OCRed excerpt from ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HYDROPOWER LICENSE, Kern River No. 3 Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2290, California.

Comments must be postmarked no later than November 22, 1996 to be considered. Comments should be directed to:

Forest Supervisor
Attn: Erik Ostly
Sequoia National Forest
900 West Grand Avenue
Porterville, CA 93257-2035

(This transcribed document may contain errors not found in the original document.)

SUMMARY

On December 10, 1991, Southern California Edison Company (Edison) filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) for a new license for the Kern River No. 3 Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 2290 (major project, more than 5 megawatts [MW]) on the North Fork of the Kern River in California.

This Environmental Assessment (EA) analyzes the effects associated with the issuance of a license under the Federal Power Act (FPA) for the Kern River No. 3 Project and recommends terms and conditions to become a part of any new license issued.

After evaluating Edison's proposal and reviewing recommendations from the resource agencies, we considered what, if any, additional mitigation, protection, or enhancement would be necessary and appropriate to include in a new license.

Edison and the resource agencies have entered into a settlement agreement to provide fisheries enhancements in accordance with the Upper Kern Basin Fishery Management Plan. This would be done in lieu of conducting fish entrainment studies and potentially providing screening at the project intake.

Based on our consideration of all developmental and nondevelopmental resource interests related to the project, we recommend the following environmental enhancement measures.

• Develop an erosion control plan.

• Monitor summer water temperatures for 5 years.

• Provide weekly sandbox flushing.

• Provide minimum instream flows of 80 cubic feet per second (cfs) in October; 40 cfs during November through February; 70 cfs in March; 100 cfs in April, May, and June; 130 cfs in July and August; and 100 cfs in September.

• Provide a trust fund to finance fishery enhancement measures.

• Monitor fish populations in the bypassed reach.

• Implement ramping rates of no more than 50 cfs per half hour and limit reductions in flow to no more than 30 percent per half hour.

• Temporarily close the fish ladder.

• Provide supplemental whitewater flows in the bypassed reach from Nay 15 through July 15.

• Construct a simplified, low-impact portage at Fairview Darn.

• Develop and implement a recreation plan providing campground and put-in improvements.

• Paint the project siphon.

• Develop and implement plans for protecting wildlife, visual, and cultural resources and other miscellaneous plans.

Overall, these measures would protect and enhance fish and terrestrial resources, water quality, aesthetics, recreation resources, and socioeconomics in the project area. These measures also limit the environmental effects of project operations.

On December 9, 1991, Edison applied to the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC). The SWRCB issued a WQC on December 9, 1992. Edison submitted a Petition of Reconsideration of the SWRCB decision, and the SWRCB issued a revised Section 401 WQC on September 26, 1995.

The U.S. Forest Service (FS), Sequoia National Forest (SQF), has filed draft final conditions pursuant to Section 4(e) of the FPA. Our analysis does not fully support all of the FS's conditions. However, conditions filed pursuant to Section 4(e) are mandatory and would become part of any license issued. The FS will file its final Section 4(e) conditions after the final EA is issued.

Section 10(j) of the FPA requires the Commission to include license conditions, based on recommendations of federal and state fish and wildlife agencies, for the protection of, mitigation of adverse impacts to, and enhancement of fish and wildlife resources. We have addressed the concerns of the federal and state fish and wildlife agencies and, in some cases, have made alternative recommendations. All fish and wildlife resource issues have been resolved (see section VIII - Recommendations of Fish and Wildlife Agencies).

Based on our independent analysis, we conclude in the EA that issuance of a license with our recommended enhancement measures for the Kern River No. 3 Project would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.