Draft EIS_072312.pdf - Middle Fork American River Project ...

20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012
objectives, standards, and guidelines. In addition, this plan describes how PCWA would
consult and coordinate with the Forest Service when implementing future projects that
have the potential to affect visual resources on NFS lands, including modification of
existing project facilities or the construction of new project facilities. PCWA would
conduct visual condition assessments every 5 years during the term of a new license and
consult with the Forest Service annually to discuss measure implementation. PCWA
would consult with the Forest Service and appropriate land management agencies every 5
years to determine a plan revision is necessary. Alternative 1 (Forest Service condition
no. 40) also specifies implementing this plan.
Our Analysis
The EVC of most of the project facilities are consistent with established visual
quality objectives but some linear features such as dams and powerhouses are not
consistent because they dominate the landscape. Through implementing the Visual
Resource Management Plan, specific project features and facilities would be modified
(e.g., painting, replacing fencing) to make them more consistent with established visual
quality objectives resulting in improved visual quality.
PCWA’s proposed project includes new facilities and incorporates existing
facilities within the project boundary that could be visible components of the project.
These include 6-foot crest gates on Hell Hole dam, gages, communication lines;
photovoltaic poles and powerlines; Hell Hole dam spillway control building and
powerline, an access road to Hell Hole spillway gates, and trails for project access.
Because locations have not been determined for some of the gages, photovoltaic poles
and trails and because PCWA’s proposed development has the potential to affect visual
resources on NFS land, establishing a process to evaluate future activities in consultation
with the Forest Service, as specified in the plan, would ensure new facilities are designed
and constructed to be consistent with agency guidelines.
Regular condition assessments would provide necessary information to determine
whether additional treatments would be necessary to achieve visual quality objectives.
Additionally, regular consultation about the appearance of project facilities could be
included in the agenda of an annual consultation meeting when a broad range of resource
topics are discussed. Revising the plan every 5 years, as specified in the plan, seems
excessively frequent considering: (1) planned development would be thoroughly
reviewed and approved by the Forest Service before implementation; and (2) the plan
already identifies several specific actions that would be implemented. A 10-year period
for plan revision would better reflect the need for revising the plan.
3.4 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the no-action alternative the project would continue to operate as it has in
the past. None of PCWA’s proposed measures or the resource agencies’
recommendations and mandatory conditions would be required. Sediment would
continue to accumulate in the small diversion pools and require periodic removal.
270