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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2 Figure 1. Location of Middle Fork American River Hydroelectric Project (Source: PCWA, 2011a, as modified by staff).
20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012 be best adapted to a comprehensive plan for improving or developing a waterway. In addition to the power and developmental purposes for which licenses are issued (such as flood control, irrigation, or water supply), the Commission must give equal consideration to the purposes of: (1) energy conservation; (2) the protection of, mitigation of damage to, and enhancement of fish and wildlife resources; (3) the protection of recreational opportunities; and (4) the preservation of other aspects of environmental quality. Issuing a new license for the Middle Fork Project would allow PCWA to continue generating electricity for the term of a new license, making electrical power from a renewable resource available to its customers. This draft environmental impact statement (EIS) assesses the effects associated with operation of the project and alternatives to the proposed project. It also includes recommendations to the Commission on whether to issue a new license, and if so, includes the recommended terms and conditions to become a part of any license issued. In this draft EIS, we assess the environmental and economic effects of continuing to operate the project: (1) as proposed by the applicant, (2) as specified in Alternative 1, a complete project alternative, and (3) with our recommended measures. We also consider the effects of the no-action alternative. Important issues that are addressed include: establishing sediment management activities that enhance aquatic and riparian habitat while minimizing adverse effects; establishing flow regimes in project bypassed and peaking reaches that protect and enhance aquatic resources and, in the peaking reach, whitewater boating opportunities; protecting environmental resources when conducting vegetation management and noxious weed control; striking an equitable balance of recreational enhancements; and protecting cultural resources. 1.2.2 Need for Power The Middle Fork Project provides hydroelectric generation to meet part of the state of California’s power requirements, as well as its resource diversity and capacity needs. The proposed project would have an authorized installed capacity of 223,753 kW and generate approximately 933,918 MWh per year (letter from A. Fecko, Resource Planning Administrator, PCWA, to K.D. Bose, Secretary, FERC, filed June 15, 2011). The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) annually forecasts electrical supply and demand nationally and regionally for a 10-year period. The Middle Fork Project is located in the California-North subregion of the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) region of the NERC. According to NERC’s 2011 forecast, summer total internal demand for the California-North subregion is projected to grow at an annual rate of 1.35 percent from 2011 through 2021 (NERC, 2011). NERC projects summer and winter resource capacity margins (generating capacity in excess of demand) will not fall below target margins throughout the 2011-2021 period. WECC’s projections of capacity margin through the 2012 to 2020 period anticipate additional capacity resources will come on line in the California-North subregion as follows: 3
Page 1 and 2: 20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 31: 20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 71 and 72: 41 Table 3.3.1-1. Average number of
Page 73 and 74: 43 Site/Release Location Gravel Ini
Page 75 and 76: 45 a Q 1 - TSR, Table G-1 (PCWA, 20
Page 83 and 84:
20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
69 Table 3.3.2-3. Hydrology for sel
Page 101 and 102:
71 Exceedances and Summary Statisti
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
91 Figure 3.3.2-6. Fish passage bar
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
105 Location American River below M
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
135 Species Name Status a Butte Cou
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
145 Table 3.3.3-5. Special-status w
Page 177 and 178:
147 Species Name Status Habitat Occ
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
195 Figure 3.3.5-1. French Meadows
Page 227 and 228:
197 Figure 3.3.5-3. Long Canyon, re
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
253 Table 3.3.6-1. Archaeological a
Page 285 and 286:
255 Resource Number Type a Descript
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
275 Table 4-2. Summary of annual co
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
279 Enhancement/Mitigation Measures
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
303 c Base 2010 costs were provided
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
307 Resource No-Action Alternative
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
319 Table 5-2. Staff-recommended mi
Page 351 and 352:
321 Location Middle Fork American R
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
A-1
Page 405 and 406:
A-3
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419:
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?