SMITH MOUNTAIN HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT P2210

1
SMITH MOUNTAIN HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTP-2210
2
Meeting Protocols

• Registration Form
• Court Reporter
• Parking Lot Issues
• Media

3
Scoping Purpose

• Initiate scoping of issues
• Review and discuss existing conditions and
  resource management objectives
• Review and discuss existing information and make
  a preliminary determination of information and
  study needs
• Review, discuss, and finalize the process plan
• Discuss cooperating agency status

4
Integrated Licensing Process (ILP) for Smith
Mountain

• On October 25, 2004, Appalachian Power Company
  filed a Notice of Intent (NOI) to use the ILP
• Pre-Application Document for the Smith Mountain
  Project filed in conjunction with the NOI

5
Integrated Licensing Process Benefits

• Improves process timeliness and efficiency by
  requiring
• Pre-Application Document (PAD)
• Early FERC staff involvement
• Early NEPA Scoping
• Process plan schedule
• Early study plan development informal/formal
  dispute resolution

6
Smith Mountain Hydroelectric Project
(P-2210-108)Overview of the Process Plan
7
Pre-Filing ILP Activities for Smith Mountain
Proposed Study Plan
Comments on SD1/PAD and Study Request Due March
1, 2005
Scoping meeting January 26 27, 2005
Study Plan Development
Final Study Plan
Scoping/PAD/NOI Notice Dec. 27, 2004
Scoping
NOI/ PAD
Conduct Studies - Develop Environmental Measures
8
Study Request Criteria

• Describe goals and objectives of study proposal
• Explain relevant resource management goals
• Describe any existing information
• Explain relevant public interest if requester is
  not a resource agency
• Nexus to project operations and effects and how
  study results would inform development of license
  requirements
• Methodology consistent with accepted practice
• Consideration of level of effort and cost and why
  alternative studies would not suffice

9
Pre-Filing ILP Activities
Proposed Study Plan (PSP) Due April 15, 2005
PSP meeting - May 15, 2005 Informal Dispute
Resolution
PSP Comments Due July 14, 2005
Study Plan Development

Commission approves SP September 12, 2005
Final Study Plan


NOI
Formal DR if needed
10
Pre-Filing ILP Activities
Proposed Study Plan
Final Study Plan
Conduct Studies Develop Environmental Measures
NOI
PLP Due by November 2, 2005
Final Study Report Due by September 12, 2007
Application
11
Preliminary Licensing Proposal

• Preliminary Licensing Proposal due 150 days prior
  to license application due date (no later than
  November 2, 2007)
• Existing and proposed facilities, operation, and
  environmental measures
• Draft environmental analysis
• Draft license application optional
• Draft BA (if necessary) and Historic Properties
  Management Plan
• Comments on proposal due within 90 days

12
Post-Filing Activities
Application - Due by March 31, 2008
Tendering Notice April 2008
Acceptance Notice and REA - May 2008
Comments/Conditions/Interventions - July 2008
VDEQ issues 401 WQC Nov. 2008
EA Issued Nov. 2008
EA Comments Due Jan. 2009
Modified Conditions - March 2009
License Order
13
Resource Issues

• Geology and Soils
• Water Resources
• Aquatic and Fisheries Resources
• Terrestrial Resources
• Recreation Resources
• Land Use and Aesthetics
• Archaeological and Historic Resources
• Developmental Resources

14
Geology and Soils

• Effects of continued project operation on lake
  shoreline erosion, as well as erosion along the
  Roanoke River

15
Water Resources

• Project compliance with state water quality
  standards
• Effects of project operations on water quality in
  the lakes, as well as upstream of and downstream
  from the project
• Effects of any construction activities on water
  quality in the project area
• Assess the need for water quality monitoring in
  the project area

16
Water Resourcescont.

• Water allocation and the effect of project
  operations on existing and any proposed future
  water withdrawals
• Effects of continued project operation on drought
  management
• Effects of continued project operation on flood
  control

17
Aquatic Fisheries Resources

• Effects of low dissolved oxygen on aquatic
  resources in the lakes and river
• Effects of lake level management on fish
  populations and other aquatic organisms that
  inhabit the drawdown zone
• Effects of any construction activities on fishery
  resources in the project area

18
Aquatic Fisheries Resourcescont.

• Effects of continued project operation and
  existing minimum flows on aquatic habitat and
  populations of fish other aquatic organisms in
  the Roanoke River
• Effects of any flow fluctuations caused by
  auto-cycling on aquatic resources in the Roanoke
  River, and describe any potential benefits
  associated with ramping rates or changes in flow
  releases

19
Aquatic Fisheries Resourcescont.

• Effects of project operations of fish entrainment
  and impingement, and effects on lake fisheries
• Effects of potential environmental enhancement
  measures at the project to improve diadromous
  fish movement and/or passage

20
Aquatic Fisheries Resourcescont.

• Effects of continued project operation on fish
  movement and aquatic habitat in the Roanoke
  River, and the overall fish restoration efforts
  in the basin
• Effects of continued project operation on any
  threatened and endangered species, including the
  Roanoke logperch

21
Terrestrial Resources

• Effects of continued project operation on
  riparian and aquatic vegetation, and any
  associated wildlife in the project area
• Effects of continued project operation on
  vegetation and wildlife associated with
  constructing any new recreation and other
  facilities at the project

22
Recreation

• Adequacy of existing public access and
  recreational facilities in the project boundary
  to meet current and future recreation demand
• Effects of continued project operation on boating
  opportunities and recreational use at the project
• Effects of continued project operation and
  minimum flow releases on recreation

23
Recreationcont.

• Effectiveness of the existing public safety
  programs in maintaining a safe recreational
  environment in the project area

24
Land Use Aesthetics

• Effectiveness of the SMP in protecting and/or
  improving management of in-water development,
  sensitive habitat areas, and shoreline erosion
• Effectiveness of SMP in creating a buffer between
  incompatible uses and in protecting natural and
  cultural resources

25
Land Use Aestheticscont.

• Adequacy of the existing program and review
  process for determining and preventing any
  adverse aesthetic affect on permitted shoreline
  uses
• Effects of continued project operation (or
  changes) on aesthetic resources
• Effects of any proposed operational changes and
  other environmental enhancement measures on
  aesthetic resources

26
Archaeological and Historic Resources

• Effects of continued project operation on
  archaeological resources and historic properties

27
Developmental Resources

• Effects of potential operation changes on project
  energy and capacity benefits, and the funding of
  various environmental enhancement measures on the
  cost of project power

28
Information Needs

• Geology and Soils
• Water Resources
• Fish and Aquatic Resources
• Wetlands, Riparian, and Littoral Habitats
• Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species
• Recreation and Land Use
• Cultural Resources

29
Geology and Soils

• Study loss of shoreline areas
• Develop bathymetric maps of the lakes
• Conduct a field review of existing erosion
  conditions along the Roanoke River

30
Water Resources

• Monitor Dissolved oxygen and water temperature in
  project area
• Using existing data, assess effects of project
  operation on the lakes and river
• Evaluate water supply needs using existing
  information
• Determine the safe yield of water from the
  project as part of any flow study

31
Water Resourcescont.

• Assess water level management effects as part of
  any flow study
• Obtain evaluate BMP information
• Investigate any potential relationship between
  Smith Mountain and the Kerr Project, as part of
  any flow study
• Investigate minimum flow discharge protocols as
  part of any flow study

32
Water Resourcescont.

• Develop a drought management plan
• Flood flow assessment for downstream areas
• Consult with Corps on need to modify existing
  Flood Operations Agreement

33
Fish Aquatics

• Conduct an instream flow study (Demonstration
  Flow Assessment)
• Study the potential for fish entrainment at the
  project using table-top methods
• Assess migration needs of various fish species
  using existing information (resource plans)
• Assess effects of water level fluctuations on
  reservoir fisheries as part of flow study

34
Fish Aquaticscont.

• Describe migration patterns of diadromous fish
  and assess the potential effects of fish passage
  at the project

35
Wetlands, Riparian, and Littoral Habitat

• Update existing information with data provided by
  the Tri-County Lake Administrative Commission
• Conduct a field survey of aquatic vegetation for
  Leesville Lake

36
Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species

• Conduct a field survey of the Roanoke River
  (Leesville to Brookneal) for Roanoke logperch

37
Recreation and Land Use

• Determine adequacy of existing public access
  using existing information
• Update existing information and data regarding
  adequacy of existing boat access facilities, and
  assess future needs
• Obtain ownership information for islands and
  perform field survey of existing conditions
• Study debris removal and prevention needs, using
  available data

38
Cultural Resources

• Continue on-going consultation with VDHR and
  Virginia Council on Indians regarding development
  of a Programmatic Agreement

39
Written Comments and Study Requests

• All correspondence must clearly show at the top
  of the first page, Smith Mountain Project,
  P-2210-108.
• Magalie R. Salas, Secretary
• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
• 888 First Street, NE
• Washington, DC 20426
• File comments/study requests by March 1, 2005