FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Project No. 405 ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

20100204-3055 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 02/04/2010 Project No. 405-087 21 all the entities that commented on this study agree that the existing ichthyoplankton data from the early 1980s are not indicative of current conditions. Since the early 1980s, when the most recent ichthyoplankton sampling was conducted, significant changes have occurred as a result of increased minimum flows, more effective upstream fish passage, and the resultant increase in the numbers of shad and river herring returning to the Susquehanna River. Staff agree that the historical icthyoplankton data are not likely to be representative of current conditions and staff recommend that ichthyoplankton sampling be conducted as part of this study. Maryland DNR’s suggestion about how to locate ichthyoplankton sampling sites seems reasonable. Therefore, staff recommend that Exelon conduct ichthyoplankton sampling in 2011 after the radio-telemetry data collected in study 3.5 has been reviewed. 3.22 Shortnose and Atlantic Sturgeon Life History Studies Exelon proposes to evaluate the possible effects of continued operation of the project on shortnose and Atlantic sturgeon using a combination of literature review, analysis of habitat below the dam (study 3.16), documentation of any sturgeon stranding (study 3.8), and deployment of an array of receivers to monitor the river immediately below the dam for sturgeon tagged with acoustic transmitters. Exelon also proposes to conduct informal Endangered Species Act consultation with Commerce after the 2010 study has been completed to determine what, if any, additional studies may be required in 2011. Commerce recommends that the revised study plan be modified to require Exelon to consult with Commerce on the deployment of a second array of receivers near the mouth of the river, in addition to the array that Exelon proposes near the dam. SRBC, Interior, and Fish & Boat Commission state that Exelon should include in the literature review a comparison of Conowingo’s fish passage facilities with other East Coast passage facilities where sturgeon have successfully passed. Interior also recommends that the study area of study 3.16 for sturgeon extend from the dam downstream to at least the mouth of the Susquehanna River and that 2-D modeling be extended to cover this area. The second array of receivers recommended by Commerce is warranted because of the federally listed status of the shortnose sturgeon and the possibility that project operation may affect sturgeon or sturgeon habitat near the mouth of the river. Therefore, staff recommend incorporation of this modification. Staff agree that Exelon’s final report for this study should include a section which compares the Conowingo Project’s fish lift with facilities that have been known to successfully pass either shortnose or Atlantic sturgeon on the East Coast. This
20100204-3055 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 02/04/2010 Project No. 405-087 22 information would be useful for evaluating the need for and feasibility of modifications to the Conowingo fish passage facilities. Staff believe the proposed 3.16 study area (4.5-mile stretch downstream from the dam) is adequate to characterize potential sturgeon spawning habitat suitability for the reach most affected by project operations. If data collected in 2010 indicate that additional habitat surveys are needed (along with the additional 2-D modeling incorporating the survey data), then that work could be conducted in 2011. However, we note that because the depth and wetted width of the river between the proposed downstream boundary of the study area and the mouth of the river becomes increasingly dominated by tidal influence, rather than project outflow, it is not clear at this time that the same 2-D modeling would be appropriate. Therefore, staff do not recommend extending the study area beyond the 4.5-mile reach proposed by Exelon or conducting 2- D modeling at this time. 3.23 Study to Identify Habitat Use Areas for Bald Eagle Interior requests that the Transmission Line Avian Interaction Study proposed for the Muddy Run Project be included in the Conowingo Project study plan. This study was included in the Muddy Run study plan because the transmission lines associated with Muddy Run are primary transmission lines, thus within the project boundary. The transmission lines present at the Conowingo Project are not primary transmission lines and are, therefore, not project features. The Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to primary transmission lines, that is the primary line or lines transmitting power from the project to the point of junction with the distribution system or with the interconnected primary transmission system (FPA section 3(11)). The project does not have any primary transmission lines and the Commission has no authority to require any modifications to the lines to reduce or mitigate any potential adverse effect to avian species (i.e., bald eagle). Moreover, the transmission and distribution lines would continue to transmit and distribute power regardless of whether the Conowingo Project exists or would continue to operate under a new license; therefore, they are independent of the Commission’s action. Thus, staff do not recommend this study for the Conowingo Project. 3.24 Dreissenid Mussel Monitoring Study Exelon proposes to monitor for zebra mussel and quagga mussel veligers (larvae) twice monthly and increase the frequency and intensity of sampling if these species are detected. Maryland DNR, SRBC, and Pennsylvania DEP request that the sentence in section 3.24.2 beginning with “zebra mussel veligers were” be replaced with “zebra mussel
Page 1 and 2: 20100204-3055 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 27: 20100204-3055 FERC PDF (Unofficial)

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Project No. 405 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?