Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12.15.20 Board Correspondence - FW_ Project Operations Compliance Report submitted in FERC P-2107-000 by Pacific Gas and Electric Company,et al.
From:Schuman, Amy To:Alpert, Bruce;Bennett, Robin;Clerk of the Board;Connelly, Bill;Cook, Holly;Kimmelshue, Tod;Lambert, Steve;Lucero, Debra;McCracken, Shari;Paulsen, Shaina;Pickett, Andy;Ring, Brian;Ritter, Tami;Rodas, Amalia;Sweeney, Kathleen;Teeter, Doug Subject:Board Correspondence - FW: Project Operations Compliance Report submitted in FERC P-2107-000 by Pacific Gas and Electric Company,et al. Date:Tuesday, December 15, 2020 3:08:50 PM 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: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 1:56 PM Subject: Project Operations Compliance Report submitted in FERC P-2107-000 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 12/15/2020, the following Filing was submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Washington D.C.: Filer: Pacific Gas and Electric Company PGE (as Agent) Docket(s): P-2107-000 Lead Applicant: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Filing Type: Project Operations Compliance Report Description: Bald Eagle Management Plan - Request for Approval of Pacific Gas and Electric Copany for Poe Hydroelectric Project under P-2107. To view the document for this Filing, click here https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/filelist?accession_num=20201215- 5187__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!TNsqOz4GyYl3i_xuPS6UaREZL_NdCRmSYRBKp2yalGlZIkkXpRuqvsS65VIC7HH0UpVF2umLvpI$ To modify your subscriptions, click here: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ferconline.ferc.gov/eSubscription.aspx__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!TNsqOz4GyYl3i_xuPS6UaREZL_NdCRmSYRBKp2yalGlZIkkXpRuqvsS65VIC7HH0UpVFSKL1fps$ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please do not respond to this email. Online help is available here: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.ferc.gov/efiling-help.asp__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!TNsqOz4GyYl3i_xuPS6UaREZL_NdCRmSYRBKp2yalGlZIkkXpRuqvsS65VIC7HH0UpVFvoYU89o$ or for phone support, call 866-208-3676. 245 Market Street Power Generation San Francisco, CA 94105 Mailing Address: Mail Code N11D December 15, 2020 P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 Via Electronic Submittal Ms. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20426 Subject: Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Condition No. 35, Bald Eagle Management Plan Request for Approval Dear Secretary Bose: Attached for your review and approval is the Bald Eagle Management Plan (Plan) (Enclosure 1) for Pacific Gas and P-2107) (Project). The Federal Energy Regulation Commission (FERC) issued a new license for the Project on December 17, 2018 (License). Subsection (a) of Article 401 of the License requires PG&E to submit a Plan that has been approved by the Forest Supervisor of the Plumas National Forest (Forest Service) for FERC approval within two years of License issuance. As background, the Plan is required under the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Forest Service 4(e) Condition No. 35 (Condition No. 35), which is included in the License as Appendix B. On October 19, 2020, PG&E submitted the Plan for formal approval to the Forest Service (Enclosure 2) in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) . The Forest Service staff in consultation with the Agencies concur with the Final Plan. Formal approval from the Forest Service Supervisor is pending and is expected before the end of the year. PG&E will file the Forest Service approval letter to FERC upon receipt. Coordinator, Matthew Joseph, at 415-264-5244. Sincerely, Matthew Joseph (for) Elisabeth Rossi Supervisor, Hydro Licensing Enclosures: 1. Bald Eagle Management Plan 2. requesting Forest Service Approval. cc: via email Amy Lind (Forest Service) - amy.lind@usda.gov Emily Moghaddas (Forest Service) - emily.moghaddas@usda.gov Aondrea Bartoo (USFWS) - Aondrea_bartoo@fws.gov Sarah Lose (CDFW) - Sarah.Lose@wildlife.ca.gov Enclosure 1 Poe Bald Eagle Management Plan PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Poe Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2107 FINAL Bald Eagle Management Plan October 2020 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Poe Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan Prepared by: Pacific Gas & Electric Company 3401 Crow Canyon Road San Ramon, CA 94583 October 2020 © 2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan POE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 2107 BALD EAGLE MANAGMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................1 1.1 Goals and Objectives .................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Bald Eagle Status and Protections ............................................................................... 2 SECTION 2.0AREA DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................4 SECTION 3.0 BALD EAGLE PRODUCTIVITY ................................................................6 SECTION 4.0 BALD EAGLE HABITAT ...........................................................................11 4.1 Bald Eagle Occurrence and Distribution ...................................................................11 4.1.1 Historical Background ..............................................................................11 4.1.2 Recent Observations.................................................................................11 4.2 Bald Eagle Prey Studies .............................................................................................12 4.3 Public Use and Human Interactions .......................................................................... 13 SECTION 5.0 BALD EAGLE MONITORING METHODS ............................................16 SECTION 6.0 MANAGEMENT OF BALD EAGLE NESTS ...........................................17 SECTION 7.0 REPORTING, CONSULTATION, AND PLAN REVISIONS ................19 SECTION 8.0 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................20 Table of Contents Page i October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1. Productivity Summary for the Poe Powerhouse Bald Eagle Territory 1970– 2020.......................................................................................................................7 Table 4-1. Bald Eagle and Potential Nest Sightings in Poe Powerhouse Territory since 2013.....................................................................................................................12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Map of the Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107. .................................5 Figure 3-1. Location of Poe Powerhouse territory bald eagle nest last used in 2012. ....................9 Figure 3-2. Location of Concow Reservoir bald eagle territory nest used 2013–2020 in relation to the Poe Powerhouse nest last used in 2012. ......................................10 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 FERC Article 401 Requirements Attachment 2 FERC Appendix B – Forest Service 4(e) Condition No. 35 Attachment 3 Productivity Summary for the Concow Reservoir Bald Eagle Territory Attachment 4 USFWS Guidelines Avoidance Measures for Bald Eagles Nests Attachment 5 Stakeholder Consultation Record Table of Contents Page ii October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan SECTION 1.0 Introduction On December 17, 2018, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a new license for Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E or Licensee) Poe Project, FERC Number (No.) 2107 (Project). The new license incorporates State of CaliforniaState Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) Conditions into the license articles in Appendix A (SWRCB 2017) and United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service (Forest Service) 4(e) Conditions (Forest Service 2018) in Appendix B of the license order. This document, Poe Hydroelectric Project Bald Eagle Management Plan (BEMP or Plan), revises an earlier BEMP (see below) to comply with Forest Service 4(e) Condition No. 35 which was also incorporated into FERC License Article 401 (FERC 2018). The relevant FERC Article 401 requirements applicable to this plan are included in Attachment 1. Similarly, Forest Service 4(e) Condition No. 35 is included in Attachment 2. There were no specific SWRCB Conditions concerning bald eagles in the WQC. The BEMP was developed in consultation with the Forest Service, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (hereafter “Agencies”). This Plan is intended to meet the requirements of Forest Service 4(e) Condition No. 35. In Section 5.2 - Reporting Schedule, there are provisions for consultation and changes to the monitoring methods. Any future modifications to the final plan must be approved by the Plumas National Forest, Forest Supervisor, USFWS. CDFW and FERC before implementation. A bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) management plan (PG&E 1988) was prepared following field surveys conducted in 1986–1987 in the Poe Powerhouse nesting territory. During Project relicensing efforts in 1999 and 2000, PG&E conducted further studies to document bald eagle reproduction at the Poe Powerhouse nest site, identify existing foraging habitats of the adult territorial pair, and document human-use patterns and existing or potential human disturbances that may threaten bald eagle productivity in this territory. With this information, PG&E prepared an updated BEMP for the Poe Powerhouse bald eagle territory in 2003, included in Exhibit E for the new license application (PG&E 2003). PG&E currently conducts annual bald eagle productivity surveys of the Poe Powerhouse nesting territory, as recommended by the 2003 BEMP. These surveys are conducted three times during the breeding season. The surveys are conducted during the following time periods: 1) late March/early April to determine site occupancy; 2) May to confirm nesting activity; and, 3) mid- to late June to count nestlings near fledging (Jurek 1990; CDFW 2010). On March 7, 2019, the Licensee met via conference call with the Forest Service to begin consultation for reviewing and updating the BEMP as required by Condition No. 35. For that meeting, the Licensee presented a history of bald eagle monitoring and current methods of the 2003 BEMP (PG&E 2003). In addition, the Licensee presented the schedule to draft a revised BEMP in 2020 with review by the Agencies and plans to continue bald eagle monitoring in 2019–2020. Section 1.0 Page 1 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan The 2020 revision to the Poe Project BEMP required in final Forest Service 4(e) Condition No. 35 is presented herein. Until this 2020 BEMP is finalized, annual productivity surveys will continue to be conducted as recommended by the 2003BEMP.As proposed in Section 5, the survey schedule will be modified to be concurrent with the Rock Creek-Cresta Project (FERC 1962) surveys which occur every three years. 1.1 Goals and Objectives The primary goal of the BEMP is to provide the necessary details concerning bald eagle ecology in the Project Area and how the Licensees will manage bald eagles with respect to Project Operations. Another goal of the BEMP is to ensure that Project Operations and Maintenance (O&M), as well as Project related recreation activities do not result in “take” of bald eagles, their eggs or nests, by implementing measures that are consistent with Federal and State of California laws and regulations (see Section 1.2 for the definition of “take” under various applicable laws and regulations). The BEMP has the following objectives: 1. Provide documentation of historical bald eagle productivity in the Project Area; 2. Summarize current knowledge of bald eagle nesting habitats and overall habitat use in the Project Area; 3. Provide guidance for protections from Project-related disturbance activities within the FERC Project Boundary potentially affecting bald eagles; and 4. Outline annual monitoring and reporting requirements. 1.2 Bald Eagle Status and Protections In 1973, the bald eagle was classified as an endangered species by the U.S. Department of Interior under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Populations nationwide had declined due to habitat loss and post-World War II DDT contamination. Since then, bald eagle populations have recovered substantially, and in 1995, the bald eagle was downlisted to threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). In July 1999, the USFWS proposed to delist the bald eagle under the ESA. The bald eagle was federally delisted in August 2007; however, the species still has special-status protection under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA). In California, a similar recovery has occurred, although the species is still listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA, Fish & G. Code §§ 86 & 2050-2085 and Cal. CodeRegs. tit. 14 §§ 783-783.8 & 786-786.8), as a fully protected bird species (Fish & G. Code § 3511), and as a Forest Service sensitive species. Bald eagle protections under the federal BGEPA prohibit “take” of bald eagles, and one component of take is to “disturb,” meaning: “to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering Section 1.0 Page 2 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior” (USFWS 2016). In addition to immediate impacts, this definition also includes impacts that result from human-induced alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle’s return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that interferes with or interrupts normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits, and causes injury, death or nest abandonment. Bald eagle protections in California under CESA prohibit any person to import into and export out of the State, or take, possess, purchase, or sell within the State, bald eagles or parts or products thereof. Take is defined under Fish and Game Code Section 86 as hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill. As a State fully protected bird species (Fish and Game Code § 3511), bald eagle or parts thereof cannot be taken or possessed unless authorized by CDFW for scientific research purposes. Additionally, bald eagles are protected in California by Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3503.5, and 3513, which make it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, including birds of prey, such as bald eagle, and take or possess any migratory non-game birds as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), respectively. Section 1.0 Page 3 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan SECTION 2.0 Area Description The Poe Project is located in the North Fork Feather River Basin—which contains extensive forested lands and is sparsely populated—in a steep canyon along the North Fork Feather River (NFFR) approximately 24 kilometers (km) north-northeast of Oroville, in Butte County, California. The “Poe Reach” or “Poe Bypass Reach” is the section of the North Fork Feather River (NFFR) from Poe Dam downstream to Poe Powerhouse (Figure 1-1). Waters of the Poe Project include the Poe Reservoir, the 7.62-mile-long Poe Bypass Reach, and the Big Bend Reservoir, which serves as the afterbay for the project. The Poe Powerhouse and Big Bend Reservoir are located just upstream of Lake Oroville, the primary storage reservoir for the Feather River Project No. 2100. Hydrologically, NFFR water is diverted at Poe Dam, near the town of Pulga, and routed by tunnel to Poe Powerhouse. Directly upstream of Poe Powerhouse, the NFFR is riverine and flows are influenced by hydroelectric power production. Flows increase below Poe Powerhouse into the afterbay during operation, but are mediated by the Big Bend Reservoir, which is formed by the old Big Bend diversion dam. Built in 1910, this dam diverted water to the old Big Bend Powerhouse, now under Lake Oroville. Upland vegetation consists of montane hardwood conifer, characterized by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), oak and live oak (Quercus spp.), manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.), and madrone (Arbutus menziesii). Land ownership/administration in the territory vicinity includes the Licensee, USDA National Forest Lands (Plumas National Forest), State of California (Lake Oroville Recreation Area), and other private landowners. Land uses include hydroelectric power generation, timber production, residential homes, and recreation. Large trees for nesting are in relatively short supply in the lower NFFR canyon. The active nest tree last used in 2007 was a dominant, 56-meter (m) tall ponderosa pine with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of around 120 centimeters (cm). Surrounding this nest tree was a multi-layered canopy of mostly sapling and pole-sized California bay trees (Umbellularia californica), tanoak (Notholithocarpus densiflorus), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), Douglas fir, and California black oak (Quercus kelloggii), with a scattering of ponderosa pines and Douglas firs in the larger size classes. The nest tree used from 2008-2012 was a co-dominant ponderosa pine. Much of the timber stands of the historic nesting territory were destroyed in the wildfires of September 2001 (i.e., Poe Fire) and November 2018 (i.e., Camp Fire). A small portion of the timber stand that supported the nest tree last used in 2007, and the nest tree last used in 2012, survived both fires. Section 2.0 Page 4 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan Figure 1.1. Map of the Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107. Section 2.0 Page 5 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan SECTION 3.0 Bald Eagle Productivity The history of breeding attempts and productivity at the Poe Powerhouse bald eagle territory is shown in Table 3-1. The earliest known nesting activity was reported in 1960; however, from 1960 to 1970, no information is available on productivity (CDFG file data). Up until 2007, this territorywas one of the most consistently successful and productive bald eagle territories in California. The mean number of young produced from 1971 to 2012 was 1.1 young/occupied year, with a 74%success rate, both above the statewide average (i.e., 1.0 young/occ. year, 65% success; Jurek 1990). The previously active nest tree described in the 2003 BEMP was located in the draw across the NFFR and west of Poe Powerhouse. It was situated about 150 m upslope from the river adjacent to, and southeast of, a transmission line tower. This nest was last used in 2007; in 2008, the eagles built a new nest in a ponderosa pine about 100 m south-southeastfrom the previously used nest tree (Figure 3-1). The territory was last successful in raising young in 2006; it was occupied but not successful each year from 2007 to 2012 and has been considered unoccupied since 2013 (Table 3-1). There was some evidence of bald eagle nesting activity along the upper NFFR arm of Lake Oroville in 2012, 2017 and 2018, when eagle-sized nests were found in large pines about 3 and 4 km downstream of Poe Powerhouse, respectively. Bald eagle use was not confirmed at these sites. However, in 2013—the same year the Poe Powerhouse territory was first unoccupied—a newly discovered bald eagle nest successfully produced young at Concow Reservoir about 6.5 km northwest of the powerhouse (Figure 3-2), and it has been mostly successful each year since (Attachment 3). In an effort to identify any potential environmental or Project effects on the nesting failures leading up to and the ultimate vacancy of the Poe territory, notes on water year type (indicative of possible high flows and drought), wildfires in the NFFR canyon, and nest stability are included in Table 3-1 from the early 2000’s. Years of high precipitation and spring runoff (i.e., Wet Water years 2006 and 2011) had flows in excess of 2,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) in April and May, and in April 2011 the bald eagle nest appeared slumped (i.e., partially falling out of tree, possibly affecting any pre-survey incubation). Large wildfires in the canyon shown in Table 3-1, with the potential for smoke effects on nesting birds, were mostly after the eagle breeding season; the only exception was the Flea Valley Fire in June 2008, but the eagles had failed earlier in May that year. As mentioned in Section 2.0, the Poe and Camp fires both burned close to the nest grove and consequently burned much of the timber adjacent to the grove while sparing the recent nest trees (see cover photo). Section 3.0 Page 6 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan Table 3-1.Productivity Summary for the Poe Powerhouse Bald Eagle Territory 1970– 2020. No. Water YearStatusComments Nest Conditions 3 Young Year Status Unknown - Nesting activity suspected 1970 Successful 1 1971 1972Successful1Female shot, male raised young Successful 1 1973 Successful 1 1974 Successful 2 1975 Successful 2 1976 Successful 1 1977 Successful 2 1978 Successful 1 1979 Successful 2 1980 Successful 2 1981 Successful 1 1982 Successful 2 1983 Successful 1 1984 Successful 2 1985 Successful 2 1986 1987 Occupied Not Successful 0 Egg material collected after failure 1988 Successful 2 One of these 2 young translocated Successful 2 1989 Successful 1 1990 Successful 2 1991 Successful 1 1992 Successful 1 1993 Successful 2 1994 Successful 1 1995 Occupied Not Successful0 Incubated, failed 1996 Successful 2 1997 Occupied Not Successful0 Incubated, failed 1998 Successful 2 1999 Storrie Fire August 2000 2000 Successful 1 Concow Fire September 2000 2001 Successful 2 Poe Fire September 2001 2002 Successful 1 N Incubated, failed, whole egg Nest in good 2003 Occupied Not Successful 0 N abandonedcondition Nest in good 2004 Successful 1 N condition Nest in good 2005 Occupied Not Successful 0 Incubated, failed N condition Section 3.0 Page 7 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan No. Water Year Status CommentsNest Conditions 3 Young Year Nest in good 2006 Successful 1 W condition Small nest under construction below Failed in April during early failed nest in same 2007 Occupied Not Successful 0 nestling stage for unknown CD 4 tree in mid-May;no reasons, nest was in good shape activity at nests in mid-June New nest, incubation failed by 2008 Occupied Not Successful 0 May, nest in good shape 2007 nest still intact CD Flea Valley Fire June 2008 1 Fixednest, added sticks in April, 2009 Occupied Not Successful 0 “ D no eggs laid Incubated, failed, nest and lining 2010 Occupied Not Successful 0 2007 nest remnant N intact. Nest appeared 2011 Occupied Not Successful 0 Nest fixed, no eggs slumped in April, W but fixed by May Nest in good Nest fixed, no eggs 2012 Occupied Not Successful 0 condition, 2007 nest D Chipps Fire July 2012 remnant Nest empty, not fixed –1 adult about 1.5 km downstream on Lake 2007 and 2012 nests 2013 Unoccupied 0 D Oroville; active nest found on are remnants Concow Reservoir No eagles or nests found in 2014 Unoccupied 0 CD territory No eagles or nests found in 2015 Unoccupied 0 CD territory No nests found – 1adult about 5 2016 Unoccupied 0 N km downstream on Lake Oroville Nest 4 kmdownstreamon Lake 2017 Unoccupied 0 Oroville with 2 abandoned, eagle- W sized eggs, no eagles seen No eagles or new nests found in 2018 Unoccupied 0 territory N Camp Fire November 2018 No eagles or nests found in 2019 Unoccupied 0 W territory No eagles or nests found in 2020 Unoccupied 0 CD 2 territory; June 25 survey Known years occupied: 42 Young produced: 46 Young/occupied year: 1.1 % Success/occupied year: 74% 1 “Fixed nest” means nest platform was intact and there appeared to be signs of recent addition of sticks and/or lining. 2 Only one survey was conducted in 2020—a ground search of the entire territory on June 25—due to earlier COVID-19 travel restrictions. 3 Water year types: CD= critically dry, D= dry, N= normal, W= wet 4 Bald eagles will sometimes start construction of a new nest—often in the same tree—following a nesting attempt failure. Section 3.0 Page 8 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan Figure 3-1. Location of Poe Powerhouse territory bald eagle nest last used in 2012. Section 3.0 Page 9 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan Figure 3-2. Location of Concow Reservoir bald eagle territory nest used 2013–2020 inrelation to the Poe Powerhouse nest last used in 2012. Section 3.0 Page 10 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan SECTION 4.0 Bald Eagle Habitat 4.1 Bald Eagle Occurrence and Distribution 4.1.1Historical Background The known foraging home range of the Poe Powerhouse bald eagles documented during earlier studies in 1986–1987 and 2000 (PG&E 1988, 2003, respectively) included several kilometers of the NFFR upstream of Poe Powerhouse, portions of the NFFR Arm, and likely the West Branch Arm of Lake Oroville as well. During the mid-1980s, the pair utilized the NFFR Arm as far downstream as French Creek Cove, approximately 8 km downstream of Poe Powerhouse (PG&E 1988). Most sightings during this period were of eagles hunting pools in the riverine portion of the reservoir downstream of Big Bend Dam when Lake Oroville levels were low, or at lake inflow areas at French Creek and the main stem NFFR. In 2000, the eagles regularly soared off to apparently more distant destinations in the direction of the West Branch Arm and lower NFFR Arm of the reservoir (PG&E 2003). Upstream of Poe Powerhouse, the adults were seen perched along the river as far upstream as Bardees Bar in the mid-1980s; however, in 2000, they seemed to be concentrating hunting efforts in the portion of the reach extending about 4 km upstream of the powerhouse (PG&E 2003). While perching along the NFFR, the eagles preferred to hunt the shallow portions of pools, an aquatic habitat known to be important to nesting bald eagles foraging on rivers (Hunt et al. 1992). Occasionally, the Poe Powerhouse adults soared off in the direction of Concow Reservoir. Past use of this reservoir by adult bald eagles was reported by local residents (PG&E 1988). Adult bald eagles were regularly observed around the Poe Powerhouse vicinity during the relicensing research period (1999-2000) and previous surveys by PG&E and the Forest Service (PG&E 1988). Winter surveys of the NFFR Arm of Lake Oroville up to Poe Powerhouse showed consistent use by low numbers of subadult and adult bald eagles, up to three total (PG&E 1988). These sightings indicate that the pair was resident year around, as is expected for bald eagles nesting along ice-free waters in California. 4.1.2Recent Observations Table 4-1 compiles a list of bald eagle sightings along with potential alternate nest locations in the historic Poe Powerhouse bald eagle territory home range made during nesting surveys and incidental sightings since the traditional nesting area was vacated in 2013. Incidental sightings made during other biological surveys along the Poe Bypass Reach suggest that the eagles occupying the Concow Reservoir territory were possibly using the NFFR portion of the historic Poe Powerhouse territory, although it is not certain if the incidental sightings were adults from the Concow pair. Although never confirmed, bald eagles may have also attempted nesting along the upper NFFR arm of Lake Oroville during this period. Section 4.0 Page 11 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan Table 4-1. Bald Eagle and Potential Nest Sightings in Poe Powerhouse Territory since 2013. Date #/Age Source of Observation Locations Activity 6/2/15 1/adult Incidental sighting during NFFR about 2 km upstream of Left perch, flew/soared NW frog survey Poe PH toward Concow Reservoir. 5/9/161/adultHelicopter nesting surveyNFFR Arm Lake Oroville, 5 km Flew to perch. downstream of Poe PH. 6/17/16 None Helicopter nesting survey NFFR Arm Lake Oroville about Eagle-sized nest, empty in 2.5 km downstream of Poe PH good condition in dead fir. (UTM 632670E/4396995N). 4/10/17 None Helicopter nesting survey NFFR Arm Lake Oroville about 2016 nest in disrepair. 2.5 km downstream of Poe PH (UTM 632670E/4396995N). 5/10/17 None Helicopter nesting survey 4 km downstream of Poe Nest in ponderosa pine Powerhouse containing 2 whole, eagle- (634396E/4397443N). sized eggs. 6/19/17 None Helicopter nesting survey 4 km downstream of Poe Nest seen on 5/10 Powerhouse empty/fixed with lining, eggs (634396E/4397443N). gone. 4/9/18 None Helicopter nesting survey 4 km downstream of Poe Large nest seen in 2017 was Powerhouse empty, not fixed; tree was (634396E/4397443N). dead. 6/2/19 1/adult Eric Jepsen, GANDA Above Highway 70 midway Soaring, ringing up from the biologist, pers. comm. between Poe PH and Concow NFFR canyon. Reservoir. 4.2 Bald Eagle Prey Studies Food Habits.Information on the food habits of the Poe Powerhouse pair was collected in 1985– 1987 (PG&E 1988) and again in 1999–2000 (PG&E 2003). The Poe Powerhouse bald eagles utilized a combination of native and introduced fish species from both reservoir (e.g., Lake Oroville, Big Bend Reservoir) and NFFR riverine habitats. Commonly taken riverine prey species were Sacramento sucker (Catostomus occidentalis) and Sacramento pikeminnow (Ptychocheilusgrandis). Prey fish speciesobtained from territory reservoir (e.g., Lake Oroville, Big Bend Reservoir, possibly Concow Reservoir) habitats included bass (Micropterus sp.), carp (Cyprinus carpio), and brown bullhead (Ameiurus nebulosus). A notable difference between the 1999–2000analysis and that from the mid-l980s was a decrease in numbers of catfish taken by the pair. Catfish (e.g., brown bullhead) represented 38 percent of prey items from the 1980s compared to five percent in the later prey remains collection. Another dissimilarity between the two periods was an increase in Centrarchid (i.e., bass) use. Bass represented over 25 percent of the 1999–2000 collection numbers, while they accounted for only eight percent of the 1985– 1987 numbers. Post-spawning mortality and fatalities from catch-and-release angling supplied an abundant source of bass carrion for eagles on Shasta Lake (Jackman et al. 2007), a Section 4.0 Page 12 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan phenomenon possibly also occurring on Lake Oroville, where carrion spotted bass (Micropterus punctulatus) were numerous in May 1999 (PG&E 2003). Prey Base. The NFFR contains the following prey-sized fish species in the bypass reach from Poe Dam to Poe Powerhouse: rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Sacramento sucker, Sacramento pikeminnow, hardhead (Mylopharadon conocephalus), and smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu). Relicensing fisheries surveys found Sacramento suckers to be the most numerous overall, followed by rainbow trout and Sacramento pikeminnow. Specifically, in large pool habitats, adult suckers were heavily dominant, followed by pikeminnow and rainbow trout (PG&E 2003). Suckers also dominated in run and pocket water habitats; however, rainbow trout were most abundant in riffles. Pikeminnow and suckers were accessible to eagles in these pools while feeding in shallows and swimming near the surface and around submerged rocks. Fish populations in Big Bend Reservoir (Poe Afterbay) were also sampled during relicensing studies (PG&E 2003). For adult size classes in an electrofishing sample, Sacramento suckers were the most abundant, followed by low numbers of adult Sacramento pikeminnow, rainbow trout, and smallmouth bass. Most of the suckers were found in the shallow run where the main NFFR channel enters the reservoir. The Poe Powerhouse eagles were observed capturing adult suckers at an exposed gravel bar of the afterbay downstream of the Powerhouse in 2000 on mornings when one or both units were shut down. During this time, suckers moved into shallow water on this bar as they grazed on the reservoir bottom and thus became vulnerable to eagle strikes. Lake Oroville contains a wide variety of fish species. The lake fishery for prey-sized fish species in the NFFR Arm includes chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus), Sacramento pikeminnow, hardhead, carp, largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass, spotted bass, redeye bass (Micropterus coosae), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), green sunfish (L. cyanellus), white catfish (Ictalurus catus), brown bullhead, and channel catfish (I. punctatus) (PG&E 1988). The bullheads occur in other nearby reservoirs, including Concow and Kunkle reservoirs, and farm ponds in the Table Mountain area (PG&E 1988). Large carp inhabit the clear waters of French Creek cove and also forage and bask at the surface in the NFFR Arm of Lake Oroville. During low lake levels, large suckers and cyprinids occurred near the surface and in the shallow water of pools below the Big Bend Dam; rainbow trout occupied the swifter water below the dam. Big Bend Dam acts as barrier to upstream movement of fish except when Lake Oroville is full or near full. 4.3 Public Use and Human Interactions Background. Many studies have documented the thresholds at which various human activities elicit response from bald eagles (e.g., Grubb et al. 1992; Steidl and Anthony 1996, Watson 2004). These thresholds have been useful in determining buffer zones to protect eagles from energy expenditures and nesting failures related to these disturbances. Past research also demonstrated that nesting and foraging eagles avoided areas of human use or development (Buehler et al. 1991; McGarigal et al. 1991). However, while Wood (1999) had evidence that boating reduced the numbers of eagles using a lake in Florida, she saw little measurable effect on Section 4.0 Page 13 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan the eagles that were present, suggesting that those eagles choosing to perch on the lake were habituated to boating activity. So, while it is documented that bald eagles are susceptible to human disturbance, it appears that they may become habituated to certain activity levels. In particular, eagles regularly tolerate or become habituated to existing human developments with predictable characteristics and activity levels, such as powerhouses and highways. Currently, it is well documented that bald eagle pairs become habituated to other familiar, non-threatening human activity, and, since their recovery, are becoming more habituated to human activity on a population level (Guinn 2013). Causes of Nesting Failure. Bald eagle pairs are periodically unsuccessful during a particular breeding season. Prolonged human disturbances (e.g., logging/woodcutting, construction) too close to nests could cause the adults to vacate nests for an amount of time lethal to vulnerable eggs or hatchlings. There arealso biological reasons for nesting failure such as when one of the members of a pair dies; in this case,there is a significant increase of successive nesting failure for up to three years following mate replacement (Jenkins and Jackman 2006). It would be reasonable to assume that such reproductive incompatibility could apply to newly established territories as well. It is often very difficult to assign causality given the variety of reasons that may prevent successful breeding—other known factors responsible for unsuccessful bald eagle nesting attempts include nest predation (e.g., bears, owls) and environmental contamination, such as pesticides, lead, and mercury. Bald eagle productivity has been positively correlated with prey availability, foraging success, and adequate provisioning of young (Dykstra et al. 1998, Elliott et al. 1998), and is therefore an indirect measure of overall habitat conditions (Hansen 1987). Eagles may not be in condition to lay and incubate eggs every year, especially if prey was limited during winter or the early nesting season. Seasons with unsuccessful breeding may therefore be affected by winter prey abundance or weather patterns. Weather could affect the availability of prey (e.g., high, turbid waterways) during the nesting season and could also threaten nest structure (e.g., high winds and heavy precipitation cause nests to collapse). Climate change appears to be contributing to this factor in northeast California with more late-season, heavy snow fall. USFWS Guidelines. The USFWS National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (Guidelines; USFWS 2007) provide comprehensive and detailed disturbance avoidance measures for bald eagles. The Guidelines were developed to advise landowners, land managers, and others who share public and private lands with bald eagles when and under what circumstances the protective provisions of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) may apply to their activities. With regards to management buffer distances, the Guidelines state that the sensitivity of particular bald eagles to disturbance “may be related to a number of factors, including visibility, duration, noise levels, extent of the area affected by the activity, prior experiences with humans, and tolerance of the individual nesting pair” (see Section 6.0). Disturbance Features. Potential Project disturbance features in the Poe Powerhouse bald eagle territory include Poe Powerhouse and associated access roads, and Poe Powerhouse Beach. Other non-Project potential disturbances to the nesting eagles include: woodcutters and various unofficial activities on the road above the old nest; railroad maintenance activities (e.g., re- blasting tracks); and, power line right-of-way vegetation maintenance activities. Poe Section 4.0 Page 14 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan Powerhouse Beach—located directly across the NFFR from the historic nesting grove—is an undeveloped recreation area; however, improvements are planned under the new license including a vault toilet. Picnic and swimming activity there during past surveys was generally light with a small number of vehicles parked near the shoreline; however, gunshots were heard from there on one occasion. An improved trail to Poe Beach, located 0.6 miles upstream of Poe Powerhouse along the NFFR, is also planned. Section 4.0 Page 15 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan SECTION 5.0 Bald Eagle Monitoring Methods Periodic monitoring over the lifetime of the Project license is recommended to assess bald eagle occupancy and productivity and to determine BEMP effectiveness and impacts from Project operations and recreational and other human activities should a bald eagle nesting territory be identified within the Project. The level of effort and schedule of bald eagle monitoring for the Project are as follows: 1. As of 2020, the Poe Powerhouse bald eagle territory is unoccupied. To search for bald eagles nesting and re-occupation in the Poe Powerhouse territory, the Licensee shall conduct bald eagle nesting (i.e., productivity) surveys every three years, coinciding with the triannual surveys for the adjacent Rock Creek-Cresta Project (FERC1962), beginning in 2021. Due to COVID-19 travel restrictions, 2020 surveys were deferred to 2021; therefore, the survey schedule will be 2021, 2023, 2026, and then every three years thereafter in order to maintain concurrence with the Rock Creek-Cresta Project surveys. The surveys will be conducted during the following three time periods: 1) late March/early April to determine site occupancy; 2) May to confirm nesting activity; and, 3) mid- to late June to count nestlings near fledging (Jurek 1990; CDFW 2010). If new nests are discovered in the Project Area, they will be surveyed annually. Surveys will be conducted by helicopter or ground and will include Big Bend Reservoir, Poe Powerhouse area, Poe Reservoir, and the NFFR Poe Bypass Reach and a surrounding 0.25 mile survey area. Helicopter surveys are conducted at approximately 500 feet (ft.) above ground level, and both helicopter and ground surveys will be conducted according to methods described in 1 Jackman and Jenkins (2004). Data collected for each territory will include location of active nest, nest tree species, nest condition, occurrence and condition of any alternate nests, time of day, activity for all observed adults and young, and any human activity in the vicinity of the active nest. Data will be recorded onto CDFW Nesting Territory Survey Forms (see CDFW 2010 to view datasheet online and see #3 below). 2. During nesting surveys note any human use within and adjacent to any new nesting areas to identify potential conflicts, and search for evidence of intrusions into nesting territories should the nesting attempt fail during any particular year. 1 A territory is defined by a nest site and foraging home range occupied by a single bald eagle adult pair. There may be one or more alternate nests—usually in the same vicinity—used during different years by the same territorial pair. Section 5.0 Page 16 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan SECTION 6.0 Management of Bald Eagle Nests The Licensee proposes using measures from the USFWS Guidelines (Guidelines; USFWS 2007) for delineation and implementation of nest management buffers around any future Project Area bald eagle nests. TheGuidelines’ buffer recommendations would apply to active nests around construction, hazard tree removal (excluding emergencies), non-routine PG&E operation and maintenance (O&M) projects, and Project recreation during thedesignated breeding season limited operating period (LOP) which is defined as January 1 to July 31. It is recommended that the most conservative Guidelines buffer zone boundary (i.e., 200 m/660 ft.) be used around nests in all cases since it can be difficult to determine line of sight visibility to eagle nests in forested habitat from the eagles’ perspective. The complete USFWS Guidelines avoidance measures for establishing buffers around bald eagles nests are presented in Attachment 3. Proposed implementation during the LOP (January 1 to July 31) of these Guideline recommendations for this BEMP by category are as follows: Categories A, B, C. If any actions such as those outlined in Guideline categories A, B, and C (e.g., construction, timber management) occur within the Project Area near bald eagle nests during the LOP, it is recommended that the most conservative buffer (i.e., 200 m/660 ft.) be used around nests in all cases since it can be difficult to determine line of sight visibility to eagle nests in forested habitat from their perspective. Exceptions would include emergency removal of hazards trees around powerlines. Category D. It is recommended that the most conservative buffer (i.e., 200 m/660 ft.) recommended for Category D be used around bald eagle nests to restrict off-road vehicle (ORV) use since it can be difficult to determine line of sight visibility to eagle nests in forested habitat from their perspective. If identified as a potential disturbance during nesting surveys, implementation of this recommendation might require blocking ORV access to nest areas (e.g., with large boulders) and working with agencies and landowners to comply with the BGEPA protections. Category E. No aquatic buffers are proposed as recommended under Category E for eagle nests occurring along shorelines closer than 100 m/330 ft., and the only two Project reservoirs (i.e., Big Bend Reservoir, Poe Reservoir) are run-of-the-river reservoirs and see little if any boat traffic. The types of log boom barriers needed to enforce aquatic closures are difficult to maintain andunpopular with the fishing public. At other popular PG&E recreational reservoirs (e.g., Pit 3, 4, and 5 Project’s Lake Britton, and Bass Lake in Madera County) bald eagle nests adjacent to the shoreline have been very successful without them. Category F. Pedestrian and non-motorized traffic in the vicinity of nests (Category F) is difficult to control without drawing additional attention to nest sites (i.e., with restrictive signage). If observations during nesting surveys suggest that nest disturbance is attributed to pedestrian and non-motorized traffic, public education by use of signage will Section 6.0 Page 17 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan be used as a last resort. Signage should be placed to discourage pedestrian/non- motorizedactivities within 200 m/660 ft. of active bald eagle nests, instead of the 100 m/330 ft. buffer recommended by the Guidelines, since humans on foot or in plain view are often more disturbing to eagles than when in enclosed vehicles. Signage should be general in nature to discourage curiosity (e.g., Caution/Prohibited Area/Authorized Personnel Only). Category G. These guidelines apply to PG&E helicopter use associated with O&M or construction activities in the Project Area. If long periods of hovering or circling are necessary, it is recommended that helicopters stay 1,000 ft. (305 m) away from bald eagle nests. As part of O&M and construction planning, PG&E pilots will be informed of the bald eagle nest locations and appropriate avoidance measures will be employed by the pilots. Annual helicopter nesting surveys conducted by PG&E at multiple hydroelectric projects consistently show that resident adults are habituated to helicopter use (i.e., very rarely alter behavior when approached at 500 ft. above ground level; PG&E survey data). With this demonstrated tolerance, it is unnecessary to implement the Category G restriction for routine over-flights, patrols, or remote helipad use. Category H. Although loud noise is often considered a potential disturbance to raptors, studies have shown there is little effect on the behavior of bald eagles (e.g., Brown et al. 1999). Still, the Guidelines recommend avoiding blasting and other activities that produce extremely loud noises within 0.5 miles (mi.) of active nests. Therefore, Project activities that generate loud disturbances (e.g., blasting) closer than 0.5 mi. to active bald eagle nests during the LOP should be evaluated by a qualified biologist as part of O&M or construction project planning. The following management recommendations are based on the findings in the relicense application (PG&E 2003) and those in support of the Licensee's 1988 management plan (PG&E 1988) and are contingent on the re-occupancy of nesting bald eagles in the Project Area: 1. If a new bald eagle nest is found on the Project the Licensee will report its location to and coordinate with Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW. 2. Limit habitat alterations within the buffer zone to those that will enhance bald eagle nesting habitat and pose no hazard to eagles (e.g., timber harvest would be allowed if under a silvicultural prescription to encourage long-term regeneration of large pines). Reduction of fuel loading is recommended where needed. 3. Schedule non-emergency construction and non-routine O&M projects, including hazard tree removal, outside the bald eagle breeding season. Excepting emergencies, no such activity should be allowed in the buffer zone between a LOP (January 1 to July 31). If a nesting attempt fails during a certain year, this restriction may be eased for that year in consultation with Forest Service. Section 6.0 Page 18 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Bald Eagle Management Plan 4.Prior to implementation of any new Project recreation developments, a biologist will evaluate the proposed development for potential impacts to bald eagles. 5.If bald eagle productivity or site fidelity is threatened by recreational use in the nesting territory, discuss protective measures with Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW. 6.As needed, Licensee will work with the Forest Service to implement appropriate administrative closures on NFS lands to protect nests. SECTION 7.0 Reporting, Consultation, and Plan Revisions Following productivity nesting surveys, CDFW Nesting Territory Survey Formswill be compiled and submitted via email tothe CDFW bald eagle database coordinator, Forest Service, and USFWS by September 1 each year of monitoring for any Project bald eagle nesting territories observed (CDFW 2010). The Licensee, in consultation with the Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW, will review, update, and revise the Plan, as needed, when significant changes in the existing conditions occur. Sixty days will be allowed for the Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW to provide written comments and recommendations. After consultation and agreement with the Forest Service, the Licensee will work with the Forest Service to file the updated Plan with FERC. The Licensee will include all relevant documentation of coordination and consultation with the updated Plan filed with FERC. If the Licensee does not adopt a specific recommendation by USFWS or CDFW, the filing will include the reasons for not doing so. The Licensee will implement the revised Plan as approved by FERC. Section 6.0 Page 19 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company SECTION 8.0 References Brown, B.T., G.S. Mills, C. Powels, W.A. Russell, G.D. Therres, and J.J. Pottie. 1999. The influence of weapons-testing noise on bald eagle behavior. Journal of Raptor Research 33(3): 227-232. Buehler, D.A., T.J. Mersmann, J.D. Fraser and J.K.D.Seegar. 1991. Effects of human activity on bald eagle distribution on the northern Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Wildlife Management. 55(2):282-290. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2010. Bald eagle breeding survey instructions. Website accessed April 27, 2020: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx? DocumentID=83706&inline Dykstra, C.R., M.W. Meyer, D.K. Warnke, W.H. Karasov, D.E. Anderson, W.W. Bowerman, IV and J.P. Giesy. 1998. Low reproductive rates of Lake Superior bald eagles: low food delivery rates or environmental contaminants? Journal of Great Lakes Research 24:32-44. Elliott, J.E., I.E. Moul and K.M. Cheng. 1998. Variable reproductive success of bald eagles on the British Columbia coast. Journal of Wildlife Management 62(2):518-529. Grubb, T.G., W.W. Bowerman, J.P. Giesy and G.A. Dawson. 1992. Responses of breeding bald eagles, Haliaeetus leucocephalis, to human activities in northcentral Michigan. Canadian Field Naturalist. 106:443-453. Guinn, J. E. 2013. Generational habituation and current bald eagle populations. Human– Wildlife Interactions 7(1):69–76. Hansen, A.J. 1987. Regulation of bald eagle reproductive rates in southeast Alaska. Ecology 68:1387-1392. Hunt, W.G., J.M. Jenkins, R.E. Jackman, C.G. Thelander, and A.T. Gerstell. 1992. Foraging ecology of bald eagles on a regulated river. Journal of Raptor Research 26:243-256. Jackman, R.E., W.G. Hunt, and N. Hutchins. 2007. Bald eagle foraging and reservoir management in California. Journal of Raptor Research 41(3):202-211. Jackman, R. E., and J. M. Jenkins. 2004. Protocol for evaluating bald eagle habitat and populations in California. Prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Office, Sacramento, CA by Garcia and Associates and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Website accessed April 27, 2020: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx? DocumentID=83707&inline Jenkins, J.M., and R.E. Jackman. 2006. Lifetime reproductive success of bald eagles in northern California. Condor 108:730-735. Section 8 Page 20 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Jurek, R.M. 1990. California bald eagle breeding population survey and trend, 1970-1990. Unpublished Administrative Report, California Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Bird and Mammal Section. Sacramento, CA. 16 pp. McGarigal, K., R.G. Anthony and F.B. Isaacs. 1991. Interactions of humans and bald eagles on the Columbia River estuary. Wildlife Monograph No. 115. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 1988. Compatibility of bald eagles with Pacific Gas and Electric Company facilities and operations. Report by BioSystems Analysis, Inc. for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Department of Research and Development, San Ramon, CA. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2003. Poe Project Bald Eagle Management Plan. In, Poe Hydroelectric Project (FERC 2107) Application for New License. P. E-3.2-31. Steidl, R.J. and R.G. Anthony. 1996. Responses of bald eagles to human activity during the summer in interior Alaska. Ecological Applications 6(2):482-491. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. May 2007. Watson, J.W. 2004. Responses to nesting bald eagles to experimental pedestrian activity. Journal of Raptor Research 38(4):295-303. Wood, P.B. 1999. Bald eagle response to boating activity in northcentral Florida. Journal of Raptor Research 33(2):97-101. Section 8 Page 21 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company A TTACHMENT 1 FERC A RTICLE 401 R EQUIREMENTS Attachment 1 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Article 401. Commission Approval, Reporting, Notification, and Filing of Amendments (a) Requirement to File Plans for Commission Approval The State Water Resources Control Board’s (Water Board) section 401 water quality certification (WQC) (Appendix A) and the U. S. Department of Agriculture – Forest Service’s (Forest Service) section 4(e) conditions (Appendix B) require the licensee to prepare plans in consultation with other entities for approval by the Water Board or Forest Service or for submittal to the Commission, and implement specific measures without prior Commission approval. The following plans must also be submitted to the Commission for approval by the deadlines specified below: Water Board WQC Forest Service 4(e) PlanName Commission Due Condition No. Condition No. Date - 35 Bald eagle Within 2 years from management plan license issuance … With each plan filed with the Commission, the licensee must include documentation that it developed the plan in consultation with the above-listed agencies and provide copies of any comments received, as well as its response to each comment. The Commission reserves the right to make changes to any plan filed. Upon Commission approval, the plan becomes a requirement of the license, and the licensee must implement the plan, including any changes required by the Commission. Any changes in the above schedule or plans require approval by the Commission before implementing the proposed change. Attachment 1 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company A TTACHMENT 2 FERCA PPENDIX B–F OREST S ERVICE 4(E) C ONDITION N O.35 Attachment 2 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Condition No. 35: Bald Eagle Management Plan Within 90 days of license issuance, the Licensee shall initiate consultation with the Forest Service and other appropriate agencies to review and update the existing Bald Eagle Management Plan for the Project area. Within two years of License issuance, Licensee shall file with the Commission a revised Bald Eagle Management Plan approved by the Forest Service for portions of the plan involving National Forest System lands. Attachment 2 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company A TTACHMENT 3 P RODUCTIVITY S UMMARYFORTHE C ONCOW R ESERVOIR B ALD E AGLE T ERRITORY Attachment 3 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Table A-1. Productivity Summary for the Concow Reservoir Bald Eagle Territory 2013– 2020. Year Status No. Comments 2013 Successful 1 New bald eagle territory 2014Occupied Not Successful0One whole egg abandoned in nest 2015 Successful 1 2016 Successful 1 2017 Successful 1 2018 Successful 2 2019 Successful 1 2020 Successful 1 Recently fledged on 6/25 Known years occupied: 8 Young produced: 8 Young/occupied year: 1.0 % Success/occupied year: 88% Attachment 3 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company A TTACHMENT 4 USFWSG UIDELINES A VOIDANCE M EASURES FOR B ALD E AGLES N ESTS Attachment 4 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company The USFWS Guidelines avoidance measures for establishing buffers around bald eagles nests are as follows (USFWS 2007): Category A: Building construction, 1 or 2 story, with project footprint of ½ acre or less. Construction of roads, trails, canals, power lines, and other linear utilities. Agriculture and aquaculture – new or expanded operations. Alteration of shorelines or wetlands. Installation of docks or moorings. Water impoundment. Category B: Building construction, 3 or more stories. Building construction, 1 or 2 story, with project footprint of more than ½ acre. Installation or expansion of marinas with a capacity of 6 or more boats. Mining and associated activities. Oil and natural gas drilling and refining and associated activities . If there is no similar activity If there is similar activity closer within 1 mile of the nest than 1 mile from the nest If the activity will be visible 660 feet. Landscape buffers 660 feet, or as close as existing from the nest are recommended. tolerated activity of similar scope. Landscape buffers are recommended. If the activity will not be Category A: 330 feet. 330 feet, or as close as existing visible from the nest Clearing, external tolerated activity of similar construction, and scope. Clearing, external landscaping between 330 feet construction and landscaping and 660 feet should be done within 660 feet should be done outside breeding season. outside breeding season. Category B: 660 feet. The numerical distances shown in the table are the closest the activity should be conducted relative to the nest. Category C. Timber Operations and Forestry Practices • Avoid clear cutting or removal of overstory trees within 330 feet of the nest at any time. • Avoid timber harvesting operations, including road construction and chain saw and yarding operations, during the breeding season within 660 feet of the nest. The distance may be decreased to 330 feet around alternate nests within a particular territory, including nests that were attended during the current breeding season but not used to raise young, after eggs laid in another nest within the territory have hatched. Attachment 4 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company • Selective thinning and other silviculture management practices designed to conserve or enhance habitat, including prescribed burning close to the nest tree, should be undertaken outside the breeding season. Precautions such as raking leaves and woody debris from around the nest tree should be taken to prevent crown fire or fire climbing the nest tree. If it is determined that a burn during the breeding season would be beneficial, then, to ensure that no take or disturbance will occur, these activities should be conducted only when neither adult eagles nor young are present at the nest tree (i.e., at the beginning of, or end of, the breeding season, either before the particular nest is active or after the young have fledged from that nest). Appropriate Federal and state biologists should be consulted before any prescribed burning is conducted during the breeding season. • Avoid construction of log transfer facilities and in-water log storage areas within 330 feet of the nest. Category D. Off-road vehicle use (including snowmobiles). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. During the breeding season, do not operate off-road vehicles within 330 feet of the nest. In open areas, where there is increased visibility and exposure to noise, this distance should be extended to 660 feet. Category E. Motorized Watercraft use (including jet skis/personal watercraft). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. During the breeding season, within 330 feet of the nest, (1) do not operate jet skis (personal watercraft), and (2) avoid concentrations of noisy vessels (e.g., commercial fishing boats and tour boats), except where eagles have demonstrated tolerance for such activity. Other motorized boat traffic passing within 330 feet of the nest should attempt to minimize trips and avoid stopping in the area where feasible, particularly where eagles are unaccustomed to boat traffic. Buffers for airboats should be larger than 330 feet due to the increased noise they generate, combined with their speed, maneuverability, and visibility. Category F. Non-motorized recreation and human entry (e.g., hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, birdwatching, kayaking, canoeing). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. If the activity will be visible or highly audible from the nest, maintain a 330-foot buffer during the breeding season, particularly where eagles are unaccustomed to such activity. Category G. Helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. Except for authorized biologists trained in survey techniques, avoid operating aircraft within 1,000 feet of the nest during the breeding season, except where eagles have demonstrated tolerance for such activity. Category H. Blasting and other loud, intermittent noises. Avoid blasting and other activities that produce extremely loud noises within 1/2 mile of active nests, unless greater tolerance to the activity (or similar activity) has been demonstrated by the eagles in the nesting area. This recommendation applies to the use of fireworks classified by the Federal Department of Transportation as Class B explosives, which includes the larger fireworks that are intended for licensed public display. Attachment 4 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company A TTACHMENT 5 S TAKEHOLDER C ONSULTATION R ECORD Attachment 5 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company On March 7, 2019, the Licensee met via conference call with the Forest Service to begin consultation for reviewing and updating the BEMP as required by Condition No. 35. The Licensee presented a history of bald eagle monitoring and current methods of the 2003 BEMP. In addition, the Licensee presented the schedule to draft a revised BEMP in 2020 with review by the Forest Service, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and plans to continue bald eagle monitoring in 2019–2020. On August 18, 2020, the Licensee met via conference call with the Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW to discuss comments on the draft updated BEMP. The Licensee and agencies discussed agency comments and the review schedule for revisions to the BEMP. The licensee submitted a revised BEMP addressing agency comments to Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW on September 17, 2020. On September 30, 2020, The Licensee received several additional comments from the Forest Service, CDFW, and the USFWS on the September 17, 2020 BEMP revision, and all suggested changes were accepted and incorporated into the final clean copy version. Attachment 5 October 2020 Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 ©2020, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Enclosure 2 PG&E letter dated October 19, 2020 to Forest Service requesting approval of the Plan 245 Market Street tƚǞĻƩ DĻƓĻƩğƷźƚƓ San Francisco, CA 94105 Mailing Address: Mail Code N11D P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 October 19, 2020 Via Electronic Submittal Mr. Christopher Carlton, Forest Supervisor United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Plumas National Forest 159 Lawrence Street Quincy, CA 95971-6025 Attn: Ms. Emily Moghaddas RE: Poe Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2107 Condition No. 35, Bald Eagle Management Plan Request for Approval Dear Mr. Carlton: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is writing to seek your approval of the attached Bald Eagle Management Plan (BEMP or -2107) (Project). The Federal Energy Regulation Commission (FERC) issued a new license for the Project on December 17, 2018 (License). Subsection (a) of Article 401 of the License requires PG&E to submit the final Plan that has been approved by the Forest Supervisor of the Plumas National Forest (Forest Service) for FERC approval within two years of License issuance. The approved Plan is due to FERC by December 17, 2020. Accordingly, PG&E respectfully requests your approval no later than December 1, 2020. The attached BEMP, as described in the Plan, revises an earlier BEMP to comply with Forest Service 4(e) Condition No. 35. The BEMP was developed in consultation with the Forest Service, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me at (415) 973-7410. Sincerely, Steven J. Bauman, P.E. Sr. Relicensing Project Manager Attachment Bald Eagle Management Plan cc: via email Amy Lind (Forest Service) Emily Moghaddas (Forest Service) Aondrea Bartoo (USFWS) Sarah Lose (CDFW)