporting protocol for each gage used to document
certification compliance. The Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan also
includes a schedule for the modification or construction of new gages that are needed to
adequately record minimum instream flows.
5.14 Rationale for Condition 14: Gravel Augmentation
Project impoundments on Bucks Creek and Grizzly Creek trap all coarse sediment from
upstream sources, potentially limiting available gravel in downstream reaches where it
is necessary to support spawning habitat for trout. Condition 14 requires the
enhancement of trout spawning habitat by supplying the upper reaches of Grizzly Creek
(below Grizzly Forebay Dam) and Bucks Creek (below Lower Bucks Dam) with
spawning-sized gravel.
5.15 Rationale for Condition 15: Aquatic Resources Monitoring
Aquatic conditions in the Project area may change as a result of current or future
Project operations and maintenance activities, which may affect stream fish populations,
17
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
brook trout populations in Three Lakes, BMI, stream channel morphology, LWM supply,
foothill yellow-legged frogs, water temperature, water quality, and riparian vegetation.
Condition 15 requires the documentation of any long-term changes in aquatic resource
conditions as a result of the certification conditions, including increased minimum
instream flows, LWM and gravel augmentation, controlled drawdowns, and managed
spill recession rates. The Aquatic Resources Monitoring Plan will provide the methods,
locations, and timing of surveys and monitoring activities to help determine any impacts
that Project activities may have on aquatic resources.
5.16 Rationale for Condition 16: Sierra Nevada Yellow-Legged Frog Management
SNYLFs are currently under various levels of protection from state and federal listings,
including: listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA);
listed as threatened under the California ESA, considered a sensitive species by the
Forest Service; and listed on the Watch List by CDFW. Because designated critical
habitat and occurrences of SNYLFs are known to occur in the Project area, Condition
16 requires periodic monitoring to assess the presence of SNYLFs and evaluate
potential effects from Project operations. Condition 16 also requires the protection of
SNYLF populations through implementation of spatial buffers, limited operating periods,
chemical restrictions, and surveying protocols for Project operations, maintenance, and
8
construction activities that occur at locations above 4,500 ft.
5.17 Rationale for Condition 17: Aquatic Invasive Species Management
Aquatic invasive species (AIS), such as New Zealand mudsnails, quagga mussels,
zebra mussels, and signal crayfish can clog facility pipes and out-compete other aquatic
macroinvertebrates for food and habitat, disrupting ecosystem balances across the food
web. Recreational angling and boating activities provide frequent opportunities for
boats and trailers to inadvertently transfer AIS into Project reservoirs. Although signal
crayfish arethe only existing AIS in Project waters, public education programs at Project
recreation areas and best management practices for Project operations and
maintenance activities are necessary to minimize the risk of transporting AIS from other
infected waterbodies. Condition 17 requires the implementation of the Aquatic Invasive
Species Plan, which includes best management practices to prevent the introduction of
AIS into Project waters, early AIS detection monitoring, and monitoring and
management of existing AIS populations.
5.18 Rationale for Condition 18: Integrated Vegetation Management
Project operation and maintenance activities and recreational uses have the potential to
negatively affect special-status plants and rare natural communities, including riparian
habitats and wetlands, and to introduce and spread non-native invasive plants. In
addition, Bucks Lake reservoir level fluctuations contribute to limited quaking aspen
8
The range of SNYLFs in the Project vicinity includes lakes, ponds, wet meadows, and
streams above 4,500 ft in elevation. SNYLF individuals have not been detected and
are not expected to occur downstream of the Project.
18
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
grove recruitment and temporary impacts to a portion of a fen wetland. Condition 18
requires the management of vegetation, including non-native invasive plants, special-
status plant species, and special-status natural communities in the Project area.
5.19 Rationale for Condition 19: Hazardous Materials Management
Construction of new Project facilities, modification of existing Project facilities, and
routine and non-routine maintenance could affect water quality if pollutants (e.g., fuels,
lubricants, herbicides, pesticides, and other hazardous materials) are discharged into
Project waterways. PG&E and Santa Clara may need to perform work that involves the
use of hazardous materials. Condition 19 requires implementation of the Hazardous
Materials Management Plan to help ensure that land and aquatic resources will be
protected. Condition 19 requires the implementation of standard practices for storing,
using, transporting, and disposing of hazardous materials in the Project area to
minimize potential negative impacts to Project waters, public land, and human health
and safety.
5.20 Rationale for Condition 20: Erosion Management
Condition 20 will help minimize erosion and sedimentation related to the Project as a
result of ground-disturbing activities associated with Project operations and
maintenance activities, emergency situations, and planned projects in the Project area.
The Erosion Management Plan describes measures the Licensees will employ to
minimize erosion and sedimentation. It also includes work-specific erosion
management plans, permits, and agency consultation protocol that are required prior to
initiating ground-disturbing activities.
5.21 Rationale for Condition 21: Recreation Management
Existing Project recreation facilities require updates, reconstruction, or improvements so
that they will meet current or future visitor needs. Replacement may be needed for
facilities that are at the end of their serviceable life, and improvements will generally be
necessary so that facilities meet current accessibility guidelines. Over the first 20 years
of the new FERC license, all existing Project recreation facilities will be reconstructed to
provide sufficient amenities, services, and visitor comfort at or above the level
previously provided by the Project. Condition 21 requires the identification of all existing
recreation facilities and amenities, definition of a schedule for all planned actions related
to recreation developments, description of the operations and maintenance
responsibilities for Project recreation facilities, and consultation and monitoring.
5.22 Rationale for Condition 22: Annual Ecological Consultation Group Meeting
Monitoring and management plans required by this certification will assist the
Relicensing Participants in evaluating impacts associated with the implementation of
new FERC license conditions on hydrological, biological, and geomorphological
resources in the Project area throughout the term of the license. Annual consultation
meetings bring the Relicensing Participants and interested parties together to discuss
monitoring results and resource trends, and develop adaptive management actions, if
necessary, to protect water quality and beneficial uses. Condition 22 requires annual
19
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
consultation meetings with the Relicensing Participantsand other interested parties to
review monitoring reports and discuss ongoing and forecasted operations, including
revisions or modifications to monitoring and/or operations that may be needed to protect
water quality and beneficial uses.
5.23 Rationale for Condition 23: Dewatering and Diversion Plan
Instream and in-water construction activities have the potential to negatively impact
water quality. Condition 23 requires the isolatation of construction activities from Project
waters so that turbidity and sedimentation areavoided whenever possible and
minimized when discharges cannot be avoided. This conditionrequires the
development and implementation of a plan to ensure compliance with Basin Plan water
quality objectives for turbidity and bypass flows to support downstream beneficial uses
and protect aquatic species. Activities that may require a dewatering a diversion plan
must be identified as part of the annual ECG meeting (Condition 22).
5.24 Rationale for Condition 24: Extremely Dry Conditions
California’s history of drought illustrates the importance of planning for multiple dry
years or drought. It is difficult to anticipate the specific impacts of consecutive dry years
or a long-term drought and identify where limited water supplies may be best used
during times of shortage. Condition 24 allows PG&E and Santa Clara to submit and
request Deputy Director approval of a Revised Operations Plan to address water
shortage issues during consecutive Dry or Critically Dry water year types or drought
years. This condition provides flexibility for adaptive implementation during times of
extreme water shortage.
Rationale for Conditions 25 through 50
In order to ensure that the Project operates to meet water quality standards as
anticipated, to ensure compliance with other relevant state and federal laws, and to
ensure that the Project will continue to meet state water quality standards and other
appropriate requirements of state law over its lifetime, this certification imposes
conditions regarding monitoring, enforcement, and potential future revisions.
Additionally, California Code of Regulations, title 23, section 3860 requires imposition of
certain mandatory conditions for all water quality certifications, which are included in this
certification.
6.0 Conclusion
The State Water Board finds that, with the conditions and limitations imposed under this
certification, the proposed Project will be protective of state water quality standards and
other appropriate requirements of state law.
20
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
7.0 Water Quality Certification Conditions
ACCORDINGLY, BASED ON ITS INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE RECORD, THE
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD CERTIFIESTHAT OPERATION
OF THE BUCKS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT(Project) will comply with
sections 301, 302, 303, 306, and 307 of the Clean Water Act, and with applicable
provisions of State law under the following terms and conditions.
CONDITION 1.Minimum Instream Flows
The Licensees shall provide instream flow releases at the following locations:
Bucks Creek below Bucks Lake Dam;
Bucks Creek below Lower Bucks Lake Dam;
Grizzly Creek below Grizzly Forebay;
Milk Ranch Creek below Three Lakes;
Milk Ranch Creek at Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 1; and
South Fork Grouse Hollow Creek at Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 3.
The Licensees shall provide minimum instream flows as specified in Tables 1 through 6.
For compliance purposes, the point of measurement for each required minimum
instream flow is described in the Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan
(Condition 13) and Tables 1 through 6.
The Licensees shall implement specified minimum instream flows within the first 90
9
days of the new license term, as required in Tables 1 through 6.Where an instream
flow release structure must be modified or newly constructed (refer to the Streamflow
and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan– Condition 13), the Licensees shall complete the
work as soon as reasonably practicable, and within two years after receiving all required
permits and approvals for the work.
Flows shall be measured at the gage or Project location referenced in this condition
unless otherwise approved by the Deputy Director. The Licensees shall comply with
applicable California laws and regulations regarding measuring and monitoring water
diversions, including California Code of Regulations, title 23, section 933, and
amendments thereto, and State Water Board requirements to provide telemetered
9
Releases made through manually operated valves may be subject to weather and
road conditions affecting access or operability, andthey shall be made as soon as
reasonably practicable given the circumstances.
21
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
10
diversion data on a public website. The Licensees shall post all gaged flow and other
data to the California Data Exchange Center website, within 24-hours of flow
measurement, unless otherwise approved by the Deputy Director. The Licensee shall
publicly notice at an easily accessible location on the internet all known events that will
affect minimum flow releases (e.g., powerhouse outages, construction, etc.) a minimum
of 30 days in advance.
Flow Measurements and Reporting for Locations with Continuous Measurements
(Table 2 and Table 3). At locations with continuous instream flow measurements (see
Tables 2 and 3), minimum instream flows shall be measured as an average hourly flow
calculated at the top of each hour. At a minimum, the Licensees shall calculate the
average hourly flow by taking the mean of four instantaneous measurements at 15-
minute intervals, as specified by United States Geological Survey (USGS) standards.
The average hourly instream flow shall be at least 90 percent of the applicable minimum
instream flow requirement set forth in Tables 2 and 3. If the average hourly flow
temporarily falls below the applicable minimum instream flow requirement (due to
unforeseen circumstances such as debris blocking the intake, ice conditions on the
measurement weir, etc.) the Licensees shall restore the required minimum instream
flow as soon as reasonably practicable and notify the Deputy Director of the Division of
Water Rights (Deputy Director) within 24 hours of the temporary hourly flow deviation.
For any temporary average hourly instream flow decreases, the Licensee shall be
document the following items in the annual report: (a) duration of decreased flow;
(b) cause of decreased flow; and (c) actions the Licensees propose to take or have
taken to prevent such a decrease in flows in the future or a description of why such
actions are not feasible.
The average daily flow shall meet the applicable minimum instream flow requirement. If
the average daily flow deviates below the applicable minimum instream flow
requirement, the Licensees shall file a report with: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC); United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (Forest
Service); United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS);
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW); and Deputy Director within 30 days
of the incident. The report shall identify, to the extent possible, the cause, magnitude
(i.e., instream flows measured versus instream flow requirement), duration of the
deviation, any observed or reported adverse environmental impacts resulting from the
deviation, all corrective actions taken, and actions the Licensees propose to take to
prevent such a decrease in flows in the future.
The Deputy Director may require the Licensee to implement corrective actions to
prevent similar future deviations in instream flows.
10
Information regarding telemetered requirements are available at the State Water
Board’s Telemetry Requirements webpage, which is available online at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/measurement_re
gulation/telemetry_requirements.html. (Last Accessed October 21, 2020)
22
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Flow Measurements and Reporting for Locations with Manual Data Collection (Table 1,
Table 4, Table 5, and Table 6). At locations with manual data collection, the release
valve shall be inspected and maintained at least once in each of the spring, summer,
and fall of each year. Seasonal inspection, maintenance, and documentation of valve
settings will constitute compliance with flow requirements at these locations.
Adjustments to the valves during seasonal inspections may be needed to comply with
the prescribed minimum instream flows in Tables 1, 4, 5, and 6, and adjustments to the
valves shall be documented in the annual report described below.
The minimum instream flow requirements listed in Tables 1, 4, 5, and 6 may be
temporarily modified as required for maintenance or repair of a dam, outlet facility, and
minimum flow release facility. The Licensees shall notify FERC, the Forest Service,
CDFW, USFWS, and the Deputy Director at least five business days prior to any such
modification. The notification shall include: a description of the temporary flow
modification; reason for the temporary flow modification; any potential impacts that may
result from the temporary flow modification; and anticipated duration of the temporary
flow modification. The Deputy Director may require the Licensees to defer the
temporary flow modification or implement other actions as part of the temporary flow
modification.
The Licensees shall notify FERC, Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and the Deputy
Director within two business days after any modification of the minimum instream flows
due to operational emergencies beyond the control of the Licensees, or in the interest of
public safety. For the purposes of this condition, an “emergency” is defined as an event
that is reasonably out of the control of the Licensees and requires Licensees to take
immediate action, either unilaterally or under instruction by law enforcement or other
regulatory agency staff, to prevent imminent loss of human life or substantial property
damage. An emergency may include but is not limited to: natural events such as
landslides, storms or wildfires; malfunction or failure of Project works; and recreation
accidents. Extremely dry conditions, including a drought for which the Governor of the
State of California declares a drought emergency for Plumas County, shall not be
considered an emergency for purposes of this condition.
Annual Reporting on Minimum Instream Flow Compliance. After consulting with and
incorporating any comments from the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water
Board staff, the Licensees shall submit the final annual report to the Deputy Director
that summarizes compliance with the minimum instream flow requirements during the
11
prior water year as specified in Condition 25. The annual report shall be submitted to
the Deputy Director no later than December 15 and shall include the items referenced
below and in this condition.
Continuous Monitoring: For all continuously gaged locations, daily mean data shall
be included in the report.
11
A water year refers to the 12-month time period from October 1 to September 30.
23
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Manual Monitoring: At locations with flow releases based on manual valve settings,
the Licensees shall provide an annual report that includes:
The dates the Licensees checked the outlet works/valves at each site from the
beginning of spring through fall;
The estimated flow released at the time the valve was checked, along with a
comparison to the applicable minimum instream flow requirement;
Documentation of any adjustments made at each site at the time the outlet
works/valves were checked and the estimated flow released following any
adjustments; and
The date the valves were adjusted tothe Winter Setting (WS) at Milk Ranch
Creek below Three Lakes (Table 4) and at Milk Ranch Conduit Division No. 1
(Table 5), respectively. If the valve(s) was set to the WS prior to November 1,
the Licensees shall describe the conditions that required the early adjustment.
Deviations from Minimum Instream Flows: Any deviations from the minimum
instream flows outlined in this condition shall be summarized in the report, including
all information referenced earlier in this condition.
The Licensees shall review the instream flow annual report at the annual Ecological
Consulting Group (ECG) meeting (Condition 22).
24
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project October 2020
Water Quality Certification
Table 1. Bucks Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Below Bucks Lake by Water Year Type (in
cubic feet per second \[cfs\]), as measured at Project ID BUCKS2
Water Year Type Oct Nov DecJan FebMarApr MayJunJul AugSep
All3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Table 2.Bucks Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Below Lower Bucks Lake by Water Year Type
(in cfs), as measured at USGS Gage No. 11403530 (also referred to as Project ID NF82)
Water Year Type Oct Nov DecJan FebMarApr MayJunJul AugSep
Critically Dry644467776666
Dry 6 5 5 5 6 8 8 8 8 6 6 6
Normal6 6 6 6 8 12 1212 9 8 8 7
Wet8 8 8 8 101515 15 11 10 8 8
Table 3.Grizzly Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements BelowGrizzly Forebay by Water Year Type
(in cfs), as measured at USGS Gage No. 11404300 (also referred to as Project IDNF22)
Water Year TypeOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSep
Critically Dry644446666666
Dry666668888886
Normal 8 8 8 8 8 1010 10 9 9 9 8
Wet9 9 9 9 1013 1313 1110109
25
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project October 2020
Water Quality Certification
Table 4. Milk Ranch Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Below Three Lakes by Water Year Type
(in cfs), as measured at Project ID MR2
Water Year Type Oct Nov DecJan FebMarApr MayJunJul AugSep
1 2
Critically Dry 0.25WSWS WS WS WS 0.250.250.25 0.25 0.250.25
2
Dry 0.5 WS WS WS WS WS 0.5 0.5 0.50.50.50.5
2
Normal1 WS WS WS WS WS 1 1 1 1 1 1
2
Wet2 WS WS WS WS WS 2 2 2 2 2 2
1
WS: “Winter Setting” refers to whenthe low-level outlet valve is fully-opened and the natural inflow equals the outflow
of the reservoir. The Licensees may open the outlet to the WS prior to November 1 if weather is predicted that may
restrict safe access to the valve house.
2
The Licensees shall adjust the valve within two business days, or as soon thereafter as accessible, following the
publication of California Department of Water Resources water year forecast of unimpaired runoff in the Feather
River at Oroville as set forth in Bulletin 120.
Table 5. Milk Ranch Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements at Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 1 by
Water Year Type (in cfs), as measured at Project ID MRC1
Water Year Type Oct Nov DecJan FebMarApr MayJunJul AugSep
1 11112
Critically Dry0.250.250.250.250.250.250.250.250.250.250.250.25
111112
Dry0.50.250.250.250.250.250.50.50.50.50.50.5
111112
Normal10.250.250.250.250.25111111
111112,33333
Wet20.250.250.250.250.25222222
1
0.25 or natural inflow, whichever is less. The Licensees may set the outlet to 0.25 cfs prior to November 1 if weather
is predicted that may restrict safe access to the diversion.
2
The Licensees shall adjust the valve within two business days, or as soon thereafter as accessible, following the
publication of the California Department of Water Resourceswater year forecast of unimpaired runoff in the Feather
River at Oroville as set forth in Bulletin 120.
3
If conditions are met in accordance with Condition 9 – Milk Ranch Conduit Closure, bypass flows shall be
implementedfrom April through August 15 in
26
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project October 2020
Water Quality Certification
Table 6. South Fork Grouse Hollow Creek Minimum Instream Flow Requirements at Milk Ranch Conduit
Diversion No. 3 by Water Year Type (in cfs), as measured at Project ID MRC2
WY TypeOct Nov DecJan FebMarApr MayJunJul AugSep
1 11111111111
All0.50.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
1
0.5 or natural inflow, whichever is less.
27
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
CONDITION 2. Cease Diversions at Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 8
For the protection of the federally Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed endangered
Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog (Rana sierrae),the Licensees shall permanently
cease diversion of flows from Bear Ravine into Milk Ranch Conduit at Milk Ranch
Conduit Diversion No. 8, thus allowing the full natural flow in Bear Ravine. Within
60 days, or as soon as is reasonably accessible following license issuance (whichever
is later), the Licensees shall install a cap or cover that will completely close and secure
the diversion pipe into the Milk Ranch Conduit. Existing infrastructure may be left in
place to minimize adverse environmental effects. The Licensees shall also install
screens and maintain air vents in order to prevent wildlife from entering the vents. In
addition, the Licensees shall perform any necessary maintenance on the screens to
prevent wildlife intrusion.
Prior to any modifications of this diversion structure beyond those discussed in this
condition (i.e., cap and secure the diversion pipe, screen installation, air vents), the
Licensees shall consult with the Forest Service, USFWS, CDFW, and State Water
Board staff. The consultation shall include the option to visit the site to discuss the
proposed work. Following consultation, the Licensees shall submit the proposed
modifications to the Deputy Director for review and consideration of approval. The
Deputy Director may require modifications as part of any approval. At a minimum, the
proposed modifications shall include: measures that will be implemented to protect
water quality and beneficial uses; schedule; and documentation of consultation,
including any comments received. The Licensees shall complete the proposed work
followingreceiptof approval from the Deputy Director and any other required approvals.
The Licensees shall monitor the existing diversion structure and adjacent hillslope
following Wet water years (as defined in Condition 7) for signs that the structure or
hillslope are at risk of failure. If the Licensees determine that non-routine maintenance
of the structure or hillslope is required to prevent significant adverse environmental
impacts, the Licensees shall consult with Forest Service, USFWS, CDFW, and State
Water Board staff regarding appropriate protection measures, as outlined in the Sierra
Nevada Yellow-legged Frog Management Plan (Condition 16). Following consultation,
the Licensees shall submit any non-routine maintenance to the Deputy Director for
review and consideration of approval. At a minimum, the proposed modifications shall
include: measures that will be implemented to protect water quality and beneficial uses;
schedule; and documentation of consultation, including any comments received. The
Deputy Director may require modifications as part of any approval. The Licensees shall
complete the proposed modifications following receipt of approval from the Deputy
Director and any other required approvals.
CONDITION 3. Annual Drawdown of Three Lakes
The Licensees shall verify the water surface elevation of Lower Three Lakes on
August 15 of each year, or the shortest amount of time before August 15 if conditions
prevent access.
28
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
If the water surface elevation is above 6,072 feet (ft), as measured by
Gage NF10 (USGS Gage No. 11403300), the Licensees shall initiate drawdown
on August 15, or the shortest amount of time before August 15 if conditions
prevent access, and set the low-level outlet valve to release 9 cfs (based on the
rating curve at Project ID MR2).
If the water surface elevation is at or below 6,072 ft, as measured by Gage NF10,
the Licensees shall calculate the date on which they will initiate drawdown at a
release of 9 cfs with the objective of reaching minimum pool at Lower Three
Lakes (water surface elevation of 6,050 ft) by September 15.
After setting the low-level outlet valve at Three Lakes to release 9 cfs as described
above, the Licensees shall not modify the valve until November 1. On November 1 of
each year the Licensees shall fully open the low-level outlet valve to the “Winter Setting”
(see Table 4). The low-level outlet valve shall be set to release 9 cfs, based on the
rating curve, however actual flow releases from the low-level outlet valve may vary
depending on reservoir head and natural inflow into Three Lakes. The low-level outlet
valve may be fully opened to the Winter Setting prior to November 1 if predicted
weather may restrict safe access to the valve house. In such instances, the Licensees
shall provide the Deputy Director with notice of the need to fully open the low-level
outlet valve earlier than November 1 and provide associated supporting documentation.
By January 31 of each year, the Licensees shall provide the Forest Service, CDFW,
USFWS, and State Water Board staff a draft report documenting the following:
The water surface elevation of Lower Three Lakes on or preceding August 15 (if
access is precluded), when the water surface elevation was verified. If the water
surface elevation is verified on a date other than August 15, that date shall be
identified;
The date the Licensees initiated drawdown of Three Lakes;
The date when minimum pool was reached at Lower Three Lakes; and
The date when the outlet valve was fully opened to the “Winter Setting.”
After consulting with and incorporating any comments from the Forest Service, CDFW,
USFWS, and State Water Board staff, the Licensees shall file a final report with the
Deputy Director on the drawdown of Three Lakes, as specified in Condition 25 and
before the ECG meeting each year. The Licensees shall review the dates associated
with the prior year’s drawdown at the annual ECG meeting (Condition 22).
CONDITION 4. Channel Maintenance Flows
The Licensees shall provide channel maintenance flows (referred to as spills) in Wet
and Normal water years at the following locations:
Bucks Creek below Lower Bucks Lake; and
Grizzly Creek below Grizzly Forebay.
29
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Water year designations shall be based on the March issuance of the California
Department of Water Resources (DWR) March Bulletin 120 forecast (as defined in
Condition 7 –Water Year Types).
Bucks Creek below Lower Bucks Lake
Annual Spill Requirements. If, by March 31 of each Normal or Wet water year in which
a natural spill in excess of 70 cfs (as measured by Gage NF57 on the NFFR, which is
part of the Rock Creek-Cresta Project, FERC Project No. 1962) has not occurred in the
previous 18 months, the Licensees shall provide instream flows of 50– 70 cfs in Bucks
Creek below Lower Bucks Lake Dam for a period of at least 18 hours. This may be
accomplished by any combination of spill, release, and accretion flows. At the end of
this event, the Licensees shall smoothly taper off the flow consistent with existing
equipment and the requirements in Condition 6 – Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay
and Lower Bucks Lake. The Licensees shall make reasonable efforts to coordinate this
event with high flows (above 3,000 cfs) in the North Fork Feather River (NFFR). If the
March Bulletin 120 forecast indicates that the water year type is Dry or Critically Dry this
Annual Spill flow is not required for that year regardless of whether later forecasts
indicate that the water year type is Normal or Wet.
High Spill Requirement. If, by March 31 of each Normal or Wet water year in which a
12
High Spill has not occurred during the previous five years in Bucks Creek below Lower
Bucks Lake Dam, the Licensees shall implement a High Spill event of 200–300 cfs for at
least 18 hours. This event shall be concurrent with flows of more than 3,000 cfs at
Gage NF57. The Licensees are not required to implement a High Spill if flows at Gage
NF57 in excess of 3,000 cfs are not available or the Licensees cannot reasonably
accommodate a High Spill at a time when 3,000 cfs may be available due to safety or
emergency conditions that exist at the time. In such an event, the Licensees may
consider a High Spill concurrent with a flow at Gage NF57 of less than 3,000 cfs but in
no event less than 1,600 cfs, recognizing that this further consideration may result in a
postponement of the High Spill to a future year. The Licensees shall electronically
notify the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board staff of the planned
High Spill event, including the proposed schedule for the spill.
Upon completion of the 18-hour High Spill, the Licensees shall smoothly taper off the
flow consistent with existing equipment and the requirements in Condition 6 – Spill
Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake. If the March Bulletin 120
forecast indicates that the water year type is Dry or Critically Dry, this High Spill event is
not required for that year and shall be postponed to the next eligible year regardless of
whether later Bulletin 120 forecasts indicate that the water year type is Normal or Wet.
Unplanned Spill Events. Although rare, it is possible that Lower Bucks Lake may
experience an unavoidable spill in the spring months due to an uncontrolled spill at
Bucks Lake, powerhouse outages, or other emergencies. In such event, and to the
12
A High Spill, in this case, refers to a flow of 200–300 cfs for at least 18 hours in
duration.
30
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
extent reasonably possible underthese conditions, the Licensees shall notify the Forest
Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board staff and minimize the magnitude of
such spill if corresponding high flow conditions (above 3,000 cfs) are not present in the
NFFR. In the event an unplanned spill may be expected to occur prior to March 31, and
if such spill could be increased to over 200 cfs for at least 18 hours, the Licensees shall
notify (by email and phone) the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board
staff prior to implementation of any actions to increase the spill, if time permits.
Reasonable efforts shall be made to incorporate any comments received from the
agencies recognizing that rapidly changing conditions may necessitate action by the
Licensees to take advantage of the opportunity to spill more than 200 cfs.
Measurement. Measurement of channel maintenance flows in Bucks Creek shall be
based on reservoir elevation and appropriate rating tables for the spillways for each
dam. Unless otherwise approved by the Deputy Director, the Licensees shall use
telemetered reservoir elevations to monitor and control channel maintenance flows.
Grizzly Creek Channel Maintenance Flow Requirements
Annual Spill Requirements. The Licensees shall track natural spill events at Grizzly
Forebay Dam. If, by March 31 of each Normal or Wet water year in which a natural spill
in excess of 50 cfs for at least 18 hours duration has not occurred in the previous
18 months, the Licensees shall provide minimum instream flows of 50–70 cfs in Grizzly
Creek below Grizzly Forebay Dam for a period of at least 18 hours prior to April 15 of
that year. This may be accomplished by any combination of spill, release, and accretion
flows. At the end of this event, the Licensees shall smoothly taper off the flow
consistent with existing equipment and the requirements in Condition 6 – Spill
Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake. If the March Bulletin 120
forecast indicates that the water year type is Dry or Critically Dry, this annual spill flow is
not required for that year regardless of whether later forecasts indicate that the water
year type is Normal or Wet.
Unplanned Spill Events. Spill flow at Grizzly Forebay is a common event in Normal and
Wet water years; therefore, the Licensees are not required to provide any notification in
the event of unplanned spills at this location.
Measurement. Flows in Grizzly Creek shall be measured at Project Gage NF22 (USGS
Gage No. 11404300).
Reporting of Channel Maintenance Flows
The Licensees shall prepare a report for each year that a channel maintenance flow
may be required to be released in either Bucks Creek or Grizzly Creek (i.e., Normal or
Wet water years, as designated in the March Bulletin 120). The report shall include:
data on the timing, magnitude, and duration of the spill flow(s); data on the timing,
magnitude, and duration of the tapering flows; any turbidity data collected; why flows
were not provided (e.g., flows in NFFR less than 3,000 cfs, spill occurred within past
18 months, etc.), if applicable; and any other observations. After consulting with and
incorporating any comments from the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water
Board staff,the Licensees shall file afinal report on the channel maintenance flowswith
31
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
the Deputy Director, as specified in Condition 25. The Licensees shall reviewthe
results of the channel maintenance flow report at the annual ECG meeting
(Condition 22).
Emergency Conditions
If emergency conditions exist and the Licensees are unable to implement actions
required by this condition, the Licensees shall notify the Deputy Directorwith a
description of theemergency and assoicated implementation challenges, and may not
be bound by the requirements of this condition.
CONDITION 5. Project Reservoirs Water Surface Elevations
The Licensees shall operate the Project to meet or exceed the following water surface
elevations (elevations) for Lower Bucks Lake, Lower and Middle Three Lakes, Bucks
Lake, and Grizzly Forebay.
Lower Bucks Lake
Elevation shall not be drawn down below an elevation of 4,966 ft above mean sea level
(msl) and shall be measured at PG&E Gage NF13 (USGS Gage No.11403520).
Lower and Middle Three Lakes
Elevationof Lower Three Lakesshall not be drawn down below 6,050 feet above msl;
and Middle Three Lakes shall not be drawn down below an elevation of 6,057 feetmsl.
Elevations shall be measured at PG&E Gage NF10 (USGS Gage No. 11403300).
Bucks Lake
Elevationshall be determined based on month and water year type (Condition 7).
Drawdown for a Wet or Normal water year between June 1 through September 1 shall
not exceed 15 feet below the elevation of June 1, and shall not go below an elevation of
5,100 feetabove msl. Drawdown for a Dry or Critically Dry water year shall not go
below elevation 5,080 feet above msl prior to September 1. Elevations shall be
measured at PG&E Gage NF16 (USGS Gage No. 11403500).
Grizzly Forebay
Elevationshall not be drawn down below 4,303 feet above msl. Elevations shall be
measured at PG&E Gage NF19 (USGS Gage No. 11404250).
Departure from these elevations shall be permissible only when it is necessary to
perform maintenance on the respective dams or their outlet works, when in the interest
of public safety, or as may be otherwise authorized by the Deputy Director. The
Licensees shall make every effort to schedule maintenance activities in a manner that
allows for attainment of the elevations required in this condition. The Licensees shall
report anydeviations from the elevations to the Deputy Directorwithin five days of the
deviation, including the reason for the deviation and any proposed actions the
32
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Licensees will take in the future to avoid a similar deviation, if applicable. All elevations
13
are on Feather River Power Company datum.
CONDITION 6.Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake
To minimize the impact of unavoidable spills on Grizzly Creek, the Licensees shall draw
down reservoir levels in Grizzly Forebay in advance of forecasted spill events to the
extent practical. However, since GrizzlyForebay often receives more flow than is able
to be released through Bucks Creek Powerhouse, the Licensees shall use managed
spills to attenuate flows in Grizzly Creek.
At no time shall the Licensees schedule managed spills during the first five business
days or the last two business days of the prescribed daily steps of the Rock Creek-
14
Cresta Project’s Cresta Reach 21-day Spill Recession (CSR). Preferably, the
Licensees shall schedule Grizzly Forebay managed spills prior to the CSR; however, if
that is impractical the managed spills may be scheduled during the 15days of constant
flow in the CSR (i.e., Days 6through 20). For additional protection of the sensitive
period of the foothill yellow-legged frog population in the Cresta Reach, powerhouse
outages longer than two weeks in duration of Bucks Creek Powerhouse and Grizzly
Powerhouse shall not be scheduled during the period of April through July. Although
outages in fall months are unlikely to result in spills, no outages shall be scheduled in
August or September if they will cause a spill.
Allowable Load Changes in Critically Dry, Dry, and Normal Water Years
April through September.For down-ramping of managed spills that occur from April
through September, daily (24 hours) load changes shall not exceed the megawatt (MW)
value in Tables 7, 8, and9, corresponding to the applicable powerhouse and
instantaneous spill flow at the beginning of that 24-hour increment.
October through March. For down-ramping of managed spills that occur from October
through March, hourly (60 minutes) load changes shall not exceed the MW value in
Tables 7, 8, or 9, corresponding to the applicable powerhouse and instantaneous spill
flow at the beginning of that 60-minute increment. During spills greater than 350 cfs
that occur from October through March, flexible schedules and bidding are allowed at
13
Elevations in “Feather River Power Company datum” are 3.5 ft lower than those
expressed as “USGS Datum.”
14
For the protection of foothill yellow-legged frogs, during the months of May through
September in all year types, the Rock Creek-Cresta Project FERC license specifies
that PG&E must implement the CSR. In this instance, CSR refers to a 21-day
recession in the Cresta reach during the transition period from 1,000 cfs to base flows
in the NFFR.For reference, the following steps are targets under the Rock Creek-
Cresta Project FERC license based on daily average flow in cfs, measured at the
Cresta Reservoir radial gate: Day 1 at 1,000 cfs, Day 2 at 920 cfs, Day 3 at 840 cfs,
Day 4 at 760 cfs, Day 5 at 680 cfs, Days 6-20 at 600 cfs, Day 21 at 520 cfs, Day 22
at Base Flow.
33
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
sub-hourly increments, but load changes shall not exceed the MW value in Tables 7, 8,
or 9 corresponding to the applicable powerhouse and instantaneous spill flow at the
beginning of that increment.
Allowable Load Changes in Wet Water Years
May through September. For down-ramping of managed spills that occur from May
through September, daily (24 hours) load changes shall not exceed the MW value in
Tables 7, 8, or 9, corresponding to the applicable powerhouse and instantaneous spill
flow at the beginning of that 24-hour increment.
October through April. For down-ramping of managed spills that occur from October
through April, and when flows on the NFFR at PG&E Gage NF56 exceed 3,500 cfs,
hourly (60 minutes) load changes shall not exceed the MW value in Tables 7, 8, or 9,
corresponding to the applicable powerhouse and instantaneous spill flow at the
beginning of that 60-minute increment.
During spills of greater than 350 cfs that occur from October through April, and when
flows on the NFFR at PG&E Gage NF56 exceed 3,500 cfs, flexible schedules and
bidding are allowed at sub-hourly increments, but load changes shall not exceed the
MW value in Tables 7, 8, or 9, corresponding to the applicable powerhouse and
instantaneous spill flow at the beginning of that increment.
Monitoring and Reporting
The Licensees shall monitor stream stage and calculated instream flow in Bucks Creek
downstream of Lower Bucks Lake Dam and in Grizzly Creek downstream of Grizzly
Forebay Dam for the first five years of the license, or until all three down-ramping
scenarios have been implemented, whichever comes first. Flow measurement methods
are described in the Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan (Condition 13).
No later than five years after issuance of the new FERC license, the Licensees shall
submit a draft report to Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board staff
that documents the effects of the measures listed in this condition on instream flow
conditions in Bucks Creek, Grizzly Creek, and the NFFR and provide recommendations
the Licensees will implement to improve compliance with this condition. After consulting
with and incorporating comments from the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State
Water Board staff, the Licensees shall file a final report on the spill management at
Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake with the Deputy Director, as specified in
Condition 25. If, based on the report, resource agencies input, and associated
hydrologic data, the Licensees propose to revise the condition to protect aquatic
species differently than pursuant to the current requirements of this condition, the
Licensees shall submit a formal request to amend the existing water quality certification.
The Licensees shall include all relevant documentation of coordination and consultation
with the request.
34
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project October 2020
Water Quality Certification
Table 7. Grizzly Powerhouse Load Changes for Spills at Grizzly Forebay Dam
Approximate Powerhouse Flow
Initial Flow at Gage NF22 (cfs) Allowable Change (MW)
Change Per Step(cfs)
> 800 -- --
551 –80012.0203 –209
351 – 550 8.0 135 – 140
150 – 350 4.0 67 – 70
1
< 1502.033 –35
1
Depending on the 9 –11 MW no-run zone, may require a 3-MW step.
Table 8.Bucks Creek Powerhouse Load Changes for Spills at Grizzly Forebay Dam
Approximate Powerhouse Flow
Initial Flow at Gage NF22 (cfs)Allowable Change (MW)
Change Per Step (cfs)
> 800 ----
551 – 800 40.0~207
351 – 550 24.0 119 –158
150 – 350 12.058 – 86
< 1506.029 –45
35
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project October 2020
Water Quality Certification
Table 9. Grizzly Powerhouse Load Changes for Spills at Lower Bucks Dam
Approximate Powerhouse Flow
Initial Flow at Gage NF22 (cfs) Allowable Change (MW)
Change Per Step (cfs)
> 800 -- --
551 –80012.0203 –209
351 – 550 8.0 135 – 140
150 – 350 4.0 67 – 70
1
< 1502.033 –35
1
Depending on the 9 –11 MW no-run zone, may require a 3-MW step.
36
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
CONDITION 7. Water Year Types
The Licensees shall use the California DWR water year forecast of unimpaired runoff in
15
the Feather River at Oroville as set forth in DWR’s Bulletin 120
, each year in each
month from February through May to determine the applicable water year type as
described below when implementing the conditions of this water quality certification,
including instream flows (Condition 1), channel maintenance flows (Condition 4), and
Project reservoirs water surface elevations (Condition 5). The April forecast shall be
used to determine if conditions are met for Wet water year Milk Ranch Conduit
Diversion Nos. 1 and 2 bypass flows (Condition 9). Water years are categorized into
four water year types based on inflow to Lake Oroville: Wet, Normal, Dry, and Critically
Dry. The water year types are defined as follows:
Wet: Greater than or equal to 5,679 thousand acre-feet (TAF) at Oroville;
Normal: Less than 5,679 TAF but greater than or equal to 3,228 TAF at Oroville;
Dry: Less than 3,228 TAF but greater than or equal to 2,505 TAF at Oroville; and
Critical Dry: Less than 2,505 TAF at Oroville.
The Licensees shall use DWR’s forecast of the water year type on or about February 10
to comply with the conditions of this water quality certification until the next month’s
water year type forecast (i.e., March, April, and May) is published in Bulletin 120. New
forecasts will be made on or about the tenth of March, April, and May after the snow
surveys are complete and compliance with certification conditions shall be changed
accordingly within two business days, or as soon thereafter as accessible for locations
that require manual modifications to implement. The May forecast shall establish the
water year type until the February forecast for the following year is released.
CONDITION 8. Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions Management
Any existing inactive diversion structures shall be left in place and managed for safety
and aesthetics by the Licensees. Six diversions along Milk Ranch Conduit (current
FERC Diversion Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 identified in Figure 2 and Table 10) and their
ancillary features are to be left inoperable (i.e., no longer divert flows). The Licensees
shall seal any exposed intake and diversion pipe openings of the inoperable diversions.
Other specific actions include:
FERC Diversion No. 5 – The Licensees shall monitor the existing diversion
structure following Wet water years for undermining and collapse. If the diversion
structure collapses, the Licensees shall consult with Forest Service and State
Water Board staff to identify appropriate actions.
15
Bulletin 120 is a publication issued four times a year, in the second week of February,
March, April, and May by DWR. It contains forecasts of the volume of seasonal
runoff from California’s major watersheds, and summaries of precipitation, snowpack,
reservoir storage, and runoff in various regions of California.
37
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
FERC Diversion Nos. 1 and 7 – No later than six months following FERC license
issuance, the Licensees, in consultation with the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS,
and State Water Board staff, shall develop an approach to modify or conceal the
face of the diversion dams to create a more natural appearance. The Licensees
shall consider methods such as chipping the concrete, modifying the flow pattern
over the crest of the dam, and/or planting vegetation.
FERC Diversion No. 8 – The Licensees shall remove the exposed diversion pipe
and seal the opening following consultation with the Forest Service and State
Water Board staff, and approval by the Deputy Director.
Following consultation and prior to implementation of the work outlined above for FERC
Diversions 1, 5, 7, and 8, the Licensees shall submit the proposed work plan or actions
to the Deputy Director for review and consideration of approval. The Deputy Director
may require modifications as part of any approval. The Licensees shall implement the
actions upon receipt of Deputy Director and any other required approvals. At all active
and inactive diversion locations, the Licensees shall remove construction litter and
diversion debris. The Licensees shall screen and maintain air vents in order to prevent
wildlife from entering the vents.
Additionally, within18 months following issuance of the FERC license, the Licensees
shall provide the Deputy Director with the details of the existing water rights associated
with each of the subject diversions (i.e., the diversion identified as inactive in Table 10),
and a discussion of the Licensees’proposal for the disposition of these water rights.
Requests for revocation or transfer of existing water rights to instream use, as
applicable, shall be submitted to the Division of Water Rights within three years
following issuance of the FERC license.
38
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project October 2020
Water Quality Certification
Table 10. Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions Status and Locations, as of 2017
PG&E
FERC Diversion Diversion
11
Diversion No. Stream Drainage EastingNorthing
No. (licensed)
Status
(proposed)
1 -- -- Inactive 651398 4418798
2 9 -- Active 651313 4419738
2
3 8 Bear Ravine Active6516334419902
4 -- -- Inactive 651377 4420560
5 ---- Inactive 6513644420593
6----Inactive6510984420817
7---Inactive6510494420823
8 -- -- Inactive 650856 4420850
97Slide RavineActive6502944421100
106Bear Trap CreekActive6499004421474
115 N/A Active6495914423096
12 and 13 4 N/A Active 649931 4423444
South Fork
143 Active 650493 4424947
Grouse Hollow Creek
North Fork
152 Active 650582 4425208
Grouse Hollow Creek
Milk Ranch
Milk Ranch Creek 1 Active 651220 4425622
Creek
1
NAD83 UTM Zone 10N
2
Although actively maintained as part of the previousFERC Projectlicense (issued in 1974), the Licensees shall
cease diversion of instream flows from Bear Ravine into Milk Ranch Conduit at Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 8,
per the requirements of Condition 2–Cease Diversions at Milk Ranch Conduit Diversion No. 8.
39
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
CONDITION 9. Milk Ranch ConduitClosure
If the Bucks Lake elevation is 5,142 ft above msl or greater (as measured by PG&E
Gage NF16) at the time of a Wet water year determination per the April Bulletin 120
forecast (Condition 7), the Licensees shall temporarily close (i.e., bypass) the following
Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions within two business days, or as soon as reasonably
accessible, from the publication date of the April Bulletin 120 forecast through
August15:
PG&E Diversion No. 1 (Milk Ranch Creek)
PG&E Diversion No. 2 (North Fork Grouse Hollow Creek)
By January 31, if flows were bypassed in the prior year, the Licensees shall provide the
Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board staffa report documenting the
dates when the Licensees closed and reopened the Milk Ranch Conduit diversion
valves. After consulting with and incorporating any comments from the Forest Service,
CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board staff, the Licensees shall file a final report on
the Milk Ranch Conduit closure with the Deputy Director, as specified in Condition 25.
The Licensees shall review the results of the Milk Ranch Conduit closure report at the
annual ECG meeting (Condition 22).
CONDITION 10. Woody Material Management
The Licensees shall allow woody material to pass over Grizzly Forebay Dam during spill
events and channel maintenance flows (Condition 4 – Channel Maintenance Flows) by
leaving the downstream end of the reservoir’s log boom attached only to the right side
of the spillway year-round, thereby allowing debris to freely pass over the spillway
during spill events. If spill events and channel maintenance flows are insufficient to
pass woody material (e.g., during multiple dry year conditions), the Licensees may
periodically mechanically remove woody material from the reservoir if the woody
material is deemed a possible operational hazard.
At Lower Bucks Lake Dam, the Licensees shall allow woody material to pass over the
dam’s spillway during spill events. If spill events and channel maintenance flows are
insufficient to pass woody material, the Licensees may periodically mechanically
remove woody material from the reservoir if the woody material is deemed a possible
operational hazard.
To avoid impacts to downstream culverts in Bucks Creek below Bucks Lake, woody
material collecting near Bucks Lake spillway shall be relocated to Lower Bucks Lake
spillway. If site conditions preclude placement and passage of wood on Lower Bucks
Lake spillway, the Licensees may transport wood offsite following consultation with the
resource agencies as described below.
All sizes of woody material, including woody material with root wads attached, shall be
allowed to pass downstream past the dams. The Licensees shall avoid cutting the
40
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
wood, unless it is unsafe for Project operations or cannot mechanically be moved due to
its large size.
For any woody material that cannot be passed downstream of Project dams, the
Licensees shall consult with the Forest Service, USFWS, CDFW, and State Water
Board staff to determine appropriate methods for removal, transport, and/or disposal.
CONDITION 11.Fish Stocking
No later than one year following issuance of the FERC license,the Licensees shall
submit a fish stocking plan to the Deputy Director for review and consideration of
approval. The Deputy Director may require modifications as part of any approval. The
fish stocking plan shall be developed in consultation with the Forest Service, USFWS,
CDFW, and State Water Board staff. The fish stocking plan shall outline how fish
stocking will be managed in waters in the Project boundary while addressing applicable
federal and state laws, regulations, and policies. At a minimum, the fish stocking plan
shall include the following major sections:
1. Introduction;
2. Regulatory Framework and Stocking History;
3. Fish Stocking Methods, Species, and Targets; and
4. Reporting, Consultation, and Plan Revisions.
The Licensees shall implement the fish stocking plan beginning the first full calendar
year after receipt of Deputy Director and any other required approvals, and annually
thereafter for the term of the license and any extensions. As part of the fish stocking
plan, the Licensees shall stock trout in Project waters as follows:
Bucks Lake – up to 17,400 pounds of catchable trout;
Grizzly Forebay – up to 10,000 fingerling trout; and
Lower Three Lakes and Middle Three Lakes – up to 10,000 fingerling trout.
The species shall be determined on an annual basis. The Licensees shall begin
implementation of CDFW’s annual stocking prescription (number and species) no later
than September 30 of each year. In the event no guidance is received by
September 30, the Licensees shall stock the same prescription (number and species)
as the previous year.
The Licensees may acquire the fish directly through available sources or enter into a
contract with CDFW for the cost of production. In the event the quantities of one or
more of the species or sizes of fish listed in this condition are not available, or the
fisheries management strategy of the waterbody changes during the term of the FERC
license, the Licensees shall coordinate with CDFW to develop a reasonable alternative.
The reasonable alternative may include substituting an equivalent quantity of a different
trout species, not to exceed the total stocking targets for weight and quantity in this
41
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
condition. Trout species selected for stocking shall notimpair the water quality or
16
beneficial uses related to native fish.
The Licensees shall implement this condition in compliance with: (1) any reasonable
and prudent measures contained in a Biological Opinion issued by the USFWS for the
Project; and (2) any other applicable permits obtained by the Licensees for fish
stocking.
CONDITION 12. Bucks Lake Shoreline Management
The Licensees shall implement the Bucks Lake Shoreline Management Plan, as filed
with FERC by PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 19, 2019. Any
revisions approved by the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 13. Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging
The Licensees shall implement the Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan, as
filed with FERC by PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 20, 2019. Any
revisions approved by the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 14. Gravel Augmentation
The Licensees shall implement the Gravel Augmentation Plan, as filed with FERC by
PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 20, 2019. Any revisions approved by
the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 15. Aquatic Resources Monitoring
The Licensees shall implement the Aquatic Resources Monitoring Plan, as filed with
FERC by PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 20, 2019. Any revisions
approved by the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 16. Sierra Nevada Yellow-Legged Frog Management
The Licensees shall implement the Sierra Nevada Yellow-Legged Frog Management
Plan, as filed with FERC by PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 20, 2019.
Any revisions approved by the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 17. Aquatic Invasive Species Management
The Licensees shall implement the Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan, as filed
with FERC by PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 20, 2019. Any
revisions approved by the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
16
“Fish” as defined in Fish and Game Code section 45 is wild fish, mollusk, crustacean,
invertebrate, amphibian, or part, spawn, or ovum of any of those animals.
42
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
CONDITION 18. Integrated Vegetation Management
The Licensees shall implement the Integrated Vegetation Management Plan, as filed
with FERC by PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 20, 2019. Any
revisions approved by the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 19.Hazardous Materials Management
The Licensees shall implement the Hazardous Materials Management Plan, as filed
with FERC by PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 20, 2019. Any
revisions approved by the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 20.Erosion Management
The Licensees shall implement the Erosion Management Plan, as filed with FERC by
PG&E and the City of Santa Clara, on September 20, 2019. Any revisions approved by
the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 21.Recreation Management
The Licensees shall implement the Recreation Management Plan, as filed with FERC
by PG&Eand the City of Santa Clara, on October 3, 2019. Any revisions approved by
the Deputy Director shall be incorporated into the plan.
CONDITION 22.Annual Ecological Consultation Group Meeting
The Licensees shall, within 60 days of license issuance, establish an Ecological
Consultation Group. ECG meetings shall be open to representatives from the Forest
Service, USFWS, CDFW, American Whitewater, Bucks Lake Homeowners Association,
State Water Board, and other interested agency representatives, who may fully
participate in the meeting. The Licensees shall coordinate meeting agendas with
interested agencies. The Licensees shall maintain an ECG e-mail contact list consisting
of e-mail addresses (one primary and one alternate) provided to the Licensees by the
17
Relicensing Participants
and organizations or individuals that notified the Licensees in
writing of their interest in participating in the ECG meetings. Thereafter, the Licensees
shall organize and host ECG meetings, and unless otherwise agreed to by the ECG,
meetings shall be held in Sacramento or Chico, California.
The Licensees shall organize and host at least one ECG meeting each year by April 15,
unless otherwise agreed to by the ECG. The Licensees shall organize and host
additional ECG meetings or conference calls if agreed upon by the ECG and the
17
Relicensing Participants that were involved in the development of PG&E and City of
Santa Clara’s proposed measures include: Forest Service, USFWS; CDFW;
American Whitewater, the Bucks Lake Homeowners Association, and State Water
Board staff.
43
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Licensees. Unless otherwise modified by the ECG, the agenda shall at a minimum
include the following:
Introductions;
Public comments;
The Licensees’ report of any deviations from the conditions in the license since
the previous meeting required under this condition;
Discussion of the Licensees’ FERC filings in the previous calendar year (e.g.,
monitoring reports required by implementation plans);
Discussion of the Licensees’ planned license-required monitoring in the current
calendar year;
Discussion of any license-required agency consultation in the current calendar
year, and the Licensees’ proposal to complete the consultation, if needed;
Discussion of any anticipated proposals in the calendar year regarding:
(1) changes or additions to facilities or features in the license; (2) variances to
conditions in the license; or (3) amendments to the license;
The Licensees’ follow-up on action items from the last meeting required by this
condition;
Other implementation plansand associated reports or results;
Identification of the Licensees’ action items from this meeting, if any; and
Review of the current lists of special-status species (species that are federally
endangered or threatened, or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered
under the federal ESA; Forest Service sensitive and Forest Service species of
conservation concern; state threatened or endangered or candidate for listing
under the California ESA; state species of special concern; state fully protected
species, and state rare plants) that occur or have the potential to occur on
Project-affected lands and may be affected by Project operation, maintenance, or
recreational activities.
At least 30 days in advance of the meeting, the Licensees shall make reports and other
information from the previous calendar year required by license conditions or
implementation plans in the FERC license available to the ECG.
The ECG members shall work collaboratively to make decisions and resolve issues
assigned to the ECG. The ECG will communicate its recommendations to the Forest
Service and State Water Board staff. The Forest Service is responsible for final
decisions covered by the Section 4(e) Conditions and the State Water Board is
responsible for final decisions within its jurisdiction.
44
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
CONDITION 23. Dewatering and Diversion
Prior to commencing any work that requires a water diversion or in-water work below
the maximum water surface elevation or high water mark, the Licensees shall submit a
Dewatering and Diversion Plan to the Deputy Director for review and consideration of
approval. The Plan shall be submitted at least 60 days before the anticipated activity is
expected to occur. The Deputy Director may require modifications as part of any
approval. The Licensees shall not implement any activities associated with the
Dewatering and Diversion Plan that my impact water quality or beneficial uses until
receipt of Deputy Director and any other required approvals. For Project work that
involves any dewatering or diversion of water, the Licensee shall include the following:
An overview of all in-water work that will require dewatering or diversion of water;
Time frames for required dewatering or diversion work;
Description of coffer dams or equivalent barriers that will be used to isolate the
construction area from instream flows;
Description of measures, if needed, that will be implemented to avoid potential
fish stranding and entrainment;
Provisions to maintain downstream flow equal to upstream flow. If temporary
modification of minimum instream flows are required, the Licensee shall provide
a written description of the modification, reason(s) for its necessity, measures
that will be implemented to protect water quality and beneficial uses, and the
proposed timeline for modification and return to the required MIFs;
Proposed monitoring and reporting related to the dewatering, diversion, and
turbidity of water; and
Description of how, upon completion of construction activities, flow will resume
with the least disturbance to the substrate, water quality, and beneficial uses.
Unless approved by the Deputy Director in writing, Project activities shall not cause
increased turbidity greater than allowable levels identified in the Water Quality Control
Plan for the Sacramento River Basin and the San Joaquin River Basin(Basin Plan)
(Central Valley Regional Board,2018)and amendments thereto. If turbidity
exceedances are expected to result from sediment disturbance related to Project
activities despite implementation of all reasonable best management practices, the
Licensees shall consult with State Water Board and Central Valley Regional Water
Quality Control Board (Central Valley Regional Water Board) staff to determine an
allowable zone of dilution in which turbidity in excess of the limits may be allowed.
Activities associated with an exception to turbidity limits may not occur without prior
written approval from the Deputy Director.
CONDITION 24. Extremely Dry Conditions
In the event of extremely dry conditions, which may include a year in which the
Governor of the State of California declares a drought emergency for Plumas County, or
45
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
multiple consecutive Dry or Critically Dry water years, the Licensees may request
modification of the flow, water surface elevation, and related requirements of this
certification. If the Licensees anticipate that they may request modification pursuant to
this condition, the Licensees shall notify the Relicensing Participants and the Deputy
Director of the Licensees’ concerns related to flows as early as possible, and no later
than March 15 of the year in which a request may be submitted. If the Licensees
request modification pursuant to this condition, the Licensees shall develop a Revised
Operations Plan in consultation with Relicensing Participants staff for flows, water
surface elevations, and related conditions during the extremely dry conditions.
The Licensees shall provide notice of the proposed Revised Operations Plan to
interested parties at least seven days prior to submittal to the Deputy Director. The
Licensees’ request shall include: an estimate of water to be saved and the alternative
beneficial uses for which the water is being conserved; a timeline for the return to
regular operations; proposed monitoring for the revised operations, including an
estimation of any impacts the revised operations may have on any beneficial uses of
water; and proposed water conservation measures that will be implemented. If
conservation measures are not applicable, the Licensees shall describe the
circumstances and justification for not implementing water conservation measures.
The Licensees shall submit the proposed Revised Operations Plan to the Deputy
Director for review and consideration of approval. The Licensees shall also provide a
summary of any comments received and how the comments were addressed. The
Deputy Director may require modifications to the Revised Operations Plan as part of
any approval. The Licensees may implement the Revised Operations Plan upon receipt
of Deputy Director and other required approvals, in accordance with the schedule and
requirements specified therein. The Licensees shall file with FERC the Deputy Director-
approved Revised Operations Plan, and any approved amendments thereto.
CONDITIONS 25 – 50.
CONDITION 25. Any report developed as a condition of this certification shall be
submitted to the Deputy Director. The Licensees shall allow the Forest Service, CDFW,
18
USFWS, and State Water Board staff at least 45 days to provide input on the draft
report. The Licensees shall file a final report with the Deputy Director within 90 days of
providing the draft report to the required entities. The report shall include
documentation of consultation with the agencies specified above; copies of their
comments and recommendations on the report; and specific descriptions of how the
agencies’ comments and recommendations are addressed in the report.
18
Sixty days shall be provided for the Forest Service, State Water Board, USFWS, and
CDFW to provide written comments and recommendations on the report on spill
management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake.
46
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
CONDITION 26. Any revisions to a management plan included as a condition of this
19
certificationshall be submitted to the Deputy Director for review and consideration of
approval. If significant changes in the existing conditions or implementation
20
circumstances occur, the Licensees shall allow the required entities60days to
provide written comments and recommendations. After consultation, the Licensees
shall file the proposed updated management plan with the Deputy Director for review
and consideration of approval. Revisions to a management plan shall include
documentation of consultation with required entities; copies of their comments and
recommendations on the plan; and specific descriptions of how the required entities’
comments and recommendations are addressed in the plan. The Deputy Director may
require modifications as part of any approval.
CONDITION 27. The State Water Board’s approval authority, including authority
delegated to the Deputy Director or others, includes the authority to withhold approval or
to require modification of a proposal, plan, or report prior to approval. The State Water
Board may take enforcement action if the Licensees fail to provide or implement a
required item in a timely manner. If a time extension is needed to submit an item for
Deputy Director approval, the Licensees shall submit a written request for the extension,
with justification, to the Deputy Director no later than 60 days prior to the deadline. The
Licensees shall file with FERC any Deputy Director-approved time extensions. The
Licensees shall not implement any plans or reports until after receiving Deputy Director
approval and any other necessary regulatory approvals.
CONDITION 28. The State Water Board reserves the authority to add to or modify the
conditions of this certification: (1) to incorporate changes in technology, sampling, or
methodologies; (2) if monitoring results indicate that continued operation of the Project
could violate water quality objectives or impair beneficial uses; (3) to implement any
new or revised water quality standards and implementation plans adopted or approved
pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act or section 303 of the Clean
Water Act; (4) to coordinate the operations of this Project and other hydrologically
connected water development projects, where coordination of operations is reasonably
necessary to meet water quality objectives and protect beneficial uses of water; and
(5) to require additional monitoring and/or other measures, as needed, to ensure that
continued Project operations meet water quality objectives and protect beneficial uses
of Bucks Creek, Grizzly Creek, Milk Ranch Creek, and their tributaries.
CONDITION 29. Future changes in climate projected to occur during the FERC license
term may significantly alter the baseline assumptions used to develop the conditions of
19
In this case, management plan refers to one of the Resource Management Plans
submitted to FERC in September and October of 2019 (Conditions 12 – 21),
implementation of which are also conditions of this certification.
20
The Recreation Management Plan, Hazardous Materials Management Plan, and
Erosion Management Plan require consultation with the Forest Service and State
Water Board staff. The remaining plans require consultation with CDFW, USFWS,
Forest Service, and State Water Board staff.
47
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
this certification. The State Water Board reserves authority to add to or modify the
conditions of this certification, to require additional monitoring and/or other measures,
as needed, to verify that Project operations meet water quality objectives and protect
the beneficial uses assigned to Project-affected stream reaches.
CONDITION 30. The State Water Board shall provide notice and an opportunity to be
heard in exercising its authority to add to or modify the conditions of this certification.
CONDITION 31. This certification is contingent on compliance with all applicable
requirements of the Basin Plan.
CONDITION 32. Notwithstanding any more specific conditions in this certification, the
Project shall be operated in a manner consistent with all water quality standards and
implementation plans adopted or approved pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water
Quality Control Act or section 303 of the Clean Water Act. The Licensees shalltake all
reasonable measures to protect the beneficial uses of Bucks Creek, Grizzly Creek, Milk
Ranch Creek, and their tributaries.
CONDITION 33. Unless otherwise specified in this certification or at the request of the
Deputy Director, data and/or reports shall be submitted electronically in a format
accepted by the State Water Board to facilitate the incorporation of this information into
public reports and the State Water Board's water quality database systems in
compliance with California Water Code section 13167.
CONDITION 34. This certification does not authorize any act which results in the taking
of a threatened, endangered, or candidate species or any act which is now prohibited,
or becomes prohibited in the future, under either the California ESA (Fish & G.Code,
§§ 2050 – 2097) or the federal ESA (16 U.S.C. §§ 1531 – 1544). If a “take” will result
from any act authorized under this certification or water rights held by the Licensees, the
Licensees must obtain authorization for the take prior to any construction or operation of
the portion of the Project that may result in a take. The Licensees are responsible for
meeting all requirements of the applicable ESAs for the Project authorized under this
certification.
CONDITION 35. The Licensees shall submit any change to the Project, including
operations, facilities, technology changes or upgrades, or methodology, which would
have a significant or material effect on the findings, conclusions, or conditions of this
certification, to the State Water Board for prior review and written approval. The State
Water Board shall determine significance and may require consultation with state and/or
federal agencies. If the State Water Board is not notified of a change to the Project, it
will be considered a violation of this certification. If such a change would also require
submission to FERC, the change must first be submitted and approved by the Executive
Director of the State Water Board unless otherwise delegated in this certification or
other State Water Board approval.
CONDITION 36. In the event of any violation or threatened violation of the conditions of
this certification, the violation or threatened violation is subject to any remedies,
48
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
penalties, process, or sanctions as provided for under applicable state or federal law.
For the purposes of section 401(d) of the Clean Water Act, the applicability of any state
law authorizing remedies, penalties, process, or sanctions for the violation or threatened
violation constitutes a limitation necessary to ensure compliance with the water quality
standards and other pertinent requirements incorporated into this certification. In
response to any violation of the conditions of this certification, the State Water Board
may add to or modify the conditions of this certification as appropriate to ensure
compliance.
CONDITION 37. In response to a suspected violation of any condition of this
certification, the State Water Board or Central Valley Regional Water Board may require
the holder of any federal permit or license subject to this certification to furnish, under
penalty of perjury, any technical or monitoring reports the State Water Board deems
appropriate, provided that the burden, including costs, of the reports shall bear a
reasonable relationship to the need for the reports and the benefits to be obtained from
the reports. (Wat. Code, §§ 1051, 13165, 13267, and 13383.)
CONDITION 38. This certification shall not be construed as replacement or substitution
for any necessary federal, state, and local approvals. The Licensees are responsible
for compliance with all applicable federal, state, or local laws or ordinances and shall
obtain authorization from applicable regulatory agencies prior to the commencement of
Project activities.
CONDITION 39. Any requirement in this certification that refers to an agency whose
authorities and responsibilities are transferred to or subsumed by another state or
federal agency, will apply equally to the successor agency.
CONDITION 40. Upon request, a construction schedule shall be provided to agency
staff. The Licensees shall provide State Water Board and Central Valley Regional
Water Board staffs access to Project sites to document compliance with this
certification.
CONDITION 41. A copy of this certification shall be provided to any contractor and all
subcontractors conducting Project-related work, and copies shall remain in their
possession at the Project site(s). The Licensees shall be responsible for work
conducted by its contractor, subcontractors, or other persons conducting Project-related
work.
CONDITION 42. Onsite containment for storage of chemicals classified as hazardous
shall be away from watercourses and include secondary containment and appropriate
management as specified in California Code of Regulations, title 27, section 20320.
CONDITION 43. Activities associated with operation and maintenance of the Project
that threaten or potentially threaten water quality shall be subject to further review by
the Deputy Director and Executive Officer of the Central Valley Regional Water Board.
49
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
CONDITION 44. Nothing in this certification shall be construed as State Water Board
approval of the validity of any water rights, including pre-1914 claims. The State Water
Board has separate authority under the Water Code to investigate and take
enforcement action, if necessary,to prevent any unauthorized or threatened
unauthorized diversions of water.
CONDITION 45. This certification is subject to modification or revocation upon
administrative or judicial review, including but not limited to review and amendment
pursuant to California Water Code, section 13330 and California Code of Regulations,
title 23, division 3, chapter 28, article 6 (commencing with section 3867).
CONDITION 46. This certification is not intended and shall not be construed to apply to
any activity involving a hydroelectric facility and requiring a FERC license or an
amendment to a FERC license unless the pertinent application for certification was filed
pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 23, section 3855, subdivision (b) and
that application for certification specifically identified that a FERC license or amendment
to a FERC license for a hydroelectric facility was being sought.
CONDITION 47. This certification is conditioned upon total payment of any fee required
under California Code of Regulations, title 23, division 3, chapter 28.
CONDITION 48. When applicable, the Licensee shall comply with the State Water
Board’s Construction General Permit (State Water Board 2009), and amendments
thereto. For any construction and maintenance activities with the potential to impact
water quality or beneficial uses that are not subject to the Construction General Permit,
the Licensee shall prepare and implement site-specific Water Quality Monitoring and
Protection Plans (WQMP Plans) for Deputy Director approval. WQMP Plans must
demonstrate compliance with sediment and turbidity water quality objectives in the
Basin Plan. The WQMP Plans shall be consistent with the most current Forest Service
National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National
21
Forest System Lands
and other appropriate documents.
The Licensee shall submit the WQMP Plans to the Deputy Director for review and
approval at least 45days prior to the desired start date of the applicable construction or
maintenance activity. The objective of the WQMP Plans shall be to identify and
implement control measures for construction, maintenance, or other activities with the
potential to cause erosion, stream sedimentation, fugitive dust, soil mass movement,
release of hazardous materials, or other water quality impairment.
The WQMP Plans shall be based on actual site geologic, soil, and groundwater
conditions, and at a minimum shall include:
21
Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide (FS-990a). Issued April 2012.
Available online at: https://www.fs.fed.us/naturalresources/watershed/bmp.shtml.
Last Accessed October 22, 2020.
50
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
1. Description of site conditions and the proposed activity;
2. Detailed descriptions, design drawings, and specific topographic locations of all
control measures in relation to the proposed activity, which may include:
a. Measures to divert runoff away from disturbed land surfaces;
b. Measures to collect and filter runoff from disturbed land surfaces, including
sediment ponds at the diversion and powerhouse sites; and
c.Measures to dissipate energy and prevent erosion;
3. Revegetation measures for disturbed areas, which shall include use of native
plants and locally-sourced plants and seeds; and
4. A monitoring, maintenance, and reporting schedule.
The Deputy Director may require modifications as part of any approval. The Licensee
shall file with FERC the Deputy Director-approved WQMP Plans, and any approved
amendments thereto. The Licensee shall implement the WQMP Plans upon receipt of
Deputy Director approval and any other required approvals, in accordance with the
schedule and requirements specified therein.
CONDITION 49. The Licensees shall ensure no net loss of wetland or riparian habitat
functions and is responsible for theirown compliance with the State Wetland Definition
and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State
Water Board 2019) and the California Wetlands Conservation Policy (Governor’s
Executive Order W-59-93), and any amendments thereto.
CONDITION 50. The Licensees shall comply with the terms and conditions in the State
Water Board’s Statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit for
Residual Aquatic Pesticide Discharges to Waters of the United States from Algae and
Aquatic Weed Control Applications (State Water Board Order No. 2013-0002-DWQ and
NPDES No. CAG990005, as amended by State Water Board Orders 2014-0078-DWQ,
2015-0029-DWQ, and 2016-0073-EXEC), and ongoing amendments during the life of
the Project.
October 22, 2020
Eileen Sobeck Date
Executive Director
Attachment A - Detailed Project Description
51
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
References
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley Regional Water
Board). 2018. The Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River
Basin and the San Joaquin River Basin (Basin Plan). Fifth Edition. Revised
May 2018 (with Approved Amendments). Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/sacsjr_2
01805.pdf. Last Accessed October 21, 2020.
State Water Board. 2012. Delegation of Authority to State Water Resources Control
Board Members Individually and to the Deputy Director for Water Rights.
Resolution No. 2012-0029. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/resolutions/20
12/rs2012_0029.pdf. Last Accessed October 21, 2020.
State Water Board. 2017. Redelegation of Authorities pursuant to Resolution No.
2012-0029.
State Water Board. 2006. State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No.
2006-0079 Approving the Proposed 2006 Federal Clean Water Act Section
303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments for California. Order WR 98-
08. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/resolutions/20
06/rs2006_0079.pdf. Last Accessed October 21, 2020.
State Water Board. 2017. Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program: Quality
Assurance Program Plan. May 2017. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/qapp/swamp_Q
APrP_2017_Final.pdf. Last Accessed October 21, 2020.
State Water Board. 2019. State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges
of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/cwa401/docs/procedure
s_conformed.pdf. Last Accessed October 21, 2020.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2012. National Best
Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest
System Lands. Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide. FS-990a.
Available at:
https://www.fs.fed.us/naturalresources/watershed/pubs/FS_National_Core_BMP
s_April2012.pdf. Last Accessed October 21, 2020.
52
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project October2020
Water Quality Certification
Figure 1. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project Facilities
53
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectOctober2020
Water Quality Certification
Figure 2. Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions
54
ATTACHMENTA: DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
FOR
BUCKS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 2020
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectAttachmentA
Water Quality Certification October 2020
1.0 Introduction
The Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) Project No. 619 is located in the North Fork Feather River
watershed in Plumas County, California. The Project is jointly owned by Pacific Gas
and Electric Company (PG&E) and the City of Santa Clara (Santa Clara). The Project
has an authorized installed capacity of 84.8 megawatts. The Project is comprised of
two developments: (1) Bucks Creek Development; and (2) Grizzly Development.
2.0 Bucks Creek Development
The Bucks Creek Development includes Bucks Lake, Bucks Lake Dam, Three Lakes,
Three Lake Dam, Milk Ranch Conduit, Lower Bucks Lake, Lower Bucks Lake Dam,
Bucks Powerhouse, Grizzly Forebay, Grizzly Forebay Dam, and Grizzly Forebay
Tunnel.
2.1 Bucks Lake and Bucks Lake Dam
Bucks Lake Dam is a rock-filled, concrete-faced structure that is123-feet-high and
1,320-feet-wide. The dam impounds Bucks Lake, which extends approximately five
miles upstream from the dam. Gross water storage in the 1,827-acre reservoir is
approximately 105,605 acre-feet (ac-ft) at the normal maximum water surface elevation
of approximately 5,157 feet above mean sea level (msl). From Bucks Lake, water is
released immediately downstream into a short reach of Bucks Creek before draining
into Lower Bucks Lake.
2.2 Three Lakes, Three Lakes Dam, and Milk Ranch Conduit
Lower Lake, Middle Lake, and Upper Lake collectively make up Three Lakes, the
highest elevation water body in the Project boundary. Three Lakes Dam impounds Milk
Ranch Creek and is a 30-feet-high and 584-feet-wide rock-filled structure. Although all
three lakes are hydraulically separate during low flow conditions, the crest of Three
Lakes Dam rises above the maximum water surface elevation of Lower Lake and
Middle Lake and converges the lower two lakes into one larger lake. Upper Lake
always remains hydraulically separate as its maximum water surface elevation is
approximately 36 feet above the crest of Three Lakes Dam. Gross storage in the 40-
acre compound reservoir is approximately 605 ac-ft at the normal maximum water
surface elevation of approximately 6,077.8 feet msl. From Three Lakes, water is
released into Milk Ranch Conduit before draining into Lower Bucks Lake. A total of
1
approximately 15 named and unnamed tributaries contribute additional flow to Milk
Ranch Conduit between Three Lakes Dam and Lower Bucks Lake. The maximum
capacity of the approximately 8-mile-long conduit is about 70 cubic feet per second
(cfs).
1
The named tributaries include North Fork Grouse Hollow Creek, South Fork Grouse
Hollow Creek, Bear Trap Creek, Slide Ravine, and Bear Ravine.
1
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectAttachmentA
Water Quality Certification October 2020
2.3 Lower Bucks Lake and Lower Bucks Lake Dam
Lower Bucks Lake Dam is a concrete arch dam that is 99-feet-high and 500-feet-wide.
The dam impounds Lower Bucks Lake, which extends approximately 1.1 miles
upstream from the dam. Gross storage in the 136-acre reservoir is approximately
5,843 ac-ft at the normal maximum water surface elevation of approximately 5,022 feet
above msl. Water is conveyed from Lower Bucks Lake to the Grizzly Powerhouse by
the Grizzly Powerhouse Tunnel. Both the Grizzly Powerhouse and Grizzly Powerhouse
Tunnel are part of the Grizzly Development (discussed below).
2.4 Grizzly Forebay and Grizzly Forebay Dam
The Grizzly Forebay is impounded by a concrete arch dam that is 98-feet-high by 520-
feet-wide. Grizzly Forebay extends approximately 0.8-mile upstream from Grizzly
Forebay Dam. Gross storage in the 38-acre reservoir is approximately 1,112 ac-ft at
the normal maximum water surface elevation of approximately 4,316 feet above msl.
2.5 Grizzly Forebay Tunnel
Flow is conveyed through the U-shaped Grizzly Forebay Tunnel to Bucks Powerhouse.
The tunnel is 9,575-feet-long with two 4,786-foot-long penstocks leading to Bucks
Powerhouse. The maximum flow capacity is 400 cfs.
2.6 Bucks Powerhouse
Bucks Powerhouse is a 47-foot-long by 132-foot-wide, steel-frame and reinforced
concrete building. The powerhouse contains two double-overhung impulse turbines that
each have a rated output of 40,000 horsepower (hp). In addition, the powerhouse
includes two revolving field generators that have a total maximum capacity of
65 megawatts (MW). The normal maximum gross head of Bucks Powerhouse is
2,558 feet, with an average annual generation production of 234.8 gigawatt hours
(GWh). There are no project transmission lines at the Bucks Powerhouse because it
connects directly to an adjacent non-project switchyard that is part of the interconnected
transmission system. Bucks Powerhouse releases all flow to the North Fork Feather
River one mile upstream of Rock Powerhouse, which is part of PG&E’s Rock Creek-
Cresta Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 1962) and is operated under a separate
FERC license.
3.0 Grizzly Development
The Grizzly Development is located downstream of Lower Bucks Lake and upstream of
the Bucks Powerhouse. Completed in 1993, the Grizzly Development is composed of
the Grizzly Powerhouse Tunnel and the Grizzly Powerhouse.
3.1 Grizzly Powerhouse Tunnel
The 12,320-foot-long, 11- to 14-foot-diameter Grizzly Powerhouse Tunnel (including a
4,900-foot-long, 4.5- to 8-foot-diameter buried penstock leading to Grizzly Powerhouse)
conveys flow from Lower Bucks Lake to Grizzly Powerhouse. The maximum flow
capacity is 400 cfs.
2
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectAttachmentA
Water Quality Certification October 2020
3.2 Grizzly Powerhouse
The Grizzly Powerhouse is a 65-foot-long by 55-foot-wide, steel-frame and concrete
building that contains one vertical Francis turbine with a rated output of 19.7 MW and
one synchronous generator with a maximum capacity of 19.8 MW. The normal
maximum gross head of Grizzly Powerhouse is 719 feet with an average annual
generation production of 48.9 GWh. Grizzly Powerhouse discharges directly into
Grizzly Forebay. A 4.2-mile-long, 115-kilovolt (kV) transmission line transmits power
from Grizzly Powerhouse to PG&E’s 115-kV Caribou-Sycamore Transmission Line.
3
Exhibit C
Existing Language
Issue Explanation Requested Correction or Clarification
(SWB revisions in red)
WQC Condition 1: Minimum Instream Flows
p. 21 The Licensees shall implement specified minimum Timing is inconsistent with US Releases made through manually operated valves are subject to The Licensees shall implement specified
minimum instream
instream flows within the first 90 days of the new Forest Service 4(e) condition 31. weather and road conditions. During certain times of the year these flows within the first 90 days
of the new license term, as required
license term, as required in Tables 1 through 6. valves are accessible only by helicopter or snow cat. Both of these in Tables 1 through 6, but releases made through manually
Where an instream flow release structure must be types of access are safety risks and present challenges with the operated valves may be subject to weather and road conditions
modified or newly constructed (refer to the weather. In addition, the weather can affect the operability of the affecting access or operability. Where an instream flow release
Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan valves as temperatures can drop below freezing during the winter structure must be modified or newly constructed (refer to the
Condition 13), the Licensees shall complete the work months. Streamflow and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan Condition 13),
as soon as reasonably practicable, and within two the Licensees shall complete the work as soon as reasonably
years after receiving all required permits and practicable, and within two years after receiving all required
approvals for the work permits and approvals for the work
p. 22 The Deputy Director may require the Licensee to Unilateral changes to plans and Facilities and operations may not be designed for the corrective The Deputy Director may require
the Licensee to implement
implement corrective actions to prevent similar operations are not authorized by law actions directed by the Deputy Director. The result of changes could corrective actions to prevent
similar future deviations in instream
future deviations in instream flows. and could have unintended result in valves and other facilities becoming inoperable. Inoperable flows.
consequences or put the Licensees valves or pipes could lead to damage to the system, an unplanned
out of compliance with other State spill through the spillway, flooding, and eventually a dam failure.
and Federal regulations. Licensees need to have control over the facilities and system to
ensure the safety of the public.
Due to the remote nature of the facilities there are times when actions
would not be safe to complete. During the winter months access is
only possible by helicopter or snow cat, both of which present their
own safety risks and are still reliant on the weather to gain access.
p. 23 The minimum instream flow requirements listed in Omitted other instream flow tables 2 Licensees may need to perform maintenance or other repairs at The minimum instream flow requirements
listed in Tables 1
Tables 1, 4, 5, and 6 may be temporarily modified as and 3 locations with continuous flow measurements (Tables 2 and 3). The through, 4, 5, and 6 may be temporarily modified as required
for
required for maintenance or repair of a dam, outlet SWB omitted these locations from the list for temporary maintenance or repair of a dam, outlet facility, and minimum
facility, and minimum flow release facility. The modifications. flow release facility. The Licensees shall notify FERC, the Forest
Dates for compliance are inconsistent
Licensees shall notify FERC, the Forest Service, Service, CDFW, USFWS, and the Deputy Director at least five
with US Forest Service 4(e)
CDFW, USFWS, and the Deputy Director at least business days prior to any such modification. The notification
condition 31. Deferring the temporary flow modification or requiring additional
five business days prior to any such modification. shall include: a description of the temporary flow modification;
action could have unintended consequences. Facilities and operations
The notification shall include: a description of the reason for the temporary flow modification; and anticipated
may not be designed for the corrective actions directed by the Deputy
temporary flow modification; reason for the duration of the temporary flow modification. The Deputy
Unilateral changes to plans and
Director. The result of changes could result in valves and other
temporary flow modification; and anticipated Director may require the Licensees to defer the temporary flow
operations are not authorized by law
facilities becoming inoperable. The Licensees need to be able to
duration of the temporary flow modification. The modification or implement other actions as part of the temporary
and could have unintended
quickly respond to maintenance needs to ensure safety of the facilities
Deputy Director may require the Licensees to defer
flow modification.
consequences or put the Licensees
and public. Deferring maintenance work on dams, outlet facilities,
the temporary flow modification or implement other
out of compliance with other State
and minimum flow release facilities could result in an unplanned
actions as part of the temporary flow modification.
and Federal regulations.
release that further damages the dam, spillway, or facility, leading to
flooding and eventually a dam failure.
The 4(e) condition dates for some operational activities have been
discussed and agreed upon with participating stakeholders, including
the State Water Board, to the relicensing process. Discrepancies from
the 4(e) conditions is an unnecessary burden to the licensee and, in
this instance, may be infeasible. Aligning the aforementioned 401
condition to the 4(e) condition would avoid confusion, simplify
implementation of the license, and ensure maintenance activities
could occur.
p. 23 Annual Reporting on Minimum Instream Flow Timing is inconsistent with US Timing requirements need to be consistent with reporting Annual Reporting on Minimum Instream Flow Compliance.
The
Compliance. After consulting with and incorporating Forest Service 4(e) condition 39 requirements for Draft and Final report as stated in the Streamflow Licensees shall submit a draft
annual report (from the prior water
any comments from the Forest Service, CDFW, (Streamflow and Reservoir Level and Reservoir Level Gaging Plan, section 7.1. year) to the State Water Board for their review and comment
by
USFWS, and State Water Board staff, the Licensees Gaging Plan) requiring submittal of January 31. After consulting with and incorporating any
Consultation with other agencies is scheduled to occur the following
th
shall submit the final annual report to the Deputy plans for approval as to the due date comments from the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State
calendar year (around April 15), where comments will be discussed.
Existing Language
Issue Explanation Requested Correction or Clarification
(SWB revisions in red)
Director that summarizes compliance with the of this Plan and all other required The Licensees Water Board staff, the Licensees shall submit the final annual
minimum instream flow requirements during the plans. report to the Deputy Director that summarizes compliance with
11
prior water year as specified in Condition 25. The the minimum instream flow requirements during the prior water
11
annual report shall be submitted to the Deputy year as specified in Condition 25. The final annual report shall
Director no later than December 15 and shall include be submitted to the Deputy Director within 90 days of providing
the items referenced below and in this condition. the draft report to the agencies no later than December 15 and
shall include the items referenced below and in this condition.
Condition 3: Annual Drawdown of Three Lakes
p. 28 The Licensees shall verify the water surface Timing is inconsistent with US Licensees are requesting flexibility on the drawdown of Three Lakes The Licensees shall verify the water
surface elevation of Lower
elevation of Lower Three Lakes on August 15 of Forest Service 4(e) condition 37 as agreed upon in 4(e) condition 37. The intent of condition 3 is to Three Lakes on by August 15 of each
year, or the shortest
each year, or the shortest amount of time before avoid impacts to spawning and rearing habitat of brook trout. There amount of time before August 15 if conditions prevent access.
August 15 if conditions prevent access. could be access or safety concerns as well as operational reasons to
adjust initiation of the Three Lakes draw down.
4(e) condition 37 was discussed and agreed upon with participating
stakeholders, including the State Water Board, throughout the
relicensing process. Discrepancies in dates from 4(e) condition 37 is
an unnecessary burden to the licensees. Aligning the dates in the
aforementioned 401 condition to 4(e) condition 37 would avoid
confusion and simplify the implementation of the license.
p. 29 If the water surface elevation is above 6,072 feet (ft), Timing is inconsistent with US Licensees are requesting flexibility on the drawdown of Three Lakes If the water surface
elevation is above 6,072 feet (ft), as
as measured by Gage NF10 (USGS Gage No. Forest Service 4(e) condition 37 as agreed upon in 4(e) condition 37. The intent of condition 3 is to measured by Gage NF10 (USGS Gage No. 11403300),
the
11403300), the Licensees shall initiate drawdown on avoid impacts to spawning and rearing habitat of brook trout. There Licensees shall initiate drawdown on or about August 15, or the
August 15, or the shortest amount of time before could be access or safety concerns as well as operational reasons to shortest amount of time before August 15 if conditions prevent
August 15 if conditions prevent access, and set the adjust initiation of the Three Lakes draw down. access, and set the low-level outlet valve to release 9cfs (based
low-level outlet valve to release 9cfs (based on the on the rating curve at Project ID MR2).
4(e) condition 37 was discussed and agreed upon with participating
rating curve at Project ID MR2).
stakeholders, including the State Water Board, to the relicensing
process. Discrepancies in dates from 4(e) condition 37 is an
unnecessary burden to the licensees. Aligning the dates in the
aforementioned 401 condition to 4(e) condition 37 would avoid
confusion and simplify the implementation of the license.
p. 29 By January 31 of each year, the Licensees shall Timing is inconsistent with US Licensees are requesting flexibility on the drawdown of Three Lakes By January 31 of each year, the
Licensees shall provide the Forest
provide the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and Forest Service 4(e) condition 37 as agreed upon in 4(e) condition 37. The intent of condition 3 is to Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water
Board staff a draft
State Water Board staff a draft report documenting the avoid impacts to spawning and rearing habitat of brook trout. There report documenting the following:
following: could be access or safety concerns as well as operational reasons to
The water surface elevation of Lower Three Lakes on or
adjust initiation of the Three Lakes draw down.
The water surface elevation of Lower Three preceding about August 15 (if access is precluded), when
4(e) condition 37 was discussed and agreed upon with participating
Lakes on or preceding August 15 (if access the water surface elevation was verified. If the water
stakeholders, including the State Water Board, throughout the
is precluded), when the water surface surface elevation is verified on a date other than August
relicensing process. Discrepancies in dates from 4(e) condition 37 is
elevation was verified. If the water surface 15, that date shall be identified;
an unnecessary burden to the licensees. Aligning the dates in the
elevation is verified on a date other than
aforementioned 401 condition to 4(e) condition 37 would avoid
August 15, that date shall be identified;
confusion and simplify the implementation of the license.
p. 29 After consulting with and incorporating any Timing is inconsistent with US 4(e) condition 37 was the result of discussions and collaborations The Licensees shall allow the above-listed
agencies at least 45
comments from the Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, Forest Service 4(e) condition 37 with participating stakeholders, including the State Water Board, to days to provide their input on the
draft report. After consulting
and State Water Board staff, the Licensees shall file the relicensing process. Discrepancies in dates from 4(e) condition 37 with and incorporating any comments from the Forest Service,
a final report with the Deputy Director on the is an unnecessary burden to the licensees. Aligning the dates in the CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board staff, the Licensees
drawdown of Three Lakes, as specified in Condition with 4(e) condition 37 would avoid confusion and simplify the shall file a final report with the Deputy Director on the
25 and before the ECG meeting each year. implementation of the license. drawdown of Three Lakes, within 90 days of providing a draft
report to the agencies. as specified in Condition 25 and before the
ECG meeting each year.
Condition 25 provides for 90 days from the draft being submitted
which would be after the ECG meeting. A draft report will be
submitted 45 day prior to the ECG meeting, where comments on the
report will be discussed.
Existing Language
Issue Explanation Requested Correction or Clarification
(SWB revisions in red)
WQC Condition 4: Channel Maintenance Flows
p. 30 If, by March 31 of each Normal or Wet water year in This gage reference is factually The Gaging Plan contains the correct compliance points. Report If, by March 31 of each Normal
or Wet water year in which a
which a natural spill in excess of 70 cfs (as measured incorrect. flows per NFC12 gage, computed record NF12 spillway + low level natural spill in excess of 70 cfs (as measured by Gage
NF57 on
by Gage NF57 on the NFFR, which is part of the outlet measured NF82. the NFFR, which is part of the Rock-Creek Cresta Project, FERC
Rock-Creek Cresta Project, FERC Project No. 1962) Project No. 1962) has not occurred in the previous months, the
has not occurred in the previous months the Licensees shall provide instream flows of 5070 cfs in Bucks
Licensees shall provide instream flows of 5070 cfs Creek below Lower Bucks Lake Dam for a period of at least 18
in Bucks Creek below Lower Bucks Lake Dam for a hours.
period of at least 18 hours.
p. 30 If, by March 31 of each Normal or Wet water year in Language is inconsistent with US Later in WQC Condition 4, there is acknowledgement that a High If, by March 31 of each Normal
or Wet water year in which a
1212
which a High Spill has not occurred during the Forest Service 4(e) condition 34 and Spill event may not always be feasible due to safety or emergency High Spill has not occurred during
the previous five years in
31
previous five years in Bucks Creek below Lower unduly restrictive conditions. To reduce confusion, risk of noncompliance, and ensure Bucks Creek below Lower Bucks Lake Dam, the Licensees
shall
Bucks Lake Dam, the Licensees shall implement a safety of the Licensees, the paragraph in its entirety should be revised implement make a good faith effort to schedule a High Spill
High Spill event of 200300 cfs for at least 18 hours. to conform with FPA 4(e) condition 34 and, in any case, be read with event of 200300 cfs for at least 18 hours.
Conflicts with additional text in
the ability to postpone a High Spill event.
SWB condition 4.
Upon completion of the 18-hour High Spill, the Upon completion of the 18-hour High Spill, the Licensees shall
Licensees shall smoothly taper off the flow make a good faith effort to smoothly taper off the flow consistent
consistent with existing equipment and the with existing equipment and the requirements in Condition 6
requirements in Condition 6 Spill Management at Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake.
Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake.
At the end of this event, the Licensees shall make a good faith
At the end of this event, the Licensees shall effort to smoothly taper off the flow consistent with existing
smoothly taper off the flow consistent with existing equipment and the requirements in Condition 6 Spill
equipment and the requirements in Condition 6 Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake.
Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower
Bucks Lake.
WQC Condition 5: Project Reservoirs Water Surface Elevations
p. 32 Elevation of Lower Three Lakes shall not be drawn Condition is factually incorrect The Licensees do not have control of Middle Three Lakes to measure Elevation of Lower Three
Lakes shall not be drawn down below
down below 6,050 feet above msl; and Middle Three below 6057; Gage NF10 does not measure elevation of Middle Three 6,050 feet above msl; and Middle Three Lakes shall not be drawn
Lakes shall not be drawn down below an elevation Lakes. down below an elevation of 6,057 feet msl. Elevations shall be
of 6,057 feet msl. Elevations shall be measured at measured at PG&E Gage NF10 (USGS Gage No. 11403300).
PG&E Gage NF10 (USGS Gage No. 11403300).
Elevation of Lower Three Lakes shall not be drawn down below
6,050 feet above msl; Elevations shall be measured at PG&E
Gage NF10
WQC Condition 6: Spill Management at Grizzly Forebay and Lower Bucks Lake
p. 33 At no time shall the Licensees schedule managed By specifying There is a need to be consistent between 4(e) 35 and coordinated At no time shall the Licensees schedule managed spills
during
spills during the first five business days or the last timing is inconsistent with US Forest efforts with other Prthe first five business days or the last two business days of the
two business days of the prescribed daily steps of the Service 4(e) condition 35 as an environmental protective measure, and are therefore not limited prescribed daily steps of the Rock
Creek-
14
Rock Creek--day to business days. Aligning the dates in the above-mentioned Reach 21-day Spill Recession (CSR).
14
Spill Recession (CSR). conditions would avoid confusion and simplify the implementation of
the license.
p. 34 No later than five years after issuance of the new Timing is inconsistent with US Requiring a separate report for the State Water Board is redundant No later than five years after
issuance of the new FERC license,
FERC license, the Licensees shall submit a draft Forest Service 4(e) condition 35 and will result in less data being analyzed as it will need to be After License Year 5, the Licensees
shall submit a draft report to
report to Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State completed before the fifth year of the license and the agreed upon Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board staff
Water Board staff that documents the effects of the date in 4(e) condition 35. Aligning the dates in the aforementioned that documents the effects of the measures listed in this condition
measures listed in this condition on instream flow 401 condition to 4(e) condition 35 would avoid confusion and on instream flow conditions in Bucks Creek, Grizzly Creek, and
conditions in Bucks Creek, Grizzly Creek, and the simplify the implementation of the license. the NFFR and provide recommendations the Licensees will
NFFR and provide recommendations the Licensees implement to improve compliance with this condition.
will implement to improve compliance with this
Existing Language
Issue Explanation Requested Correction or Clarification
(SWB revisions in red)
condition.
WQC Condition 9: Milk Ranch Conduit Closure
p. 40 If the Bucks Lake elevation is 5,142 ft above msl or Timing is inconsistent with timing in In condition 3, Licensees are requesting flexibility on the drawdown If the Bucks Lake
elevation is 5,142 ft above msl or greater (as
greater (as measured by PG&E Gage NF16) at the US Forest Service 4(e) condition 33 of Three Lakes as agreed upon in 4(e) condition 37. The intent of measured by PG&E Gage NF16) at the
time of a Wet water year
time of a Wet water year determination per the April regarding the timing of the Three condition 3 is to avoid impacts to spawning and rearing habitat of determination per the April
Bulletin 120 forecast (Condition 7),
Bulletin 120 forecast (Condition 7), the Licensees Lakes drawdown. brook trout. There could be access or safety concerns as well as the Licensees shall temporarily close (i.e., bypass)
the following
shall temporarily close (i.e., bypass) the following operational reasons to adjust initiation of the Three Lakes drawdown. Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions within two business days, or
as
Milk Ranch Conduit Diversions within two business soon as reasonably accessible, from the publication date of the
days, or as soon as reasonably accessible, from the April Bulletin 120 forecast through August 15, or when the
Discrepancies in dates from 4(e) condition 37 and WQC Condition 3
publication date of the April Bulletin 120 forecast Licensees initiate the annual Three Lakes drawdown:
is an unnecessary burden to the licensees. Aligning the dates in the
through August 15:
above-mentioned conditions would avoid confusion and simplify the
implementation of the license.
WQC Condition 11: Fish Stocking
p. 41 No later than one year following issuance of the Language provides that the SWB Providing for unilateral modifications by the Deputy Director is No later than one year following
issuance of the FERC license,
FERC license, the Licensees shall submit a fish Deputy Director may unilaterally the Licensees shall submit a fish stocking plan to the Deputy
contrary to modification rules and could conflict with CDFW
stocking plan to the Deputy Director for review and require modifications to the Director for review and consideration of approval. The Deputy
authority to determine species to be stocked.
consideration of approval. The Deputy Director may collaboratively developed and Director may require modifications as part of any approval.
The fish stocking condition is supportive of recreational angling. The
require modifications as part of any approval. agency/FERC-approved Fish
SWRCB does not have authority of recreation activities under FERC
Stocking Plan.
jurisdiction.
p. 41 Trout species selected for stocking shall not impair This provision could halt the Since Bucks Creek basin is historically fishless and no trout species If Licensees are required
to fulfill a license condition requiring
the water quality or beneficial uses related to native an annual trout stocking prescription, Licensees suggest removal
stocking of fish as required by are native to its waters, any trout species stocked in these waters
16
fish. of this statement.
Article 404 (FERCs Final EIS) and would necessarily eneficial uses
included in US Forest Service
16
Section 10(a) Recommendation 1. 45, and
Trout species selected for stocking shall not impair the water
16
45 is wild fish, mollusk, crustacean, invertebrate, quality or beneficial uses related to native fish.
beneficial uses for inland streams affected by stocking of nonnative
amphibian, or part, spawn, or ovum of any of those
trout include:
animals.
16
RARE: Uses of water that support high quality aquatic habitats
fish, mollusk, crustacean, invertebrate, amphibian, or part,
suitable for reproduction and early development of fish.
spawn, or ovum of any of those animals.
WILD: Uses of waters that support wildlife habitats, including,
but not limited to, the preservation and enhancement of
vegetation and prey species used by wildlife, such as waterfowl.
COLD: Uses of water that support cold water ecosystems,
including, but not limited to, preservation or enhancement of
aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, or wildlife, including
invertebrates.
SPWN: Uses of water that support high quality aquatic habitats
suitable for reproduction and early development of fish.
Further, and more importantly, Licensees will not be responsible for
selecting the trout species or numbers for stocking. The Licenses will
consult with CDFW to select the trout species for stocking in Project
waters.
Existing Language
Issue Explanation Requested Correction or Clarification
(SWB revisions in red)
p. 42Any revisions approved by the Deputy Director shall Allows Deputy Direction to Management plans were discussed and agreed upon with participating Any revisions approved by the Deputy
Director shall be
43 be incorporated into the plan. unilaterally revise the management stakeholders, including the State Water Board. Requiring a incorporated into the plan.
plans, contrary to the procedures set modification outside of the collaborative process and without
out in the plans themselves for consultation with the other stakeholders is not an appropriate action.
stakeholder notice and the In addition, there is potential that the modification would not coincide
opportunity to comment before with the existing plan approved with FERC.
making revisions to the plans.
Unilateral changes to plans and operations could put the Licensees
out of compliance with other State and Federal agencies and
regulations.
WQC Condition 24: Extremely Dry Conditions
p. 45 In the event of extremely dry conditions, which may Contains consultation requirements Licensees seek for this consultation requirement to be consistent with In the event of extremely
dry conditions, which may include a
include a year in which the Governor of the State of that are inconsistent with US Forest 4(e) condition 62. The rational for this condition is to provide
year in which the Governor of the State of California declares a
California declares a drought emergency for Plumas Service 4(e) condition 62. flexibility for adaptive implementation during extremely dry
drought emergency for Plumas County, or multiple consecutive
County, or multiple consecutive Dry or Critically conditions. Consultation with stakeholders is appropriate because the
Dry or Critically Dry water years, the Licensees may request
Dry water years, the Licensees may request stakeholder group contains the best decisionmakers for determining
modification of the flow, water surface elevation, and related
modification of the flow, water surface elevation,
how to best use a limited resource.
requirements of this certification. If the Licensees anticipate that
and related requirements of this certification. If the
they may request modification pursuant to this condition, the
Licensees anticipate that they may request
Licensees shall notify the Relicensing Participants Forest
modification pursuant to this condition, the
Service, Deputy Director, USFWS, and other interested
Licensees shall notify the Relicensing Participants
stakeholders
and the Deputy Di
as possible and no later than March 15 of the year in which a
related to flows as early as possible, and no later
request may be submitted. If the Licensees request modification
than March 15 of the year in which a request may be
pursuant to this condition, the Licensees shall develop a Revised
submitted. If the Licensees request modification
Operations Plan in consultation with Relicensing Participants
pursuant to this condition, the Licensees shall
staff the agencies for flows, water surface elevations, and related
develop a Revised Operations Plan in consultation
conditions during the extremely dry conditions.
with Relicensing Participants staff for flows, water
surface elevations, and related conditions during the
extremely dry conditions.
WQC Condition 25
CONDITION 25. Any report developed as a
p. 46 Timing is inconsistent with Requirements for reports in the 4(e) conditions vary based on the Any report developed as a condition of this certification shall be
condition of this certification shall be submitted to
requirements as outlined in individual plan or report. Timing of the reports is based on the on the submitted to the Deputy Director. The Licensees shall allow the
the Deputy Director. The Licensees shall allow the
individual management plans and availability of the data to the Licensees and consultation with other Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water Board staff 45
Forest Service, CDFW, USFWS, and State Water
various US Forest Service 4(e) agencies. days to provide input on the draft report. time to provide input on
18
Board staff at least 45 days to provide input on the
conditions. the draft report as stated within the associated 4(e) condition. The
draft report. The Licensees shall file a final report
Licensees shall file a final report with the Deputy Director within
For example, Condition 3 states that the report is due by December
with the Deputy Director within 90 days of
90 days of providing the draft report to the required entities
th
15, but this conflicts with 4(e) condition 39 and would require a
providing the draft report to the required entities.
within the timeline of the associated 4(e) condition. The report
separate incomplete report to be filed with the Deputy Director.
The report shall include documentation of
shall include documentation of consultation with the agencies
Consultation with other agencies is scheduled to occur the following
consultation with the agencies specified above;
th specified above; copies of their comments and recommendations
calendar year (around April 15), where comments will be discussed.
copies of their comments and recommendations on
The Licensees
the report; and specific descriptions of how the
comments and recommendations are addressed in the report.
the other agencies have not reviewed it yet.
addressed in the report.
Other instances of inconsistency include the reports for the following,
which all specify a 30-day comment period: Aquatic Invasive Species
Plan (4(e) condition 44), the Integrated Vegetation Management Plan
Existing Language
Issue Explanation Requested Correction or Clarification
(SWB revisions in red)
(4(e) condition 45), and the Sierra-Nevada Yellow Legged Frog Plan
(4(e) condition 42).
Aligning the dates with corresponding 4(e) condition would avoid
duplicative and potentially incomplete reports and confusion, and
would simplify the implementation of the license.
WQC Condition 26
CONDITION 26. Any revisions to a management
p. 47 Language provides that the SWB Management plans were discussed and agreed upon with participating Any revisions to a management plan included as a condition of
plan included as a condition of this certification19
Deputy Director may unilaterally stakeholders, including the State Water Board. Requiring a this certification shall be submitted to the Deputy Director for
shall be submitted to the Deputy Director for review
require modifications to modification outside of the collaborative process and without review and consideration of approval. If significant changes in
and consideration of approval. If significant changes
collaboratively developed and consultation with the other stakeholders is not an appropriate action. the existing conditions or implementation circumstances occur,
in the existing conditions or implementation
agency/FERC-approved management In addition, there is potential that the modification would not coincide the Licensees shall allow the required entities 20-60 days to
circumstances occur, the Licensees shall allow the
plans. with the existing plan approved with FERC. provide written comments and recommendations. After
required entities20 60 days to provide written
consultation, the Licensees shall file the proposed updated
This would be inconsistent with the
comments and recommendations. After consultation,
management plan with the Deputy Director for review and
collaborative process established to
the Licensees shall file the proposed updated
consideration of approval. Revisions to a management plan shall
review and make revisions as stated
management plan with the Deputy Director for
include documentation of consultation with required entities;
in the management plans.
review and consideration of approval. Revisions to a
copies of their comments and recommendations on the plan; and
management plan shall include documentation of
specific de
consultation with required entities; copies of their
recommendations are addressed in the plan. The Deputy
comments and recommendations on the plan; and
Director may require modifications as part of any approval. If the
Licensees do not adopt a particular recommendation by the
comments and recommendations are addressed in the
Deputy Director, the filing will include the reasons for not doing
plan. The Deputy Director may require
so. The Licensees will implement the Plan as approved by FERC.
modifications as part of any approval.
WQC Condition 48
CONDITION 48. When applicable, the Licensee CONDITION 48. When applicable, the Licensee shall comply
p. 50-Requires development and approval Measures to protect water quality are already outlined in the
Construction General Permit
51 of WQMP Plans for routine management plans filed with FERC. The implementation of these
Construction General Permit (State Water Board (State Water Board 2009), and amendments thereto. For any
maintenance and construction too plans will be required as a condition of the License; the additional
2009), and amendments thereto. For any construction and maintenance activities with the potential to
small to qualify for the Construction Water Quality Monitoring and Protection Plans required under
construction and maintenance activities with the impact water quality or beneficial uses that are not subject to the
General Permit. Condition 48 are unnecessary, burdensome and not unlikely to yield
potential to impact water quality or beneficial uses Construction General Permit, the Licensee shall prepare and
new information that would justify the effort. Logistically, preparing
that are not subject to the Construction General implement site-specific Water Quality Monitoring and Protection
these plans for all minor operations and maintenance activities would
Permit, the Licensee shall prepare and implement Plans (WQMP Plans) for Deputy Director approval. WQMP
not only be burdensome for the staff of the Water Board to review,
site-specific Water Quality Monitoring and Plans must demonstrate compliance with sediment and turbidity
but may be infeasible since many routine maintenance activities are
Protection Plans (WQMP Plans) for Deputy Director water quality objectives in the Basin Plan. The WQMP Plans
not planned far in advance. Paperwork delays could potentially
approval. WQMP Plans must demonstrate shall be consistent with the most current Forest Service National
compromise the safety of the hydroelectric facilities if basic
compliance with sediment and turbidity water Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on
maintenance cannot continue to be performed on demand.
quality objectives in the Basin Plan. The WQMP National Forest System Lands21 and other appropriate
Plans shall be consistent with the most current Forest documents.
Service National Best Management Practices for The Licensee shall submit the WQMP Plans to the Deputy
Water Quality Management on National Forest Director for review and approval at least 45 days prior to the
System Lands21 and other appropriate documents. desired start date of the applicable construction or maintenance
The Licensee shall submit the WQMP Plans to the activity. The objective of the WQMP Plans shall be to identify
Deputy Director for review and approval at least 45 and implement control measures for construction, maintenance,
days prior to the desired start date of the applicable or other activities with the potential to cause erosion, stream
construction or maintenance activity. The objective sedimentation, fugitive dust, soil mass movement, release of
of the WQMP Plans shall be to identify and hazardous materials, or other water quality impairment.
implement control measures for construction, The WQMP Plans shall be based on actual site geologic, soil,
maintenance, or other activities with the potential to and groundwater conditions, and at a minimum shall include:
cause erosion, stream sedimentation, fugitive dust,
soil mass movement, release of hazardous materials,
1. Description of site conditions and the proposed activity;
or other water quality impairment.
2. Detailed descriptions, design drawings, and specific
topographic locations of all control measures in relation to the
Existing Language
Issue Explanation Requested Correction or Clarification
(SWB revisions in red)
The WQMP Plans shall be based on actual site proposed activity, which may include: a. Measures to divert
geologic, soil, and groundwater conditions, and at a runoff away from disturbed land surfaces;
minimum shall include:
b. Measures to collect and filter runoff from disturbed land
surfaces, including sediment ponds at the diversion and
1. Description of site conditions and the proposed
powerhouse sites; and
activity;
c. Measures to dissipate energy and prevent erosion;
2. Detailed descriptions, design drawings, and
specific topographic locations of all control
3. Revegetation measures for disturbed areas, which shall include
measures in relation to the proposed activity, which
use of native plants and locally-sourced plants and seeds; and
may include: a. Measures to divert runoff away from
4. A monitoring, maintenance, and reporting schedule.
disturbed land surfaces;
The Deputy Director may require modifications as part of any
b. Measures to collect and filter runoff from
approval. The Licensee shall file with FERC the Deputy
disturbed land surfaces, including sediment ponds at
Director-approved WQMP Plans, and any approved amendments
the diversion and powerhouse sites; and
thereto. The Licensee shall implement the WQMP Plans upon
c. Measures to dissipate energy and prevent erosion;
receipt of Deputy Director approval and any other required
approvals, in accordance with the schedule and requirements
3. Revegetation measures for disturbed areas, which
specified therein.
shall include use of native plants and locally-sourced
plants and seeds; and
4. A monitoring, maintenance, and reporting
schedule.
The Deputy Director may require modifications as
part of any approval. The Licensee shall file with
FERC the Deputy Director-approved WQMP Plans,
and any approved amendments thereto. The Licensee
shall implement the WQMP Plans upon receipt of
Deputy Director approval and any other required
approvals, in accordance with the schedule and
requirements specified therein.
Exhibit D
Pacific Gas and
TM
Electric Company
Mailing Address
Annette Faraglia
P.O. Box 7442
Chief Counsel, Hydro Generation
San Francisco, CA 94120
Law Department
Street/Courier Address
Law Department
77 Beale Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 973-7145
Fax: (415) 973-5520
Email: Annette.Faraglia@pge.com
November 20, 2020 Via Electronic and Regular Mail
Eileen Sobeck, Executive Director
State Water Resources Control Board
nd
1001 I Street, 22 Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814-2828
Re: Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project
FERC Project No. 619
401 Certificate Petition for Reconsideration
Dear Ms. Sobeck:
has filed its Petition for Reconsideration of the Water
Quality Certification for the Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, Federal Energy Regulatory
Co19. The Water Quality Certification was issued by you on
October 22, 2020. As required by 23 California Code of Regulations § 3867(d)(9), PG&E requests
that the State Water Board prepare the Staff Record, if available, for the Water Quality Certification
Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, which is designated as FERC Project No.
619. This request for the Staff Record is a necessary part of the Petition for Reconsideration under
If you have any questions, please contact me at (415) 973-7145 or annette.faraglia@pge.com.
If I am not available, contact Tony Gigliotti, the Project Manager, at (925) 357-7120 or
tony.gigliotti@pge.com.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Annette Faraglia
Chief Counsel, Hydro Generation
Enclosures
cc: David Rose (via E-mail)
Tony Gigliotti (via E-mail)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have this day caused to be served the foregoing document:
PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
OF THE WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
FOR THE BUCKS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
via E-Mail to all parties listed on the Office Service List on file with the FERC Docket Office for
FERC Docket No. P-619 and via U.S. mail to all parties without an E-mail address.
Service was also completed by sending via U.S. Mail delivery to:
Patrick Pulupa , Executive Officer Eileen Sobeck, Executive Director
Central Valley Regional Water State Water Resources Control Board
nd
Quality Control Board 1001 I Street, 22 Floor
364 Knollcrest Drive, Suite 205 Sacramento, CA 95814-2828
Redding, CA 96002
I certify and declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing is true and correct.
th
Executed in Walnut Creek, California this 20 day of November 2020.
/s/ Lynn Powell______________
LYNN POWELL
PG&E Law Department
77 Beale Street, B30A-3012
San Francisco, CA 94105-1814
(415) 973-3164