` Refer to: FERC # P-12496 / WCR-2018-10409
`
`
`March 13, 2019
`
`
`
`Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
`Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
`888 First Street, NE
`Washington, D.C. 20426
`
`Re: Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Letter of Concurrence for the Proposed Lassen
`Lodge Hydroelectric Project (P-12496), located on the South Fork Battle Creek, California.
`
`
`Dear Secretary Bose:
`
`On February 4, 2019, NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) received a request for
`written concurrence from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) (FERC 2019) that
`the issuance of a new license for Rugraw, LLC’s (Rugraw) proposed Lassen Lodge
`Hydroelectric Project (P-12496) (Project) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect
`threatened or endangered anadromous fish and their critical habitats designated under the
`Endangered Species Act (ESA). FERC’s request (2019) was in response to both Rugraw (2018)
`and NMFS (2018) letters that included proposed actions, such as monitoring and operational
`components, agreeable to Rugraw and NMFS.
`
`This response to your request was prepared by NMFS pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA,
`implementing regulations at 50 CFR 402, and agency guidance for preparation of letters of
`concurrence. This letter underwent pre-dissemination review using standards for utility, integrity,
`and objectivity in compliance with applicable guidelines issued under the Data Quality Act
`(section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001,
`Public Law 106-554). The concurrence letter will be available on-line through NMFS Public
`Consultation Tracking System. A complete record of this consultation is on file at the NMFS
`California Central Valley Office in Sacramento, California.
`
`Proposed Action
`
`As described in FERC’s Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (FERC 2018), Rugraw
`(2018), and FERC (2019), FERC proposes issuing a new license for the proposed Project that
`includes license terms and conditions guiding the construction, anadromous fish monitoring and
`reporting, and operations of the proposed Project.
`
`
`
`
`

`

`2
`
`Project Description and Proposed Facilities
`The proposed Project would generate approximately 24,936 megawatt-hours of electricity
`annually and include the following new facilities: (1) an 8-foot-high, 63-foot-long, diversion
`dam located at river mile (RM) 23 of South Fork Battle Creek, with three 8-by-8-foot pneumatic
`gates with a sill elevation of 4,302 feet mean sea level (msl); (2) a 0.4-acre reservoir at a normal
`pool elevation of 4,310 feet msl; (3) an enclosed 17-foot by 25-foot concrete intake structure
`with two 5-foot by 12-foot trash racks; (4) a 20-foot by 59-foot control/fish screen structure
`attached to the intake; (5) a 48-inch-diameter, 7,565-foot-long, low-pressure pipeline and a 36-
`inch-diameter, 5,230-foot-long, high-pressure penstock; (6) a 50-foot by 51-foot powerhouse
`containing a single Pelton-type turbine and generator with an installed capacity of 5.0 MW; (7) a
`buried concrete box culvert discharging back to South Fork Battle Creek; and (8) transmission
`facilities.
`
`The Project would bypass approximately 2.4 RM of South Fork Battle Creek (bypassed reach).
`The Project’s bypassed reach (RM 20.6-23.0) has two subreaches: subreach 1, from the
`Powerhouse tailrace (RM 20.6) upstream to Angel Falls (RM 22.3) and subreach 2, from Angel
`Falls (RM 22.3) upstream to the Project’s Diversion Dam (RM 23.0). To transmit power from
`the generator, an underground conduit would be built to a new substation located about 500 feet
`away. Rugraw would connect the Project to the grid by constructing a 12-mile-long, 60-kilovolt
`transmission line and a new switchyard adjacent to Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s existing
`60-kilovolt Volta-South transmission line. No recreation facilities are proposed.
`
`Project Operation
`Rugraw proposes to operate the Project in a run-of-river mode, maintaining the water surface
`elevation within +/- 0.5 inch of the normal pool elevation. Rugraw proposes to release a
`minimum instream flow (MIF) of 13 cubic feet per second (cfs) into the bypassed reach. Because
`the minimum hydraulic capacity of the Project’s turbine would be 5 cfs, river inflows less than
`18 cfs (minimum flow plus minimum hydraulic capacity of the turbine) would not be diverted to
`operate the Project and instead would be released downstream into the bypassed reach. Rugraw
`would divert flows of 18 cfs and above for generation, up to the turbine’s maximum hydraulic
`capacity of 105 cfs, while maintaining the 13 cfs MIF into the bypassed reach. River inflows
`greater than 118 cfs (minimum flow plus maximum hydraulic capacity of the turbine) would be
`released downstream into the bypassed reach. The Project would be shut down once river flows
`reached about 418 cfs.
`
`FERC (2018), Rugraw (2018), and FERC (2019) discussed license terms for the construction and
`operations of the proposed Project that supports FERC’s not likely to adversely affect
`determination, which Rugraw agreed to implement. Construction effects would be short-term,
`localized, and minimized by the use of erosion control measures and appropriate best
`management practices. The main Project operations terms for protecting ESA-listed fish and
`their designated critical habitats would be the proposed MIF of 13 cfs year-round, anadromous
`fish monitoring and reporting, and criteria for Project shut-down. The Project would not operate
`if inflow to the diversion was less than 18 cfs or water temperature in Subreach 1 was greater
`than 20°C based on real-time monitoring. Thus, when not operating, all flow would be restored
`to the bypassed reach. Additionally, the FEIS license terms included passing large woody debris
`over the dam and periodic sluicing of accumulated sediments and gravels downstream.
`
`

`

`3
`
`
`Action Area
`
`The action area includes Subreach 1 of the proposed Project’s 2.4 river mile (RM) bypassed
`reach. Subreach 1 is from the proposed powerhouse tailrace (RM 20.6) 1.7 RM upstream to
`Angel Falls (RM 22.3), which is the limit of anadromy and designated critical habitat for CV
`spring-run Chinook salmon and CCV steelhead. Subreach 2 is from Angel Falls (RM 22.3) 0.7
`RM upstream to the proposed diversion (RM 23.0).
`
`Although listed fish do not currently occupy the action area due to non-Project dams
`downstream, the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project (BCSSRP) includes fish
`passage components, which are expected to result in the likelihood of listed fish ranging up to
`Angel Falls within the term of the new License (USBR et. al., 2004; USBR 2014; NMFS 2018).
`
`FERC’s ESA-Effects Determinations
`
`FERC determined the proposed Project facilities and operations may affect, but are not likely to
`adversely affect the following distinct population segment (DPS) and evolutionarily significant
`units (ESU) of ESA-listed anadromous species and their critical habitats:
`
`California Central Valley (CCV) steelhead DPS (O. mykiss) (Threatened / 71 FR 834,
`January 5, 2006) (Critical Habitat / 70 FR 52488, September 2, 2005).
`
`CV spring-run Chinook salmon ESU (O. tshawytscha) (Threatened / 64 FR 50394,
`September 16, 1999) (Critical Habitat / 70 FR 52488, September 2, 2005).
`
`FERC determined the proposed Project was not likely to adversely affect the two listed species
`and their designated critical habitats noted above based on construction timing occurring prior to
`completion of the BCSSRP, and based on measures and terms Rugraw (2018) agreed to
`incorporate into their operation plans.
`
`Pre-consultation Background and Consultation History
`
`The Applicant files Final License Application (FLA).
`April 17, 2014.
`NMFS files comments on FLA.
`June 12, 2014.
`September 11, 2014. The Applicant flies Amended FLA.
`April 25, 2016.
`FERC issues Ready for Environmental Analysis (REA) Notice.
`June 25, 2016.
`NMFS files Preliminary Terms in response to FERC REA Notice.
`December 4, 2017.
`FERC issues Draft EIS (DEIS).
`December 5, 2017. NMFS receives FERC’s first Request for Concurrence with ESA-effects
`determinations.
`NMFS files first ESA non-concurrence letter.
`NMFS files comments on DEIS.
`The Applicant files comments on DEIS.
`FERC issues FEIS.
`
`April 4, 2017.
`January 31, 2018.
`February 2, 2018.
`July 25, 2018.
`
`

`

`4
`
`July 30, 2018.
`
`August 16, 2018.
`
`NMFS receives FERC’s second Request for Concurrence with ESA-
`effects determinations.
`NMFS requests more information regarding FERC’s ESA-effects
`determinations.
`September 5, 2018. The Applicant files revised proposed actions containing terms mutually
`agreeable to the Applicant and NMFS.
`NMFS files non-concurrence letter to FERC: “Endangered Species Act
`Section 7(a)(2) Technical Assistance for the Proposed Lassen Lodge
`Hydroelectric Project (P-12496), located on the South Fork Battle Creek,
`California.”
`FERC requested concurrence on that the Project may affect but is not
`likely to adversely affect listed species and critical habitat.
`February 14, 2019. NMFS initiates consultation.
`
`
`October 4, 2018.
`
`February 4, 2019.
`
`ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
`
`
`Effects of the Action on Listed Species and Critical Habitat
`
`The definitions and standards for arriving at determinations are different under NEPA and the
`ESA. Under the ESA, “effects of the action” means the direct and indirect effects of an action on
`the listed species or critical habitat, together with the effects of other activities that are
`interrelated or interdependent with that action (50 CFR 402.02). The applicable standard to find
`that a proposed action is not likely to adversely affect listed species or critical habitat is that all
`of the effects of the action are expected to be discountable, insignificant, or completely
`beneficial. Beneficial effects are contemporaneous positive effects without any adverse effects to
`the species or critical habitat. Insignificant effects relate to the size of the impact and should
`never reach the scale where take occurs. Discountable effects are those extremely unlikely to
`occur. Thus, FERC (2018; 2019) determined that the Project’s operations would not adversely
`affect the various critical habitat PBFs in a manner likely to appreciably diminish or preclude
`the role of that critical habitat in the recovery of these two ESA-listed species.
`
`Appendix B of the FEIS contained a separate assessment for the PBFs of the critical habitats of
`CV spring-run Chinook salmon and CCV steelhead. Appendix B noted that the current condition
`of most of the PBFs for these species’ critical habitats are either not properly functioning or are
`severely impaired. NMFS (2018) agrees with FERC (2018; 2019) and Rugraw (2019). In
`addition, the FEIS noted, that the13 cfs MIF would be 1.6 to 4.3 times higher than the average
`MIF for July to January (3-8 cfs) and expects the 13 cfs supports resident O. mykiss within the
`entire bypassed reach, depending on water year. Appendix B, Rugraw (2018), and FERC (2019)
`also noted that the 13 cfs MIF and other terms regarding the Project’s operations would not
`substantially alter the existing PBFs, therefore resulting in insignificant effects to designated
`critical habitat. The proposed Project’s construction and operations are not expected to
`adversely affect listed CV spring-run Chinook salmon, CCV steelhead, and their designated
`critical habitats in the action area.
`
`
`

`

`5
`
`Conclusion
`
`Based on our analysis and review of NMFS (2018), FERC (2018; 2019), and Rugraw (2018),
`NMFS concurs with FERC that the proposed action may affect but is not likely to adversely
`affect CV spring-run Chinook salmon, CCV steelhead, and their designated critical habitats.
`
`Reinitiation of Consultation
`
`Reinitiation of consultation is required and shall be requested by FERC or by NMFS, where
`discretionary Federal involvement or control over the action has been retained or is authorized by
`law and (1) new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species or critical
`habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; (2) the identified action is
`subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed species or critical habitat
`that was not considered in this concurrence letter; or if (3) a new species is listed or critical
`habitat designated that may be affected by the identified action (50 CFR 402.16). This concludes
`the ESA portion of this consultation.
`
`If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact William Foster, at 916-930-3617,
`or William.Foster@noaa.gov.
`
`
`Sincerely,
`
`
`Steve Edmondson
`FERC Branch Supervisor
`West Coast Region
`
`
`Enclosure
`
`FERC Service List P-12496
`cc:
`File: Admin. Record # 151422-WCR2018-SA00415
`
`
`
`

`

`6
`
`References
`
`Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 2018. Final Environmental Impact Statement
`for the Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project (P-12496). FERC, Washington D.C.
`July 25, 2018.
`
`FERC. 2019. Letter from Timothy Konnert (FERC) to Maria Rea (NMFS) Re: “Request for
`National Marine Fisheries Service’s Concurrence” for the Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric
`Project (P-12496). FERC, Washington D.C. February 4, 2019.
`
`
`Federal Register Notice (FR). 1993. Notice, 58 FR 33212. June 16, 1993. Endangered and
`Threatened Species: Designated Critical Habitat; Sacramento River winter-run Chinook
`salmon. Final Rule.
`
`
`FR.1994. Notice, 59 FR 440, January 4, 1994. Endangered and Threatened Species: Status of
`Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon. Final Rule.
`
`
`FR. 1999. Notice, 64 FR 50394, September 16, 1999. Endangered and Threatened Species:
`Threatened Status for Two Chinook Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units in California.
`Final Rule.
`
`
`FR. 2005. Notice, 70 FR 52488, September 2, 2005. Endangered and Threatened Species:
`Designation of Critical Habitat for Seven Evolutionarily Significant Units of Pacific Salmon
`and Steelhead in California. Final Rule.
`
`
`FR. 2006. Notice, 71 FR 834, January 5, 2006. Endangered and Threatened Species: Final
`Listing Determinations for 10 Distinct Population Segments of West Coast Steelhead. Final
`Rule.
`
`
`National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2018. Letter from Steve Edmondson (NMFS) to
`Secretary Bose (FERC), Re: “Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Technical Assistance
`for the Proposed Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project (P-12496), located on the South Fork
`Battle Creek, California.” NMFS, West Coast Region, Sacramento, CA. October 4, 2018.
`
`
`Rugraw, LLC (Rugraw/Applicant). 2014. Amended Final License Application for the Proposed
`Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project P-12496-002. Rugraw, LLC, Tiburon,
`CA. September 11, 2014.
`
`
`Rugraw. 2018. Letter from Rugraw to Secretary Bose (FERC), Re: “NMFS Post Final
`Environmental Impact Statement Consultation with Applicant for the Lassen Lodge
`Hydroelectric Project, FERC P-12496-002 (Applicant Revised Proposed Actions A & B).
`Rugraw, LLC, Tiburon, CA. September 5, 2018.
`
`
`U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), NMFS, USFWS, CDFG, and Pacific Gas and Electric
`Company, Inc. 2004. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project (BCSSRP)
`Draft Adaptive Management Plan (AMP). Prepared by Terraqua, Inc. April 2004.
`
`
`USBR. 2014. USBR’s website: The Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project
`(BCSSRP). http://www.usbr.gov/mp/battlecreek/index.html.
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
`FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
`
`
`
`Enclosure A
`
`Lassen Lodge, LLC
`Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project
`South Fork Battle Creek
`
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`Project No. P-12496-002
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
` I
`
` hereby certify that I have this day served, by first class mail or electronic mail, a letter to
`
`Secretary Bose of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) containing the U.S.
`
`Department of Commerce’s, NOAA Fisheries, West Coast Region’s Letter of Concurrence
`
`regarding FERC’s ESA-effects determinations for the proposed Project for the above-captioned
`
`proceeding, and this Certificate of Service upon each person designated on the official service
`
`list compiled by FERC in the above-captioned proceeding.
`
`Dated this 13th day of March 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`