Document ID: FERC-2011-0757-0001
Agency: ferc
Document Type: Notice
Title: Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Okanogan Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County, WA
Posted Date: 2011-05-17T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28506-28621]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11757]

[[Page 28505]]

Vol. 76

Tuesday,

No. 95

May 17, 2011

Part II

Department of Energy

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Okanogan Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County, WA; Notice 
of Availability of Draft Environmental Assessment; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 95 / Tuesday, May 17, 2011 / 
Notices  

[[Page 28506]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Project No. 12569-001]

Okanogan Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County, WA; 
Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission or FERC's) 
regulations, 18 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 380 (Order No. 
486, 52 Federal Register [FR] 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has 
reviewed Okanogan Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County's 
(Okanogan PUD) application for license for the Enloe Hydroelectric 
Project (FERC Project No. 12569), located on the Similkameen River near 
the city of Oroville in Okanogan County, Washington. Part of the 
project would occupy a total of 35.47 acres of federal lands 
administered by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.
    Staff prepared this draft environmental assessment (EA), which 
analyzes the potential environmental effects of relicensing the 
project, and concludes that licensing the project, with appropriate 
environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal 
action that would significantly affect the quality of the human 
environment.
    A copy of the draft EA is available for review at the Commission in 
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site 
at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket 
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to 
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at 
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, 
202-502-8659.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and 
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, 
contact FERC Online Support.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this 
notice. Comments may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web 
site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit 
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, 
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the 
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online 
Support. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, 
documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and 
seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    For further information, contact Kim Nguyen by telephone at (202) 
502-6105, or by e-mail at kim.nguyen@ferc.gov.

    Dated: May 9, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Environmental Assessment for Hydropower License

Enloe Hydroelectric Project--FERC Project No. 12569--Washington

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, 
Division of Hydropower Licensing, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426

[May 2011]

Table of Contents

 
 
 
List of Figures
List of Tables
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Executive Summary
1.0 Introduction
    1.1 Application
    1.2 Purpose of Action and Need for Power
        1.2.1 Purpose of Action
        1.2.2 Need for Power
    1.3 Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
        1.3.1 Federal Power Act
            1.3.1.1 Section 18 Fishway Prescriptions
            1.3.1.2 Section 4(e) Conditions
            1.3.1.3 Section 10(j) Recommendations
        1.3.2 Clean Water Act
        1.3.3 Endangered Species Act
        1.3.4 Coastal Zone Management Act
        1.3.5 National Historic Preservation Act
        1.3.6 Pacific Northwest Power Planning and Conservation Act
        1.3.7 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
    1.4 Public Review and Consultation
        1.4.1 Scoping
        1.4.2 Interventions
        1.4.3 Comments on the License Application
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives
    2.1 No-Action Alternative
    2.2 Applicant's Proposal
        2.2.1 Proposed Project Facilities
        2.2.2 Project Safety
        2.2.3 Proposed Project Operation
        2.2.4 Proposed Environmental Measures
        2.2.5 Modifications to Applicant's Proposal--Mandatory
         Conditions
    2.3 Staff Alternative
    2.4 Staff Alternative With Mandatory Conditions
    2.5 Removal of Existing Hydroelectric Facilities Including Enloe Dam
3.0 Environmental Analysis
    3.1 General Description of the River Basin
    3.2 Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis

[[Page 28507]]

 
        3.2.1 Geographic Scope
        3.2.2 Temporal Scope
    3.3 Proposed Action and Action Alternatives
        3.3.1 Geologic and Soil Resources
            3.3.1.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.1.2 Environmental Effects
        3.3.2 Water Quantity and Quality
            3.3.2.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.2.2 Environmental Effects
            3.3.2.3 Cumulative Effects
        3.3.3 Aquatic Resources
            3.3.3.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.3.2 Environmental Effects
            3.3.3.3 Cumulative Effects
        3.3.4 Terrestrial Resources
            3.3.4.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.4.2 Environmental Effects
        3.3.5 Threatened and Endangered Species
            3.3.5.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.5.2 Environmental Effects
        3.3.6 Recreation and Land Use
            3.3.6.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.6.2 Environmental Effects
        3.3.7 Aesthetic Resources
            3.3.7.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.7.2 Environmental Effects
        3.3.8 Cultural Resources
            3.3.8.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.8.2 Environmental Effects
        3.3.9 Socioeconomics
            3.3.9.1 Affected Environment
            3.3.9.2 Environmental Effects
    3.4 No-Action Alternative
4.0 Developmental Analysis
    4.1 Power and Economic Benefits of the Project
    4.2 Comparison of Alternatives
        4.2.1 No-Action Alternative
        4.2.2 Okanogan PUD's Proposal
        4.2.3 Staff Alternative
    4.3 Cost of Environmental Measures
5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
    5.1 Comparison of Alternatives
    5.2 Comprehensive Development and Recommended Alternative
    5.3 Unavoidable Adverse Effects
    5.4 Fish and Wildlife Agency Recommendations
    5.5 Consistency With Comprehensive Plans
6.0 Finding of No Significant Impact
7.0 Literature Cited
8.0 List of Preparers
 

List of Figures

 
 
 
Figure 1. Location of the Enloe Hydroelectric Project
Figure 2. Daily maximum temperatures at the 2006 monitoring locations
Figure 3. 7-DADMax temperatures in the lower end of the Enloe reservoir
 (RM 9.1) and at the upper end of the reservoir (RM 10.3)
Figure 4. Plunge pool below Similkameen Falls
Figure 5. Recreation facilities in the Enloe Project area
Figure 6. Land ownership in the Enloe Project area
Figure 7. Roads, gates, and spurs in the project area
Figure 8. Location of proposed fencing downstream of Enloe dam
Figure 9. Enloe Project recreation site schematic
Figure 10. Enloe Project area KOPs
Figure 11. KOP 1, Loomis-Oroville Road
Figure 12. KOP 2, overlook from Loomis-Oroville Road approximately 3
 miles north of Oroville
Figure 13. KOP 3, rocks below Enloe dam on the Similkameen River
Figure 14. KOP 4, overlook near Enloe dam
Figure 15. KOP 5, overlook east of Enloe dam, looking south
Figure 16. KOP 6, view from proposed interpretive panel 1,
 looking north
Figure 17. KOP 7, view from interpretive panel 2, looking north
 

List of Tables

 
 
 
Table 1. Major Statutory and Regulatory Requirements for the Enloe
 Hydroelectric Project
Table 2. Summary of Similkameen River Flows at the USGS Nighthawk Gage
 No. 12442500, 1929-2005

[[Page 28508]]

 
Table 3. Similkameen River Water Rights
Table 4. Enloe Reservoir Characteristics at Existing and Proposed
 Operations and Spills
Table 5. Summary of Total Dissolved Gas Measurements Near Enloe Dam From
 May 26-30, 2006
Table 6. Summary of Preliminary Enloe Dam Sediment Trace Metals Results
Table 7. Summary of Preliminary Enloe Dam Sediment Elutriate Results
Table 8. Simulated Average Annual Tailrace Flow for Three Normal and
 Three Wet Water Years
Table 9. Native and Non-Native Fishes in the Similkameen River Based on
 Snorkel Surveys
Table 10. Numbers and Percent Composition of Native and Non-Native
 Fishes in the River Downstream of Enloe Dam Based on Snorkel Surveys
Table 11. Numbers and Percent Composition of Native and Non-Native
 Fishes in the Reservoir Upstream of Enloe Dam
Table 12. Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertebrate Taxa Found in the
 Similkameen River above Enloe Reservoir
Table 13. Proposed Ramping Rates
Table 14. Estimate of User Days by Month for the Project Area
Table 15. Estimate of User Days by Type of Day for the Project Area
Table 17. Land Ownership Within the Proposed Enloe Project Boundary
Table 18. Archaeological and Historic Resources Within or Directly
 Adjacent to the Enloe Project Boundary APE
Table 19. Population Characteristics of the City of Oroville, Okanogan
 County, and Washington
Table 20. Parameters for the Economic Analysis of the Enloe
 Hydroelectric Project
Table 21. Summary of Annual Cost of Alternative Power and Annual Project
 Cost for the Alternatives for the Enloe Hydroelectric Project
Table 22. Cost of Environmental Mitigation and Enhancement Measures
 Considered in Assessing the Environmental Effects of Constructing and
 Operating the Proposed Enloe Hydroelectric Project
Table 23. Summary of Key Differences in the Potential Effects of
 Okanogan PUD's Proposal and the Staff Alternative
Table 24. Fish and Wildlife Agency Recommendations for the Enloe
 Hydroelectric Project
 

Acronyms and Abbreviations

[micro]g microgram
AHS Archaeological and Historical Services
APE area of potential effect
BLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management
BMP best management practice
[deg]C degrees Celsius
cfs cubic feet per second
Colville Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
Commission Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
CSMP Construction Sediment Management Program
Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CRITFC Columbia River Inter-tribal Fish Commission
CRWG Cultural Resources Working Group
CWA Clean Water Act
dB decibel
DO dissolved oxygen
EA environmental assessment
EFH essential fish habitat
Enloe Project or project Enloe Hydroelectric Project
ESCP Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
ESA Endangered Species Act
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FPA Federal Power Act
FTE full-time equivalent
FWS U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
g the acceleration due to gravity (32.2 feet per second\2\)
GWh gigawatt-hour
HAER Historic American Engineering Record
HPMP Historic Properties Management Plan
Interior U.S. Department of the Interior
kg kilogram
kV kilovolt
KOP key observation point
L liter
mg milligram
mm millimeter
Ministry of Environment British Columbia Ministry of Environment
msl mean sea level
MW megawatt
MWh megawatt-hour
National Register National Register of Historic Places
NERC North American Electric Reliability Council
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
Okanogan PUD Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County
Okanogan Shoreline Program Okanogan County's Shoreline Master 
Program
OTID Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District
PA Programmatic Agreement
Park Service National Park Service
Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
RM river mile
SCORP State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan
SD1 Scoping Document 1
SD2 Scoping Document 2
Scenic Trail Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trail
State Parks Commission Washington State Parks and Recreation 
Commission
TCP traditional cultural property
TDG total dissolved gas
TMDL total maximum daily load
UCR Upper Columbia River
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
Vegetation Plan Vegetation Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
Washington DFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Washington DNR Washington Department of Natural Resources
Washington DOE Washington Department of Ecology
Washington PC Washington Parks Commission
Washington RCO Washington Recreation and Conservation Office
Washington SHPO State Historic Preservation Office
Water Trail Committee Greater Columbia Water Trail Steering 
Committee
WSMA Washington State's Shoreline Management Act of 1971

Executive Summary

Proposed Action

    On August 22, 2008, the Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan 
County, Washington (Okanogan PUD) filed an application seeking a 
license with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or 
FERC) for the proposed 9.0-megawatt (MW) Enloe Hydroelectric Project 
(Enloe Project or project) to be located on the Similkameen River near 
Oroville in Okanogan County, Washington. The project would occupy 35.47 
acres of federal lands administered by U.S. Bureau of Land Management 
(BLM).

Project Description and Proposed Facilities

    The Enloe dam and development was originally constructed for 
hydroelectric generation between 1919 and 1923. The project operated 
from 1923 to 1958 when it was decommissioned. The original project 
included an intake, penstock, and powerhouse located 850 feet 
downstream of the dam on the west bank of the Similkameen River. On 
September 13, 1996, the Commission issued an order to Okanogan PUD to 
redevelop the Enloe Project using the existing dam and rehabilitating 
the original intake, penstock, and powerhouse. However, on February 23, 
2000, that order was rescinded.
    Okanogan PUD proposes again to redevelop the Enloe Project by using 
the existing concrete gravity arch dam impounding a 76.6-acre 
reservoir, and constructing a new penstock intake structure and above-
ground steel penstocks carrying flows from the intake to the new 
powerhouse located 370 feet downstream of the dam on the east bank of 
the Similkameen River. The existing

[[Page 28509]]

dam crest elevation of 1,044.3 feet would be increased by installing 
new 5-foot-high crest gates which would increase the reservoir to 
1,049.3 feet elevation and the surface area to 88.3 acres. The 
powerhouse would contain two vertical Kaplan turbine/generator units 
with a total installed capacity of 9.0 MW. The project would also 
include a substation adjacent to the powerhouse, and a 100-foot-long, 
13.2-kilovolt primary transmission line connecting the substation to an 
existing distribution line. The project would also include about 1.5 
miles of new and upgraded access roads. The Enloe Project would operate 
automatically in a run-of-river mode, with a normal operating water 
level of the reservoir between 1,048.3 and 1,049.3 feet mean sea level.

Proposed Environmental Measures

    Okanogan PUD proposes the following environmental measures to 
protect, mitigate, and enhance water quality, aquatic, terrestrial, 
recreation, aesthetic, and cultural resources during construction and 
operation of the project.
    During construction:
     Implement a Construction Sediment Management Program 
(CSMP), an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP), and a Spill Plan;
     Implement a Blasting Plan;
     Employ best management practices (BMPs) including flagging 
and fencing wetland areas;
     Provide biological monitoring;
     Implement a Noxious Weed Control Program;
     Survey disposal sites and control noxious weeds prior to 
spoil disposal;
     Revegetate spoil disposal sites;
     Schedule construction activities in the summer and early 
fall to minimize effects on overwintering birds and bald eagles;
     Conduct pre-disposal site surveys for wildlife and 
schedule vegetation clearing to avoid wildlife conflicts;
     Survey for Ute ladies-tresses prior to, during, and 
postconstruction to identify locations and avoid effects;
     Monitor and avoid known archaeological sites listed in the 
National Register of Historic Places (National Register) during 
construction of project facilities; and
     Develop and implement a Safety During Construction Plan 
and limit public access.
    During project operation:
     For water quality:
    [cir] Design and place the intake structure and channel to minimize 
sediment transport;
    [cir] Place the powerhouse tailrace below Similkameen Falls so that 
it discharges to and circulates water in the plunge pool downstream of 
the falls, preventing stagnation and consequently water quality 
degradation of the pool habitat;
    [cir] Provide aeration in the powerhouse draft tubes to maintain 
dissolved oxygen (DO) levels; and
    [cir] Monitor water quality, including water temperatures, DO, and 
total dissolved gases (TDG) in the tailrace for a five-year period.
     For aquatic resources:
    [cir] Ensure that logs and woody debris can pass over the dam and 
transporting large debris off-site if needed;
    [cir] Place two clusters of boulders in the Similkameen River 
upstream of the reservoir to improve mountain whitefish habitat and 
recreational fisheries;
    [cir] Include trashracks with 1-inch bar spacing on the project 
intake(s) so that smaller fish would be able to pass safely through the 
trashrack and larger fish would be discouraged or prevented from 
passing through the trashracks and turbines;
    [cir] Design and place the tailrace to avoid effects on fish;
    [cir] Install and monitor entrainment and mortality of fish at the 
tailrace barrier nets;
    [cir] Operate run-of-river and implementing agency-recommended 
ramping rates downstream of the project during project start-up and 
shut-down;
    [cir] Improve spawning, rearing, and summer thermal refugia 
downstream of the powerhouse tailrace in an existing side channel;
    [cir] Supplement gravel in the river reach downstream of the 
tailrace to increase the amount of gravel in the river downstream of 
Enloe dam and improve spawning habitat;
    [cir] Develop and implement a biological review process including 
the establishment of a Technical Review Group (TRG) comprising agencies 
and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (Colville); and
    [cir] Develop a fish monitoring database for organizing and storing 
monitoring data related to aquatic resources for all proposed studies.
     For terrestrial resources, design the project transmission 
line to minimize effects on raptors and other birds and implement a 
Vegetation Plan that includes:
    [cir] Returning the abandoned shoreline road to natural conditions;
    [cir] Planting riparian vegetation along the abandoned road and 
along and upstream of the east and west banks of the reservoir;
    [cir] Installing grazing control measures;
    [cir] Monitoring restored areas and planting additional willows if 
needed; and
    [cir] Developing an environmental training program to inform 
employees about sensitive habitats.
     For recreation resources, implement a Recreation 
Management Plan that includes:
    [cir] Installing barricades, fencing, and a stock watering tank as 
part of the Fence Plan;
    [cir] Providing public access downstream of Enloe dam on the east 
bank;
    [cir] Transferring ownership rights of the trestle bridge to 
Okanogan County for the development of a future public, non-motorized, 
recreational use trail;
    [cir] Improving the existing informal boat ramp upstream of Enloe 
dam;
    [cir] Restoring the wooded area on the east bank and conducting 
annual cleanup activities of the wooded area and along the Ditch Road;
    [cir] Developing an interpretive publication, including a map 
illustrating public access and recreation sites;
    [cir] Developing interpretive displays by placing an information 
board near Enloe dam; and interpretive signage near the parking, picnic 
area, and near the access bridge to the abandoned powerhouse;
    [cir] Removing existing trash and conducting annual cleanup;
    [cir] Providing parking, picnic tables, primitive campsites, and a 
vault toilet on the east bank upstream of Enloe dam;
    [cir] Maintaining existing signage, safety cables, and grab ropes 
upstream of the dam;
    [cir] Installing safety and warning signs and a log boom across the 
channel to protect boaters; and
    [cir] Coordinating with BLM and other landowners on how to prevent 
public access to the old powerhouse.
     For aesthetic resources, implement an Aesthetics 
Management Plan that includes:
    [cir] Using visually-compatible colors and building materials for 
facilities along the east bank;
    [cir] Consulting with the Colville and other stakeholders regarding 
restoration;
    [cir] Using non-reflective surfaces where possible during 
construction; and
    [cir] Grading and repairing slopes with native plants following 
removal of buildings.
     For cultural resources, finalize a draft May 2009 Historic 
Properties Management Plan (HPMP) that includes:
    [cir] Soliciting for a new owner of the historic Enloe powerhouse, 
and failing that, demolishing the structure and providing interpretive 
signage using visually-compatible colors and building materials for 
facilities along the east bank;
    [cir] Reviewing and reaching agreement on the HPMP and 
incorporating

[[Page 28510]]

information into a Programmatic Agreement (PA);
    [cir] Monitoring effects of shoreline fluctuation on archaeological 
sites in shoreline areas and mitigating, as needed;
    [cir] Determining if there would be effects on archaeological sites 
around project recreation areas; and
    [cir] Developing an inadvertent discovery plan.
    On October 28, 2010, Okanogan PUD filed additional information 
regarding ongoing consultations with Washington Department of Ecology 
(Washington DOE) and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 
(Washington DFW) for the 401 Water Quality Certification process. In 
this filing, Okanogan and Washington DFW and DOE have developed the 
following understanding with regards to the bypassed reach:
     Providing 30 cubic feet per second (cfs) minimum flows 
from mid-July to mid-September, and 10 cfs rest of the year to the pool 
in the bypassed reach;
     Monitoring DO and water temperature in the bypassed reach;
     Initiating an adaptive management program to enhance DO 
and monitor water temperature in the bypassed reach if water quality 
standards are not met;
     Providing downramping rates in the bypassed reach; and
     Determining means and withdrawal location for minimum 
flows released to the bypassed reach.

Alternatives Considered

    This draft environmental assessment (EA) considers the following 
alternatives: (1) No-action--the project would not be constructed and 
there would be no changes or enhancements at the site; (2) Okanogan 
PUD's proposal--as outlined above; and (3) a staff alternative--
Okanogan PUD's proposal with staff's additions and modifications.
    Under the staff alternative, the project would include Okanogan 
PUD's proposed measures, as outlined above, with the exception of 
placing boulder clusters in the project forebay and entrainment and 
resident fish monitoring. In addition, the staff alternative would 
include: (1) A Spoil Disposal Plan; (2) a water quality monitoring plan 
that includes: Selecting water quality monitoring locations, filing of 
reports at the end of year 5, and conducting additional temperature, 
DO, and TGD monitoring beyond the 5-year period, if needed; (3) 
consultation with the TRG prior to implementation of the Blasting Plan, 
the woody debris plan, the proposed side-channel enhancement plan, the 
proposed gravel supplementation program, and the Spill Plan; (4) 
consultation with Interior and Washington DFW during final design of 
the intake structure and trashracks; (5) a project compliance 
monitoring plan; (6) revision of the Vegetation Plan to include filing 
monitoring reports annually for first 5 years and in year 8 and 
providing the Commission, FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW with these 
reports and filing for Commission approval, any proposals for further 
restoration measures; (7) incorporation of the land occupied by the 
side-channel enhancement and length of the project access road from the 
Loomis-Oroville Road to the powerhouse into the project boundary; (8) 
retention of dead trees along the reservoir and provisions for 10 
artificial perch poles; (9) preparation of an Ute ladies'-tresses 
survey plan after consultation with FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW and an 
additional plan to avoid or minimize adverse effects on the Ute 
ladies'-tresses if they are identified in the project areas; (10) 
consultation with stakeholders on the final Recreation Management Plan; 
(11) a plowing schedule for winter months; (12) a recreation use 
monitoring plan developed in consultation with BLM; (13) a fire 
suppression program; (14) removal of the one small, deteriorated 
building on Okanogan PUD land at the north end of the proposed Enloe 
dam recreation area; (15) consultation with BLM and local emergency 
response agencies on the Safety During Construction Plan; (16) creation 
of a river access point at Miner's Flat; (17) consultation with BLM and 
the Colville to develop details on how the facilities and laydown or 
construction areas would blend into the existing landscape; and (18) a 
revised HPMP to include provisions for: Further consideration of the 
potential effects of capping site 45OK532, a description of the 
proposed side-channel enhancement site, two separate defined APEs that 
delineate the proposed Enloe project and the proposed side-channel 
enhancement site, consultation with the Cultural Resources Working 
Group regarding the resolution of adverse effects on the historic Enloe 
powerhouse, re-evaluating the Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation Canal for 
National Register-eligibility, completing determinations of eligibility 
for unidentified cultural resources on BLM lands, periodic review of 
the HPMP, a site monitoring program, cultural interpretative and 
education measures, and revising the APEs to accommodate modifications 
to the project boundary.

Public Involvement and Areas of Concern

    Before filing its license application, Okanogan PUD conducted pre-
filing consultation under the traditional licensing process. The intent 
of the Commission's pre-filing process is to initiate public 
involvement early in the project planning process and encourage 
citizens, governmental entities, tribes, and other interested parties 
to identify and resolve issues prior to an application being formally 
filed with the Commission.
    After the license application was filed, we conducted scoping to 
determine what issues and alternatives should be addressed. On December 
16, 2008, we distributed Scoping Document 1 (SD1) to interested 
parties, soliciting comments, recommendations, and information on the 
project. An environmental site review of the project was held on 
January 15, 2009. Two scoping meetings were held in Oroville, 
Washington, on January 14 and 15, 2009, to receive oral comments on the 
project. Based on discussions during the environmental site review and 
scoping meetings and written comments filed with the Commission, we 
issued a revised scoping document (SD2) on May 7, 2009. On December 28, 
2009, we issued a notice that the application was ready for 
environmental analysis and requested conditions and recommendations.
    The primary issues associated with licensing the project are the 
effects of project construction and operation on geology and soils; 
water quality; aquatic, terrestrial, and cultural resources; threatened 
and endangered species; and recreation, land use, and aesthetic 
resources.

Staff Alternative

Aquatic Resources

    Measures proposed in the ESCP, CSMP, Spill Plan, Blasting Plan, and 
Safety During Construction Plan would help prevent adverse effects from 
erosion and sedimentation that may result from construction and 
operation of the project, and would help prevent adverse effects on 
geology and soils and water quality.
    Run-of-river operation would minimize effects on aquatic resources. 
Locating the tailrace downstream of Similkameen Falls would reduce TDG 
and enhance conditions for aquatic resources in the Similkameen 
downstream of the falls. In addition, designing the tailrace in a 
manner to provide circulation in the pool and aerating the draft tubes 
would ensure

[[Page 28511]]

adequate DO for aquatic resources downstream of Similkameen Falls.
    Providing minimum flows in the bypassed reach would provide some 
refuge for resident fish in the plunge pool downstream of Enloe dam. 
The 1-inch trash rack spacing on the intake trashrack, and installation 
and monitoring of a tailrace net barrier would minimize adverse affects 
on aquatic resources.
    The construction of the side channel, gravel enhancement, riparian 
planting projects, and improved water quality due to reductions in TDG 
and enhanced DO levels are expected to have long-term benefits for 
holding, spawning, and rearing fish, particularly anadromous salmonids, 
and should increase anadromous salmonid productivity in the Similkameen 
River downstream of the project.

Terrestrial Resources

    Measures in the Vegetation Plan, including grazing controls, 
noxious weed control, vegetation monitoring, employing BMPs, providing 
biological monitor during construction, retaining dead trees and 
installing artificial perch poles for bald eagle perching habitat, and 
employee training would prevent adverse effects on riparian and wetland 
areas which provide habitat for wildlife, as well as mitigate for 
adverse effects during construction of the project.

Threatened and Endangered Species

    The Similkameen River below Similkameen Falls is designated 
critical habitat for the threatened UCR steelhead, the only fish 
species known to occur in project affected waters that is listed under 
the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Proposed measures to reduce TDG, 
increase DO through draft tube aeration, supplement spawning gravel, 
transport large woody debris, and construct the side-channel 
enhancements would improve spawning and rearing habitat in the river 
downstream of the falls and increase productivity. The biological 
review process, fisheries monitoring, and ongoing refinement would 
provide long-term benefits for UCR steelhead and UCR steelhead 
designated critical habitat.
    Additional surveys for the threatened Ute ladies'-tresses prior to, 
during, and postconstruction would either confirm that the species does 
not occur in areas affected by the project or guide the development of 
avoidance or mitigative measures. The survey results and filing, with 
the Commission for approval, proposed measures to avoid or mitigate 
impacts to listed species; implementation of the Vegetation Plan, 
including noxious weed control, employing BMPs during construction, 
employee training, and provision of a biological monitor during 
construction would protect potential Ute ladies'-tresses habitat in 
areas affected by the project and at the proposed side channel 
enhancement site.

Recreation and Land Use

    Implementation of the Recreation Management Plan would improve 
existing recreational facilities and opportunities. The Safety During 
Construction Plan, as well as the Fence Plan, would help keep visitors 
to the project away from the construction activities and reduce user 
conflicts between recreationists and cattle grazing activities.
    Inclusion of the entire Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District Ditch 
Road as a project feature and bringing it into the project boundary 
would ensure maintenance of the entire road for the purpose of 
providing public access to the campground, boat launch, picnic areas, 
and access trail to the river below the dam.

Aesthetic Resources

    Okanogan PUD's proposal to use visually-compatible colors and 
building materials, use non-reflective surfaces where possible, and 
consult with the Colville during restoration activities, would provide 
some protection for visual resources. The staff alternative with 
additional recommendations including coordination with stakeholders to 
include specific approaches for blending existing and proposed Enloe 
Project facilities into the existing landscape character; revegetating, 
stabilizing, and landscaping the new construction areas and areas 
immediately adjacent; grading, planting native vegetation, repairing 
slopes damaged by erosion, and preventing future erosion; monitoring 
restored areas; and conducting maintenance activities would provide 
additional protection.

Cultural Resources

    Revising and implementing the May 2009 HPMP, with staff's 
additional measures, would ensure protection of historic properties 
over the license term.

No-Action Alternative

    Under the no-action alternative, environmental conditions would 
remain the same, and no enhancement of environmental resources would 
occur. BLM stated that it would require Okanogan PUD to remove the dam 
and all associated facilities from the public lands under the existing 
right-of-way permit if a license is be issued. We discussed dam removal 
under cumulative effects in section 3.5.

Conclusions

    Based on our analysis, we recommend licensing the project as 
proposed by Okanogan PUD with some staff modifications and additional 
measures.
    In section 4.2 of the EA, we estimate the likely cost of 
alternative power for each of the alternatives identified above. Our 
analysis shows that during the first year of operation under Okanogan 
PUD's proposed alternative, the project would cost $106,470, or $2.40/
megawatt-hours (MWh), less than the likely alternative cost of power. 
Under the staff alternative, the project power would cost $83,920, or 
$1.89/MWh, less than the likely cost of alternative power.
    We chose the staff alternative as the preferred alternative 
because: (1) The project would provide a dependable source of 
electrical energy for the region (44.4 gigawatt-hours annually); (2) 
the project could save an equivalent amount of fossil fuel-fired 
electric generation and capacity, which may help conserve non-renewable 
energy resources and reduce atmospheric pollution, including 
greenhouses gases; and (3) the recommended environmental resources 
proposed by Okanogan PUD, as modified by staff, would adequately 
protect and enhance environmental resources affected by the project. 
The overall benefits of the staff alternative would be worth the cost 
of proposed and recommended environmental measures.
    We conclude that issuing a new license for the project, with the 
environmental measures we recommend, would not be a major federal 
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

Draft Environmental Assessment

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, 
Division of Hydropower Licensing, Washington, DC

Enloe Hydroelectric Project

Project No. 12569-001--Washington

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Application

    On August 22, 2008, the Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan 
County, Washington (Okanogan PUD) filed an application seeking a 
license with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or 
FERC) for the 9.0-megawatt (MW) Enloe Hydroelectric Project (Enloe 
Project or project) located on the Similkameen River at river mile (RM) 
8.8 near the city of Oroville, Okanogan County, Washington (figure

[[Page 28512]]

1). The project would occupy 35.47 acres of federal lands administered 
by U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The project would generate an 
average of 45 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of energy annually.
    Enloe dam was originally constructed for hydroelectric generation 
between 1919 and 1923. The project operated from 1923 to 1958 when it 
was decommissioned. The original project included an intake, penstock, 
and powerhouse located 850 feet downstream of the dam on the west bank 
of the Similkameen River. On September 13, 1996, the Commission issued 
an order to Okanogan PUD to redevelop the Enloe Project using the 
existing dam and rehabilitating the original intake, penstock, and 
powerhouse. However, on February 23, 2000, that order was rescinded.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to again redevelop the Enloe Project by using 
the existing concrete gravity arch dam impounding a 76.6-acre 
reservoir; and constructing new penstock intake structure, and above-
ground steel penstocks carrying flows from the intake to the new 
powerhouse located 370 feet downstream of the dam on the east bank of 
the Similkameen River.

1.2 Purpose of Action and Need for Power

1.2.1 Purpose of Action
    The Commission must decide whether to issue a license to Okanogan 
PUD for the Enloe Project and what conditions should be placed on any 
license issued. In deciding whether to issue a license for a 
hydroelectric project, the Commission must determine that the project 
will 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.
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

[[Page 28513]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.000

BILLING CODE 6717-01-C
    Issuing a license for the Enloe Project would allow the Okanogan 
PUD to generate electricity for the term of the license, making 
electrical power from a renewable resource available to its customers.
    This draft environmental assessment (EA) assesses the effects 
associated with construction and operation of the project and 
alternatives to the proposed project. It also includes recommendations 
to the Commission on whether to issue a license, and if so, includes 
the recommended terms and

[[Page 28514]]

conditions to become a part of any license issued.
    In this draft EA, we assess the environmental and economic effects 
of construction and operation of the project as proposed by Okanogan 
PUD, and with our recommended measures. We also consider the effects of 
the no-action alternative. Important issues that are addressed include 
the protection of geology and soils, water quantity and quality, 
cultural resources, aesthetics resources, and recreation and land use 
during project construction and operation.
1.2.2 Need for Power
    The Enloe Project would provide hydroelectric generation to meet 
part of Okanogan PUD's power requirements, resource diversity, and 
capacity needs. The project would have an installed capacity of 9.0 MW 
and generate approximately 44.4 GWh per year.
    The North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) annually 
forecasts electrical supply and demand nationally and regionally for a 
10-year period. The Enloe Project is located in the Northwest subregion 
of the Western Electricity Coordinating Council region of the NERC. 
According to NERC's 2010 forecast, winter peak demands and annual 
energy requirements for the Northwest subregion are projected to grow 
at rates of 1.1 percent and 1.2 percent, respectively, from 2010 
through 2019 (NERC, 2010). NERC projects resource capacity margins 
(generating capacity in excess of demand) will remain above the target 
reserve margins of 18.6 percent for summer and 20.0 percent for winter 
throughout the 2010-2019 period. Over the next 10 years, WECC estimates 
that about 6,285 MW of additional capacity will be brought on line.
    We conclude that power from the Enloe Project would help meet a 
need for power in the Northwest subregion in both the short and long 
term. The project would provide power that displaces non-renewable, 
fossil-fired generation and contributes to a diversified generation 
mix. Displacing the operation of fossil-fueled facilities may avoid 
some power plant emissions and creates an environmental benefit.

1.3 Statutory and Regulatory Requirements

    A license for the Enloe Project would be subject to numerous 
requirements under the Federal Power Act (FPA) and other applicable 
statutes. We summarize the major regulatory requirements in table 1 and 
describe them below.

   Table 1--Major Statutory and Regulatory Requirements for the Enloe
                          Hydroelectric Project
                             [Source: Staff]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Requirement                 Agency               Status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 18 of the FPA (fishway  NMFS, FWS........  NMFS and FWS filed
 prescriptions).                                    reservations of
                                                    authority on
                                                    February 26, 2010.
Section 4(e) of the FPA (land   Interior.........  No section 4(e)
 management conditions).                            conditions have been
                                                    filed.
Section 10(j) of the FPA......  Washington DFW,    Washington DFW, FWS,
                                 FWS, NMFS.         and NMFS all filed
                                                    section 10(j)
                                                    recommendations on
                                                    February 26, 2010.
Clean Water Act--Water Quality  Washington DOE...  Application for
 Certification.                                     certification was
                                                    received on February
                                                    25, 2011; action on
                                                    the application due
                                                    by February 25,
                                                    2012.
Endangered Species Act          NMFS, FWS........  Commission staff is
 Consultation.                                      initiating formal
                                                    consultation with
                                                    both agencies.
Coastal Zone Management Act     Washington DOE...  By letter dated
 Consistency.                                       September 25, 2009,
                                                    Washington DOE
                                                    waived its
                                                    requirement for
                                                    compliance with its
                                                    Coastal Zone
                                                    Management Program
                                                    for the project.
National Historic Preservation  Advisory Council   The Commission
 Act.                            on Historic        designated Okanogan
                                 Preservation;      PUD as a non-federal
                                 Washington         representative for
                                 Department of      conducting section
                                 Archaeology and    106 consultation on
                                 Historic           September 26, 2005.
                                 Preservation.      Okanogan PUD filed a
                                                    Historic Properties
                                                    Management Plan on
                                                    June 16, 2009.
Pacific Northwest Power         .................  The project is not
 Planning and Conservation Act.                     located within the
                                                    designated protected
                                                    area of the Columbia
                                                    River Basin and
                                                    would be in
                                                    compliance with
                                                    specific provisions
                                                    to be considered in
                                                    the licensing or
                                                    relicensing of non-
                                                    federal hydropower
                                                    projects.
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery        NMFS.............  Licensing the project
 Conservation and Management                        could adversely
 Act.                                               affect Chinook
                                                    salmon essential
                                                    fish habitat.
                                                    Commission staff is
                                                    initiating formal
                                                    consultation with
                                                    NMFS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: 401 WQC--401 Water Quality Certificate
BLM--U.S. Bureau of Land Management
Commission--Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FPA--Federal Power Act
FWS--U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
Interior--U.S. Department of the Interior
NMFS--National Marine Fisheries Service
Okanogan PUD--Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County
Washington DFW--Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Washington DOE--Washington Department of Ecology

1.3.1 Federal Power Act
1.3.1.1 Section 18 Fishway Prescriptions
    Section 18 of the FPA states that the Commission is to require 
construction, operation, and maintenance by a licensee of such fishways 
as may be prescribed by the Secretaries of Commerce or the U.S. 
Department of the Interior (Interior). The National Marine Fisheries 
Service (NMFS) by letter dated February 26, 2010, and the U.S. 
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) by letter 
dated February 26, 2010, request that a reservation of authority to 
prescribe fishways under section 18 be included in any license issued 
for the project.

[[Page 28515]]

1.3.1.2 Section 4(e) Conditions
    Section 4(e) of the FPA provides that any license issued by the 
Commission for a project within a federal reservation shall be subject 
to and contain such conditions as the Secretary of the responsible 
federal land management agency deems necessary for the adequate 
protection and use of the reservation. Interior, on behalf of the U.S. 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), filed recommended terms and conditions 
by letter dated February 26, 2010, and did not prescribe any conditions 
pursuant to section 4(e) of the FPA.
1.3.1.3 Section 10(j) Recommendations
    Under section 10(j) of the FPA, each hydroelectric license issued 
by the Commission must include conditions based on recommendations 
provided by federal and state fish and wildlife agencies for the 
protection, mitigation, or enhancement of fish and wildlife resources 
affected by the project. The Commission is required to include these 
conditions unless it determines that they are inconsistent with the 
purposes and requirements of the FPA or other applicable law. Before 
rejecting or modifying an agency recommendation, the Commission is 
required to attempt to resolve any such inconsistency with the agency, 
giving due weight to the recommendations, expertise, and statutory 
responsibilities of such agency.
    NMFS, FWS, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 
(Washington DFW) all timely filed, on February 26, 2010, 
recommendations under section 10(j), as summarized in table 23, in 
section 5.4, Recommendations of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. In section 
5.4, we also discuss how we address the agency recommendations and 
comply with section 10(j).
1.3.2 Clean Water Act
    Under section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), a license applicant 
must obtain certification from the appropriate state pollution control 
agency verifying compliance with the CWA. On February 24, 2010, 
Okanogan PUD applied to the Washington Department of Ecology 
(Washington DOE) for a 401 Water Quality Certificate (WQC) for the 
Enloe Project. Washington DOE received this request on February 25, 
2010. Washington DOE has not yet acted on the request. Washington DOE 
action is due by February 25, 2011.
    On October 28, 2010, Okanogan PUD filed a status report on its 
negotiations with Washington DOE and Washington DFW regarding possible 
conditions for the WQC for the Enloe Project, and on November 10, 2010, 
it filed supplemental information regarding the basis for the potential 
conditions. In this filing, measures for aquatic resources would 
include:
     A minimum flows of 30 cfs from mid-July to mid-September, 
and 10 cfs rest of the year to the pool below Enloe dam.
     Monitoring water temperature in the bypassed reach for a 
period of time postconstruction; and adopting an adaptive management 
program to enhance DO and water temperatures should monitoring indicate 
that water quality standards are not being met.
     Determining appropriate thresholds for downramping rates 
immediately downstream of Enloe dam based on monitoring and field 
observations prior to operations.
     Selecting an appropriate minimum flow release location in 
consultation with fisheries resource agencies (Washington DOE, 
Washington DFW, Interior, NMFS, BLM, and the Colville), and making 
appropriate project modifications to provide minimum flow releases.
1.3.3 Endangered Species Act
    Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires federal 
agencies to ensure that their actions are not likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of endangered or threatened species or result in 
the destruction or adverse modification of the critical habitat of such 
species. NMFS notified the Commission in its February 26, 2010, filing 
that one ESA-listed threatened species of anadromous fish is known to 
occur in the Similkameen River below Enloe dam: The upper Columbia 
River (UCR) steelhead distinct population segment. Designated critical 
habitat includes the Similkameen River below Similkameen Falls (the 
falls). There is no critical habitat designation upstream of 
Similkameen Falls.
    FWS lists five additional ESA-listed species of fish, wildlife, and 
plants that occur in Okanogan County, Washington, including the bull 
trout (threatened), Canada lynx (threatened), grizzly bear 
(threatened), northern spotted owl (threatened), and Ute ladies'-
tresses (threatened). There is no designated critical habitat for any 
of these species within the Enloe Project boundary. Our analyses of 
project impacts on threatened and endangered species are presented in 
section 3.3.5, Threatened and Endangered Species, and our 
recommendations in section 5.2, Comprehensive Development and 
Recommended Alternative.
    We conclude that licensing the project would have no effect on bull 
trout, Canada lynx, grizzly bear, and northern spotted owl.
    We conclude that licensing the project would adversely affect 
federally listed UCR steelhead because proposed project construction 
and habitat enhancement projects could result in short-term increases 
in turbidity and sedimentation and the risk of injury or mortality to 
eggs, fry, juveniles, or adults by instream use of equipment. 
Construction of the tailrace could result in injury or mortality to 
eggs, fry, juveniles, or adults caused by capture and transport, 
relocation, and blasting. UCR steelhead injury or mortality could 
result from fish swimming into draft tubes and hitting the turbine 
runner during project operation. We conclude, however, that the 
proposed project would not appreciably diminish the value of designated 
UCR steelhead critical habitat for both survival and recovery of this 
species and the proposed enhancement measures would provide some long-
term beneficial effects. Consequently, we will request formal 
consultation with NMFS pursuant to section 7 of the ESA.
    Potential habitat for Ute ladies'-tresses exists along the 
reservoir and in the side channel enhancement area. No populations of 
this species were discovered during Okanogan PUD's rare plant surveys, 
but there are agency concerns about the adequacy of the surveys. If Ute 
ladies'-tresses grows in the habitat identified at the edge of the 
reservoir, operation of the proposed crest gates would inundate the 
population. If this species occurs at the side-channel enhancement 
site, construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed facility 
could adversely affect the plants, but it may be possible to adjust the 
facility's footprint so that the plants are not affected.
    In response to agency recommendations for additional surveys, 
Okanogan PUD proposes to survey areas that could potentially provide 
habitat for Ute ladies'-tresses for an additional 3 years as part of 
its proposed Vegetation Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (Vegetation 
Plan). Thereafter, potential habitat for Ute ladies'-tresses would be 
resurveyed only if site management changes occur that could affect that 
habitat. Okanogan PUD's proposed surveys would either confirm that Ute 
ladies'-tresses does not occur in areas that would be affected by the 
project or would guide the development of avoidance or mitigative 
measures for this species. Therefore, licensing the project with the

[[Page 28516]]

recommended protection, mitigation, and enhancement measures would not 
be likely to adversely affect Ute ladies'-tresses.
1.3.4 Coastal Zone Management Act
    Under section 307(c)(3)(A) of the Coastal Zone Management Act 
(CZMA),\1\ the Commission cannot issue a license for a project within 
or affecting a state's coastal zone unless the state CZMA agency 
concurs with the license applicant's certification of consistency with 
the state's CZMA program, or the agency's concurrence is conclusively 
presumed by its failure to act within 180 days of its receipt of 
Okanogan PUD's certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 1456(c)(3)(A) (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By letter dated September 25, 2009, the Washington DOE waived its 
requirement for compliance with its Coastal Zone Management Program for 
the project. Therefore, no consistency certification is required.
1.3.5 National Historic Preservation Act
    Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 
(NHPA) \2\ and its implementing regulations,\3\ requires that every 
federal agency ``take into account'' how each of its undertakings could 
affect historic properties. Historic properties are districts, sites, 
buildings, structures, traditional cultural properties, and objects 
significant in American history, architecture, engineering, and culture 
that are eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic 
Places (National Register). To meet the requirements of section 106, 
the Commission intends to execute a Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the 
protection of historic properties from the effects of the construction, 
operation, and maintenance of the Enloe Project. The terms of the PA 
would ensure that Okanogan PUD addresses and treats all historic 
properties identified within the project's areas of potential effects 
(APEs) for the proposed project and the side-channel enhancement site 
through implementation of a revised Historic Properties Management Plan 
(HPMP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq. (2006).
    \3\ 36 CFR Part 800 (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.3.6 Pacific Northwest Power Planning and Conservation Act
    Under section 4(h) of the Pacific Northwest Power Planning and 
Conservation Act, the Northwest Power and Conservation Council 
developed the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program to 
protect, mitigate, and enhance the operation of the hydroelectric 
projects within the Columbia River Basin. Section 4(h) states that 
responsible federal and state agencies should provide equitable 
treatment for fish and wildlife resources, in addition to other 
purposes for which hydropower is developed, and that these agencies 
should take into account, to the fullest extent practicable, the 
program adopted under the Pacific Northwest Power Planning and 
Conservation Act.
    The program directs agencies to consult with federal and state fish 
and wildlife agencies, appropriate Indian tribes, and the Council 
during the study, design, construction, and operation of any 
hydroelectric development in the basin.
    To mitigate harm to fish and wildlife resources, the Council has 
adopted specific provisions to be considered in the licensing or 
relicensing of non-federal hydropower projects (appendix B of the 
Program). The specific provisions that apply to the proposed project 
call for: (1) Specific plans for fish facilities prior to construction; 
(2) assurance that the project would not degrade fish habitat or reduce 
numbers of fish; (3) assurance all fish protection measures are fully 
operational at the time the project begins operation; (4) timing 
construction activities, insofar as practical, to reduce adverse 
effects on wintering grounds; and (5) replacing vegetation if natural 
vegetation is disturbed.
    Our recommendations in this EA (sections 2.2 and 2.3) are 
consistent with the applicable provisions of the program, listed above. 
Further, a condition of any license issued would reserve the 
Commission's authority to require future alterations in project 
structures and operations to take into account, to the fullest extent 
practicable, the applicable provisions of the program.
    As part of the Program, the Council has designated more than 40,000 
miles of river (protected area) in the Pacific Northwest region as not 
being suitable for hydroelectric development. The project is not 
located within a protected area.
1.3.7 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
    The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
requires federal agencies to consult with NMFS on all actions that may 
adversely affect essential fish habitat (EFH). The Pacific Fishery 
Management Council manages the fisheries for coho, Chinook, and Puget 
Sound pink salmon and has defined EFH for these three species. Salmon 
EFH includes all those streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and other water 
bodies currently or historically accessible to salmon in Washington, 
except areas upstream of certain impassable human-made barriers 
(Pacific Fisheries Management Council, 2010), and longstanding, 
naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence 
for several hundred years). The historically accessible reaches of the 
Similkameen River (RM 0 to the falls) are EFH for Chinook salmon.
    Based on our analysis in this EA of the proposed action as 
specified in the license application, we conclude that licensing the 
project would be likely to adversely affect EFH for the UCR Chinook 
salmon for the same reasons we conclude that licensing the project 
would adversely affect the UCR steelhead and its designated critical 
habitats (see section 1.3.3, Endangered Species Act). Consequently, we 
will request that NMFS provide any EFH recommendation along with its 
biological opinion regarding listed anadromous fish.

1.4 Public Review and Consultation

    The Commission's regulations (18 CFR, section 4.38) require that 
applicants consult with appropriate resource agencies, tribes, and 
other entities before filing an application for a license. This 
consultation is the first step in complying with the Fish and Wildlife 
Coordination Act, ESA, NHPA, and other federal statutes. Pre-filing 
consultation must be complete and documented according to the 
Commission's regulations.
1.4.1 Scoping
    Before preparing this EA, we conducted scoping to determine what 
issues and alternatives should be addressed. Scoping Document 1 (SD1) 
was issued on December 16, 2008. Two scoping meetings were noticed on 
December 16, 2008, and held on January 14 and 15, 2009, in Oroville, 
Washington. A court reporter recorded all comments and statements made 
at the scoping meetings, and these are part of the Commission's public 
record for the project. In addition to comments provided at the scoping 
meetings, the following entities provided written comments:

[[Page 28517]]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Commenting entity                       Date filed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington DFW......................  February 6, 2009.
National Park Service (Park Service)  February 9, 2009.
Richard Terbasket...................  February 12, 2009.
FWS.................................  February 13, 2009.
BLM.................................  February 17, 2009.
Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish      February 17, 2009.
 Commission (CRITFC).
NMFS................................  February 17, 2009.
Washington DOE......................  February 17, 2009.
U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).  February 17, 2009.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  February 17, 2009.
 (EPA).
Lower Similkameen Indian Band.......  February 20, 2009.
Confederated Tribes of the Colville   February 23, 2009.
 Reservation (Colville).
Arnold N. Merchand..................  February 23, 2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A revised scoping document 2 (SD2), addressing these comments, was 
issued on May 7, 2009.
1.4.2 Interventions
    On October 29, 2008, the Commission issued a notice that Okanogan 
PUD had filed an application for a license for the Enloe Project. This 
notice set December 29, 2008, as the deadline for filing protests and 
motions to intervene. In response to the notice, the following entities 
filed motions to intervene, none in opposition:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Late intervention; no action has been taken on this 
petition.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Intervenor                           Date filed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greater Columbia Water Trail          October 31, 2008.
 Coalition (Water Trail Committee).
American Whitewater.................  November 4, 2008.
Washington Department of Natural      November 26, 2008.
 Resources (Washington DNR).
Washington DFW......................  November 26, 2008.
American Rivers.....................  December 8, 2008.
Washington DOE......................  December 11, 2008.
CRITFC..............................  December 29, 2008.
Interior............................  December 29, 2008.
NMFS................................  December 30, 2008.
Colville \4\........................  April 10, 2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.4.3 Comments on the License Application
    A notice requesting conditions and recommendations was issued on 
December 28, 2009. The following entities commented:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Commenting agency and other entity               Date filed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
British Columbia Ministry of          February 18, 2010.
 Environment (Ministry of
 Environment).
Chloe O'Loughlin, Canadian Parks and  February 24, 2010.
 Wilderness Society--British
 Columbia Chapter.
Colville............................  February 26, 2010.
Interior (including FWS and BLM)....  February 26, 2010.
NMFS................................  February 26, 2010.
Washington DFW......................  February 26, 2010.
American Rivers, American             February 26, 2010.
 Whitewater, the Center for
 Environmental Law and Policy, the
 North Cascades Conservation Council
 (Cascade Chapter), Water and Salmon
 Committee of the Sierra Club, and
 the Columbia River Bioregional
 Education Project (American River
 et al.).
U.S. Department of Agriculture,       February 27, 2010.
 Forest Service (Forest Service).
CRITFC..............................  March 1, 2010.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Okanogan PUD filed reply comments on April 9, 2010.

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives

2.1 No-Action Alternative

    The no-action alternative is license denial. Under the no-action 
alternative, the project would not be built, and the environmental 
resources in the project area would not be affected.

2.2 Applicant's Proposal

2.2.1 Proposed Project Facilities
    The proposed Enloe Project would consist of: (1) An existing 315-
foot-long, 54-foot-high concrete gravity arch dam with an integrated 
276-foot-long central overflow spillway; (2) three 5-foot-high 
automated steel flap crest gates; (3) an existing 76.6-acre reservoir 
(narrow channel of the Similkameen River) with a storage capacity of 
775 acre-feet at a surface elevation of 1,049.3 feet above mean sea 
level (msl); (4) a 190-foot-long intake canal on the east abutment of 
the dam diverting flows into the penstock intake structure; (5) a 35-
foot-long by 30-foot-wide penstock intake structure; (6) two above-
ground 8.5-foot-diameter, 150-foot-long steel penstocks carrying flows 
from the intake to the powerhouse; (7) a powerhouse containing two 
vertical Kaplan turbine/generator units with a total installed capacity 
of 9.0 MW; (8) a 180-foot-long tailrace channel, downstream of the

[[Page 28518]]

falls; (9) a substation adjacent to the powerhouse; (10) a 100-foot-
long, 13.2-kilovolt (kV) primary transmission line connecting the 
substation to an existing distribution line; (11) about 1.5 miles of 
new and upgraded access roads; and (12) appurtenant facilities. The 
project would generate an average of 45 GWh of electricity annually.
2.2.2 Project Safety
    As part of the licensing process, the Commission would review the 
adequacy of the proposed project facilities. Special articles would be 
included in any license issued, as appropriate. Commission staff would 
inspect the licensed project both during and after construction. 
Inspection during construction would concentrate on adherence to 
Commission-approved plans and specifications, special license articles 
relating to construction, and accepted engineering practices and 
procedures. Operational inspections would focus on the continued safety 
of the structures, identification of unauthorized modifications, 
efficiency and safety of operations, compliance with the terms of the 
license, and proper maintenance. In addition, any license issued would 
require an inspection and evaluation every 5 years by an independent 
consultant and submittal of the consultant's safety report for 
Commission review.
2.2.3 Proposed Project Operation
    The Enloe Project would operate automatically in a run-of-river 
mode, regardless of water year (wet, dry, or average). Under a run-of-
river mode of operation, all project outflows would approximate all 
project inflows at any point in time, such that there would be minimal 
fluctuation of the reservoir surface elevation.\5\ The existing dam 
crest elevation of 1,044.3 feet would be increased by re-installation 
of 5-foot-high crest gates which would increase the reservoir to 
1,049.3 feet elevation. Automated crest gates would be installed that 
would automatically adjust to regulate spills and maintain a nearly 
constant reservoir elevation relative to reservoir inflow. Okanogan PUD 
plans to maintain reservoir levels between elevation 1,048.3 feet and 
elevation 1,049.3 feet (top of crest gates) when inflows are equal to, 
or less than, the maximum hydraulic capacity of the units (1,600 cfs). 
This is estimated to occur approximately 70 percent of the time. 
Discharge through the units would be approximately equal to inflow 
based on the maintenance of reservoir levels. When inflows are between 
1,600 and 16,500 cfs, which is estimated to occur approximately 29 
percent of the time, the reservoir elevation would be maintained 
between elevation 1,049.3 feet and elevation 1,050.3 feet. When inflows 
exceed 16,500 cfs, which is only estimated to occur approximately 1 
percent of the time, the crest gates would be fully lowered and the 
water level would be controlled at the spillway. During low flow 
conditions, less than 500 cfs, the project would operate in run-of-
river mode with one unit running. In this operational mode, a stable 
water level of the reservoir and stable flow in the downstream reach 
would be maintained. Under these conditions, the rate of change in the 
outflow from the reservoir would follow the natural rate of change on 
the inflow to the reservoir.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A perfectly constant water level would be difficult to 
achieve because natural events, such as wave action, would likely 
cause slight fluctuations in the reservoir surface elevation 
regardless of operational controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2.2.4 Proposed Environmental Measures
    Okanogan PUD proposes the following environmental measures.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ We used Okanogan PUD's classification of their environmental 
measures presented in the license application, and they are 
indicated in parentheses after each measure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Geology and Soil Resources

     Develop and implement the Erosion and Sediment Control 
Plan (ESCP) to minimize the effects of construction, repair, and 
operation of the dam and intake, penstocks, powerhouse, tailrace, 
impoundment, access roads, powerline, and construction camp (WQ-06).
     Develop and implement a Construction Sediment Management 
Program (CSMP) to minimize sediment disturbance and maximize sediment 
containment during construction (WQ-08).

Water Quality

     Monitor water temperatures at three locations for a period 
of 5 years to determine if the operation of crest gates causes an 
increase in the water temperatures in the reservoir when compared with 
upstream of the reservoir (WQ-01).
     Locate the powerhouse tailrace so that it discharges to 
and circulates water in the plunge pool downstream of Similkameen 
Falls, preventing stagnation and consequently water quality degradation 
of the pool habitat (WQ-02 and FISH-09).
     Provide aeration in the powerhouse draft tubes during low 
flow summer months and monitor for the first 5 years to determine the 
optimum time to provide aeration (WQ-03).
     Monitor total dissolved gas (TDG) and DO at the project 
intake and in the pool below Similkameen Falls for a period of 5 years 
to assess TDG and DO under project operations (WQ-04).
     Design a broad, shallow intake structure and channel to 
minimize sediment disturbance in the reservoir near the intake (WQ-05).
     Develop and implement at project initiation a Spill Plan 
to reduce potential effects from accidental spills when heavy machinery 
is operating near the river and reservoir (WQ-07).

Aquatic Resources

     Implement the Blasting Plan and use best management 
practices (BMPs) to avoid and minimize the potential effects on aquatic 
resources, including federally listed or sensitive species (FISH-01).
     Place two clusters of boulders in riffles or in plane-bed 
sections of the Similkameen River upstream of the reservoir to improve 
mountain whitefish habitat and recreational fisheries (FISH-02).
     Ensure that logs and other large woody debris can pass 
over the dam spillway during the annual flood and, if needed, transport 
some large woody debris around the dam and place it in the river 
downstream of the dam to provide fish habitat (FISH-03).
     Design the intake trashrack with 1-inch bar spacing so 
that smaller fish would be able pass safely through the trashrack and 
larger fish would be discouraged or prevented from passing through the 
trashracks and turbines (FISH-04).
     Monitor seasonal variation in entrainment susceptibility; 
observe trauma and mortality caused by entrainment, and monitor 
reservoir fish populations to relate the entrainment observations with 
the fish distribution and abundance in the reservoir (FISH-05).
     Install tailrace barrier nets in the powerhouse draft 
tubes to prevent fish in the tailrace from swimming upstream into the 
draft tubes during low flows and an inspection and maintenance plan to 
ensure that the tailrace barrier operates effectively (FISH-06).
     Monitor barrier nets with video cameras to observe if 
adult salmonids are able to enter the draft tubes past the barrier nets 
(FISH-07). Develop and implement a written operation plan, a post 
construction evaluation and monitoring plan, and an inspection and 
maintenance plan.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Okanogan PUD proposes to develop and implement the 
recommended-written operation plan for the tailrace barrier (April 
19, 2010) from NMFS, Interior, and Washington DFW (February, 26, 
2010).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 28519]]

     Operate the project in a run-of-river mode so that there 
are no detectable changes in flows below Similkameen Falls (FISH-08). 
Avoid flow fluctuations that might affect downstream resources by 
complying with ramping rate restrictions as recommended by resource 
agencies.\8\ Monitor ramping rate compliance utilizing an existing 
Washington DOE gage on the Similkameen River.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Okanogan PUD proposes to comply with recommended ramping 
rates (April 9, 2010) from NMFS, Department of Interior, and 
Washington DFW recommendations (February 26, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Design and place the tailrace to avoid effects on fish 
that use the plunge pool below Similkameen Falls (FISH-09 and WQ-02).
     Enhance an existing side channel to improve spawning, 
rearing, and summer thermal refugia downstream of the powerhouse 
tailrace (FISH-10).
     Implement a gravel supplementation program to increase the 
amount of gravel in the river downstream of Enloe dam and improve 
spawning habitat (FISH-11).
     Develop a biological review process, including a 
Biological Resource Program, and consultation with the Technical Review 
Group (TRG) comprising the Colville, BLM, Washington DOE, Washington 
DNR, NMFS, FWS, and Washington DFW (FISH-12).
     Develop a fisheries monitoring database for organizing and 
storing monitoring data related to aquatic resources (FISH-13).

Terrestrial Resources

     Implement the Vegetation Plan to minimize effects on 
riparian and wetland vegetation, including goals, the species to be 
used, methods, and benchmarks of success for botanical resources (BOTA-
01).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Vegetation Plan (BOTA-01) contains the measures BOTA-2 
through BOTA-7, BOTA-11, REC-01, and AES-04.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Plant riparian vegetation along the west and east banks of 
the reservoir shoreline to mitigate the temporary loss of habitat while 
fringe riparian vegetation establishes along the new water line (BOTA-
02).
     Return the existing shoreline road to natural conditions 
to improve wildlife habitat along the reservoir and eliminate the 
current interruption between the shoreline and upland habitat (BOTA-03, 
also analyzed as part of REC-13).
     Plant woody riparian species in the riparian area along 
the abandoned road corridor (BOTA-04).
     Plant woody riparian vegetation along the east and west 
banks of the reservoir downstream of Shanker's Bend and upstream of the 
reservoir (BOTA-05).
     Install grazing control measures, including fencing, to 
protect riparian plantings and sensitive areas from cattle grazing 
(BOTA-06, also analyzed as part of REC-1).
     Monitor restored areas annually for 5 years and then once 
again at year 8, and plant additional willows if performance criteria 
are not met; provide annual reports of the monitoring results to the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and Washington DOE (BOTA-07).
     Employ BMPs during construction to protect riparian and 
wetland vegetation, including measures such as flagging and temporarily 
fencing any wetland and riparian vegetation in the vicinity of the 
project that would reduce or avoid accidental impacts, and limiting 
construction and maintenance-related disturbance of sensitive habitats 
to the extent possible to protect these resources (BOTA-08).
     Develop and implement an environmental training program to 
inform employees and contractor employees who work on the project site 
or related facilities during construction and operation about the 
sensitive biological resources associated with the project area (BOTA-
09).
     Provide a biological monitor to check construction sites 
on a weekly schedule to ensure that protected areas are not disturbed 
and that fencing and other control measures are intact (BOTA-10).
     Implement the Noxious Weed Control Program to control 
weeds along roads and construction sites (BOTA-11).
     Survey disposal sites and control noxious weeds by 
implementing control measures prior to spoil disposal (BOTA-12).
     Hydroseed disposal sites using native upland species, 
following completion of spoil disposal (BOTA-13).
     Strategically place and install the project transmission 
line to reduce the adverse effects on raptors and other birds (WILD-
01).
     Concentrate construction activities to occur in summer and 
early fall to minimize effects on overwintering birds and bald eagles 
(WILD-02).
     Conduct pre-disposal site survey for wildlife and time the 
clearing of vegetation at spoil disposal sites to minimize wildlife 
impacts (WILD-03).

Threatened and Endangered Species

     Conduct surveys for Ute ladies'-tresses prior to, during, 
and postconstruction to either confirm that the species does not occur 
in the areas affected by the project or guide the development of 
avoidance or mitigative measures (BOTA-14).

Recreation and Land Use

     Implement the Recreation Management Plan, which includes 
measures for recreation and safety of and access to the project areas 
(REC-13).
     Revise and implement the Fence Plan in coordination with 
the Recreation Management Plan to include: (a) Installation of 
barricades and fencing on the east side of the dam and the area below 
the dam; (b) use of non-barbed wire at the recreation area; and (c) 
installation of a stock watering tank north of the proposed recreation 
site as an alternative source of drinking water for all grazing cattle 
with rights to this area (REC-01).
     Provide public access downstream of Enloe dam on the east 
bank by developing a trail to the river below the dam (REC-02).
     Transfer to Okanogan County ownership rights to the 
trestle bridge that is located on the west side of the river downstream 
of the dam with certain conditions (REC-03).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Land ownership rights were transferred to Okanogan County 
in 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Improve the existing informal boat ramp located on the 
east bank upstream of the dam (REC-04).
     Clean up and restore wooded area on east bank of the 
reservoir (REC-05).
     Develop an interpretive publication, in collaboration with 
Okanogan County, the Greater Columbia Water Trail Steering Committee 
(Water Trail Committee), and other interested parties, that would 
include a map illustrating public access and recreation sites (REC-06).
     Remove existing trash and conduct annual cleanup 
activities within the wooded area on the east bank of the reservoir and 
along the Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District (OTID) Ditch Road 
leading from the Loomis-Oroville Road to the dam site (REC-07).
     Develop a parking area and install a vault toilet, 
accessible to persons with disabilities, on the east bank and upstream 
of Enloe dam included in (Okanogan PUD, 2009b) (REC-08).
     Install picnic tables, at least one of which should 
incorporate universal design principles, near the parking area taking 
advantage of existing trees for shading (REC-09).

[[Page 28520]]

     Develop primitive campsites near the parking and picnic 
area (REC-10).
     At a minimum, install one interpretive sign near the 
parking and picnic area and one sign near the abutment of the old 
powerhouse access bridge, below Similkameen Falls (REC-11).
     Place an information board near Enloe dam to depict public 
access areas and information concerning visitor use of the project area 
(REC-12).
     Maintain the existing signs and system of safety cables 
and grab ropes above the dam, install dam safety/warning signs for 
boaters, and install a log boom across the powerhouse intake channel to 
protect boaters (SAFETY-01).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ All SAFETY measures were proposed by Okanogan PUD in the 
response to additional information request filed on February 27, 
2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Coordinate with BLM and other land owners, as appropriate, 
to identify options for preventing public access to the old powerhouse 
(SAFETY-03).
     Develop and implement a Safety During Construction Plan 
and allow limited public access to the project during construction 
(SAFETY-02).

Aesthetic Resources

     Use visually-compatible colors and building materials for 
construction occurring on the east bank (AES-01).
     Consult with the Colville and other stakeholders during 
restoration activities (AES-02).
     Use non-reflective surfaces where possible during 
construction (AES-03).
     Grade and repair all slopes where buildings are removed 
and plant native grasses and other riparian vegetation (AES-04).

Cultural Resources

     Solicit a new owner for the existing historic powerhouse 
(HIST-01).
     If a qualified owner is not identified for the existing 
historic powerhouse, demolish the existing historic powerhouse (HIST-
02).
     Install interpretive panels about the existing historic 
powerhouse (HIST-03).
     Review and reach agreement on the HPMP and incorporate 
information into a PA (HIST-04).
     Monitor shoreline areas to prevent effects on 
archaeological sites due to reservoir fluctuations (ARCH-01).
     Avoid known National Register-eligible archaeological 
sites to prevent effects during construction (ARCH-02).
     Monitor eligible sites during construction activities to 
avoid effects on these sites (ARCH-03).
     Develop and implement an inadvertent discovery plan, 
specifying required actions and procedures if a site is discovered 
during construction and including training staff and construction 
workers about the potential for discovery of archaeological deposits 
(ARCH-04).
     Determine if there would be effects on archaeological 
sites in the vicinity of recreational facilities (ARCH-05).
    As we've said, on October 28, 2010, Okanogan PUD filed additional 
information regarding ongoing consultations with Washington DOE and 
Washington DFW for the 401 Water Quality Certification process (letter 
from Dan Boetter, Director, Regulatory and Environmental Affairs, 
Okanogan PUD, Okanogan, Washington, to Kimberly Bose, Secretary, FERC, 
Washington, DC, October 28, 2010). In this filing and for the bypassed 
reach, Okanogan PUD proposes to:
     Provide minimum flows of 30 cfs from mid-July to mid-
September, and 10 cfs rest of the year to the pool below Enloe dam.
     Monitor DO and water temperature in the bypassed reach for 
a period of time postconstruction; and adopt an adaptive management 
program to enhance DO and water temperatures should monitoring indicate 
that water quality standards are not being met.
     Determine appropriate thresholds for downramping rates 
immediately downstream of Enloe dam based on monitoring and field 
observations prior to operations.
     Select an appropriate minimum flow release location in 
consultation with fisheries resource agencies (Washington DOE, 
Washington DFW, Interior, NMFS, BLM, and the Colville), and make 
appropriate project modifications to provide minimum flow releases.
    In this draft EA, staff will consider measures in this filing as 
Okanogan PUD's minimum flow proposals, and will analyze their effects 
on environmental resources.
2.2.5 Modifications to Applicant's Proposal--Mandatory Conditions
    To date, no mandatory conditions were submitted under sections 4(e) 
or 18 of the FPA, or section 401 of the CWA.

2.3 Staff Alternative

    Under the staff alternative, the project would include the majority 
of Okanogan PUD's proposed measures, with the exception of placement of 
boulder clusters in the plane bed section of the Similkameen River 
upstream of Shanker's Bend and entrainment and resident fish 
monitoring, along with the following modifications and additions:

Geology and Soil Resources

     Develop and implement a Spoil Disposal Plan after 
consultation with BLM and other interested parties.

Water Quality

     Develop and file with the Commission, in consultation with 
the TRG, a water quality monitoring plan including: Selecting the 
monitoring locations; filing a report at the end of year 5 documenting 
the results of monitoring and recommendations for the need for 
continued monitoring development; and conducting water temperature, 
TDG, and DO monitoring for a period longer than 5 years if needed.

Aquatic Resources

     Revise Okanogan PUD's preliminary Blasting Plan to include 
preparing a final Blasting Plan after consultation with the TRG.
     Revise Okanogan PUD's proposed large woody debris 
transport plan to include consultation with the TRG to determine when 
such transport would be required, the methods to be used for collection 
and transport of the wood, and the best locations for release of the 
woody debris downstream of the dam.
     Revise Okanogan PUD's proposed side-channel enhancement 
plan to include consultation with the TRG to develop the side-channel 
enhancement plan and file the plan with the Commission, with copies to 
the agencies, at least 180 days prior to implementation. Implement the 
plan and incorporate the lands associated with the side channel 
enhancements in the project boundary (approximately 0.75 acre 5 miles 
downstream of the dam).
     Revise Okanogan PUD's proposed gravel supplementation 
program to include consulting with the TRG to develop the gravel 
enhancement plan.
     Revise Okanogan PUD's Spill Plan to include consultation 
with BLM and Washington DOE.
     Revise and file with the Commission Okanogan PUD's 
proposal to design a narrow-spaced intake trashrack to include 
consulting with Interior and Washington DFW during the final design of 
the intake structure and trashracks to ensure that fish protection 
features are included in the final design.
     Develop a project operations compliance and monitoring 
plan, in consultation with the TRG, to be filed for Commission 
approval.

Terrestrial Resources

     Revise the Vegetation Plan to file monitoring reports 
annually for 5 years

[[Page 28521]]

and in year 8, and provide these reports to the Commission, FWS, BLM, 
and Washington DFW, and filing for Commission approval, any proposals 
for further restoration measures.
     Retain dead trees along the reservoir unless they become a 
hazard and provide 10 artificial perch poles.

Threatened and Endangered Species

     Prepare a Ute ladies'-tresses survey plan after 
consultation with FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW, and if plant surveys 
identify the threatened Ute ladies'-tresses in areas that would be 
affected by the project, file for Commission approval, an additional 
plan developed, after consultation with FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW, 
to avoid or minimize adverse effects.

Recreation and Land Use

     Revise the proposed Recreation Management Plan (REC-13) in 
coordination with the Aesthetics Management Plan and the HPMP, and 
include consultation with stakeholders. Finalize and implement the 
interpretive publication as part of the Recreation Management Plan.
     Add to the Recreation Plan an established plow schedule to 
allow visitors winter access to project lands and waters.
     Develop and implement a recreation use monitoring plan to 
include consultation with BLM.
     Develop and implement a Fire Suppression Program in 
consultation with BLM.
     Revise the Safety during Construction Plan to include 
consultation with BLM and local emergency response agencies.
     Add approximately 5.0 acres to the project boundary 
incorporating the entire length of the public access road from the 
Loomis-Oroville Road to Enloe dam to ensure public access throughout 
the length of any license issued for the project.
     Develop a river access point at Miner's Flat and 
incorporate approximately 1 acre into the project boundary.
     Remove the one small, deteriorated building on Okanogan 
PUD land at the north end of the proposed Enloe dam recreation 
area.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Measures were proposed by Okanogan PUD in the response to 
additional information request filed on February 27, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aesthetics

     Revise the proposed Aesthetics Management Plan in 
coordination with the Recreation Management Plan and the HPMP to 
include consultation with the Colville, BLM, and other stakeholders.
     Develop specific approaches concerning the blending of the 
existing and proposed Enloe Project facilities into the existing 
landscape character.
     Include these measures at the laydown or construction 
material storage areas that have yet to be determined.

Cultural Resources

     Revise Okanogan PUD's May 2009 HPMP to include provisions 
for: (1) Further consideration of the potential effects of capping site 
45OK532; (2) a description of the proposed side-channel enhancement 
site; (3) two separate defined APEs that delineate the proposed Enloe 
project and the proposed side-channel enhancement site; (4) 
consultation with the Cultural Resources Working Group (CRWG) regarding 
the resolution of adverse effects on the historic Enloe powerhouse; (5) 
re-evaluating the Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation Canal for National 
Register-eligibility; (6) completing determinations of eligibility for 
unidentified cultural resources on BLM lands; (7) periodic review of 
the HPMP; (8) a site monitoring program; (9) cultural interpretative 
and education measures; and (10) revising the APEs to accommodate 
modifications to the project boundary, if any.

2.4 Staff Alternative With Mandatory Conditions

    To date, no mandatory conditions were submitted under section 4(e) 
or section 18 of the FPA, or section 401 of the CWA. NMFS and Interior, 
however, request reservation of authority under section 18.

2.5 Removal of Existing Hydroelectric Facilities Including Enloe Dam

    BLM stated that it would require Okanogan PUD to remove the dam and 
all associated facilities from the public lands under the existing 
right-of-way permit if a license is not be issued. Removing Enloe dam 
would affect many resources. We discuss the effects on these resources 
in section 3.2.

3.0 Environmental Analysis

    In this section, we present: (1) A general description of the 
project vicinity; (2) an explanation of the scope of our cumulative 
effects analysis; and (3) our analysis of the proposed action and other 
recommended environmental measures. Sections are organized by resource 
area (aquatic, recreation, etc.). Under each resource area, historic 
and current conditions are first described. The existing condition is 
the baseline against which the environmental effects of the proposed 
action and alternatives are compared, including an assessment of the 
effects of proposed mitigation, protection, and enhancement measures, 
and any potential cumulative effects of the proposed action and 
alternatives. Staff conclusions and recommended measures are discussed 
in section 5.2, Comprehensive Development and Recommended Alternative 
of the EA.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Unless otherwise indicated, our information is taken from 
the application for license for this project (Okanogan PUD, 2008a) 
and additional information filed by Okanogan PUD (2009a-d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.1 General Description of The River Basin

    Located in north-central Washington about 2 miles south of the 
Canadian border, the Enloe Project is situated in a narrow constriction 
of the Similkameen River Valley, about 3.5 miles northwest of the city 
of Oroville (figure 1). The project is located predominantly on land 
administered by the BLM. The Similkameen River is tributary to the 
Okanogan River just south of Oroville, Washington; the Okanogan in turn 
flows into the Columbia River east of Brewster, Washington. The 
Similkameen River drains the east slopes of the Cascade Mountains in 
northern Washington and southern British Columbia, Canada. The majority 
(79 percent) of the drainage basin lies within Canada.
    Similkameen Falls is located about 370 feet below Enloe dam, and 
forms a 33-foot-long and 20-foot-high barrier impassible to anadromous 
fish. Above the dam lies a shallow reservoir with a mean depth of 8.4 
feet at the existing dam crest elevation of 1,044.3 feet msl and a 
maximum depth of 55.6 feet (MaxDepth, 2006); the reservoir is filled 
with an accumulated sediment volume of approximately 2.43 million cubic 
yards (MaxDepth, 2006). The existing reservoir is approximately 2 miles 
long and averages about 250 feet in width.
    Topography in the project vicinity has been significantly affected 
by glaciations and is moderately steep and rugged. In the lower part of 
the river canyon, steep slopes adjacent to the river are interspersed 
with relatively flat benches of alluvial or glacial origin. The upper 
portions of the river canyon are steep and rocky. The mountains of the 
Okanogan Highlands lie to the east and the North Cascades to the west. 
Elevations range from 1,000 feet at the mouth of the Similkameen River 
at Oroville to greater than 3,600 feet at the summits of surrounding 
mountains.
    The climate in the lower Similkameen River Basin is typical of 
eastern

[[Page 28522]]

Washington, with cool, moist winters and hot dry summers. The Cascade 
Mountains act as a barrier to the movement of maritime and continental 
air masses, creating the generally dry conditions observed in the 
project vicinity. Average annual precipitation is approximately 11 
inches. River flows peak in late spring to early summer when warm 
temperatures melt the extensive winter snowpacks at the higher 
elevations in the basin. Low flows occur in late-fall/mid-winter when 
cold temperatures minimize runoff.

3.2 Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis

    According to the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations for 
implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR, section 
1508.7), cumulative effect is the impact on the environment which 
results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other 
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of 
what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other 
actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but 
collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time, 
including hydropower and other land and water development activities.
    Based on our review of the license application, written and oral 
comments from scoping, other filings related to the project, and 
preliminary staff analyses, we have identified water quantity and water 
quality, aquatic resources including federally listed threatened and 
endangered fish species, as resources that could be cumulatively 
affected by the proposed project in combination with other actions and 
other hydroelectric development on the Similkameen River.
3.2.1 Geographic Scope
    The geographic scope of the analysis defines the physical limits or 
boundaries of the proposed action's effects on the resources. Because 
the proposed action would affect the resources differently, the 
geographic scope for each resource may vary. For water resources and 
aquatic resources, including federally listed threatened and endangered 
fish species, we have identified the Similkameen River Basin as our 
geographic scope of analysis.
3.2.2 Temporal Scope
    The temporal scope of our cumulative effects analysis in the EA 
includes a discussion of past, present, and future actions and their 
effects on these resources. Based on the potential term of a license, 
we will look 30 to 50 years into the future, concentrating on the 
effect on the resources from reasonably foreseeable future actions. The 
historical discussion is limited, by necessity, to the amount of 
available information. We identified the present resource conditions 
based on the license application, agency comments, and comprehensive 
plans.
    During scoping, Washington DFW, FWS, EPA, BLM, Park Service, U.S. 
Bureau of Indian Affairs, and CRITFC requested the Commission to 
consider the effects of the proposed Shanker's Bend Project (Project 
Number P-12804) in our cumulative effects analysis because it would be 
located upstream of the Enloe Project. Washington DFW stated that the 
Shanker's Bend Project is not a run-of-river project; therefore, the 
Enloe Project would not be a run-of-river project either, and would 
benefit from the analysis of the Shanker's Bend Project. FWS requested 
that proposed project operations of the Enloe Project include an 
analysis of how the proposed Shanker's Bend Project would alter the 
project operations as defined in the final license application. BLM 
understands that the Shanker's Bend Project is currently under 
consideration/study and may be operated in conjunction with Enloe dam; 
it recommended that the cumulative effects on resources and recreation 
uses be analyzed. BLM also recommended that the Commission analyze the 
cumulative effects of other dams operated down-river. CRITFC stated 
that the Shanker's Bend Project is a ``reasonably foreseeable action'' 
and that the Commission must consider a cumulative effects analysis of 
the Shanker's Bend Project with the Enloe Project.
    The Commission issued a preliminary permit to the Okanogan PUD for 
the Shanker's Bend Project in 2008. The purpose of a preliminary permit 
is to preserve the right of the permit holder for a period of three 
years to have the first priority in applying for a license for the 
project that is being studied. Because a permit is issued only to allow 
the permit holder to investigate the feasibility of a project while the 
permittee conducts investigations and secures necessary data to 
determine the feasibility of the proposed project and to prepare a 
license application, it grants no land-disturbing or other property 
rights. Until such time as an application for license is filed with the 
Commission, there is no project proposal to consider. Whether Okanogan 
PUD decides to file a development application in the future and whether 
the Commission would issue a license for this project is speculation 
and not a reasonably foreseeable action at this time.

Dam Removal Alternative

    BLM stated that it would require Okanogan PUD to remove the dam and 
all associated facilities from the public lands under the existing 
right-of-way permit if a license is not issued. Removing Enloe dam 
would affect many resources.

Effects on Water Quality

    Approximately 2.43 million cubic yards of sediment are stored 
behind Enloe dam (MaxDepth, 2006). Much of this sediment is 
contaminated with high levels of arsenic, cadmium, copper, and other 
metals. Removal of the dam would release these contaminated sediments 
to the Similkameen and Okanogan rivers and eventually the Columbia 
River. Dredging and disposing of the sediments from the reservoir prior 
to dam removal risks resuspension and transport of some of these 
sediments to downstream areas. Even if the sediments were dredged prior 
to dam removal, significant amounts of sediment could remain on the 
reservoir bottom and would eventually reach the river and be 
transported downstream.

Effects on Aquatic Resources

    The release of the contaminated sediments currently stored behind 
Enloe dam could have substantial effects on spawning habitat, eggs, 
fry, juvenile and adult anadromous and resident fish. This effect could 
seriously damage Chinook salmon essential fish habitat (EFH) and UCR 
steelhead critical habitat. The duration of the effects of this release 
of sediments would depend largely on flow and volume of material 
captured in the channel as bedload. Equilibrium would eventually be 
achieved, and removing Enloe dam would eventually provide for the free 
flow of gravel, large woody debris, and sediments downstream of the 
current dam location. Increased gravel input below Similkameen Falls 
would improve the spawning habitat for anadromous fish. Increased input 
of large woody debris downstream of the falls would also benefit 
anadromous and resident fish by providing habitat structure. Dam 
removal would also affect the nature of the current reservoir by 
returning it to a riverine state. Water velocity in the reservoir area 
would increase, while water temperature may be slightly cooler. Slower 
water habitats along the edges of the reservoir would disappear as the 
water recedes into a more defined channel. Fish species composition 
would shift, as the

[[Page 28523]]

available habitat may select for fish that prefer faster moving, cooler 
water.
    Dam removal would have no effect on anadromous fish passage in the 
Similkameen River. There are no anadromous fish found directly 
downstream of the dam due to the presence of Similkameen Falls, which 
acts as a natural barrier to anadromous fish passage. If the dam were 
removed, resident fish would be able to move freely from the current 
reservoir reach, downstream to the rest of the river.

Effects on Terrestrial Resources

    The change in water surface elevation with dam removal would result 
in the loss of existing wetland and riparian habitat along the 
reservoir. The death of large trees in the existing riparian forest 
community would provide cavities and snags that would be valuable 
wildlife habitat components. Over time, riparian and wetland vegetation 
would re-colonize the edge of the river, replacing the lost habitat.
    The decrease in the water surface elevation would likely make the 
existing potential Ute ladies'-tresses habitat along the reservoir too 
dry to support the plant. New potential habitat for this species would 
likely be created, but the extent of the new habitat is unknown.

Effects on Recreation

    Removing Enloe dam would change the recreational opportunities 
associated with the site. Returning the reservoir above the dam into a 
free-flowing river would affect a variety of recreation opportunities 
including: Fishing, boating, hiking, camping, and wildlife watching. 
Dam removal will change angling opportunities by changing fisheries 
habitat from reservoir to riverine and the associated fish species 
available to anglers. Similarly, some boaters seek flat water 
experiences (motor or paddle) while others prefer whitewater. 
Opportunities to engage in flat water experiences are available at 
nearby Lakes Wannacut, Palmer, and Osoyoos. Hiking and camping 
experiences are influenced by nearby water bodies through the sounds of 
rushing water or the opportunity to swim in a reservoir. Additionally, 
the flora and fauna associated with the site would change, thus 
modifying the species available for nature study.

Effects on Aesthetics Resources

    Removal of Enloe dam would change the aesthetic character 
associated with the site. The current reservoir lakebed would be 
dewatered, changing the character of the former lakebed to a vegetative 
environment with a free-flowing river. Fall flows would remain at the 
falls. This new view would be seen from the Loomis-Oroville road and 
the Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trail (Scenic Trail).

Effects on Cultural Resources

    Removing the National Register-listed Enloe dam would result in an 
adverse effect on this historic property. Additionally, removal of the 
dam could result in the exposure of currently inundated and as yet 
unidentified cultural sites, including properties of traditional 
religious and cultural importance to the Colville. This action could 
expose these resources to the public, resulting in illicit artifact 
collection and site vandalism.

Effects on Socioeconomics

    Dam removal would likely result in a negligible effect on the 
recreation and tourism industry in Okanogan County. Currently, fishing 
occurs primarily in the lower reaches of the Similkameen River, below 
the Enloe dam. Creation of aesthetic and recreation resources due to a 
shift from a reservoir to a riverine environment would indirectly 
affect recreational use of the project resources and associated 
expenditures (such as, a fee for a fishing license) and therefore, the 
local economy should continue to benefit from these expenditures.
    With dam removal, there would be no loss of property value to 
residents because the majority of land ownership within the Enloe 
Project boundary is administered by federal or State agencies and there 
are no residents that border the Enloe dam.

3.3 Proposed Action and Action Alternatives

    In this section, we discuss the effect of the project alternatives 
on environmental resources. For each resource, we first describe the 
affected environment, which is the existing condition and baseline 
against which we measure effects. We then discuss and analyze the site-
specific and cumulative environmental issues.
    Only the resources that would be affected, or about which comments 
have been received, are addressed in detail in this EA. We present our 
recommendations in section 5.2, Comprehensive Development and 
Recommended Alternative.
3.3.1 Geologic and Soil Resources
3.3.1.1 Affected Environment
    The complex structure and lithology along the Similkameen River 
above and below Enloe dam reflect its position at the boundary of 
several distinct physiographic and lithological regions. The dam is 
located within the Cordilleran fold and thrust belt (Bayer, 1983) of 
northwestern North America. In this region, successive episodes of 
accretion, volcanic-arc mountain building, and back-arc deposition have 
created a complex physiography.
    Enloe dam is situated on the Similkameen River near the boundary of 
the Cascade Range and Columbia mountains physiographic provinces where 
they converge around the 49th parallel, separating the Canadian 
Interior plateaus from the Lava plateaus of eastern Washington and 
Oregon, western Idaho, and northern California.

Geology

    Along the narrow valley section of the Similkameen River downstream 
of Palmer Lake and upstream of Enloe dam, the uplands are composed 
primarily of Triassic-Permian metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks of 
the Kobau Formation, interspersed with Jurassic metavolcanic, 
intrusive, and sedimentary rocks, Eocene conglomerate and Eocene 
intrusive dacite. Much of the valley and sideslopes are mantled in 
Quaternary glacial drift. The complicated structure is the result of 
late Triassic or early Jurassic accretion of Paleozoic and Mesozoic 
volcanic archipelagos accompanied by regional metamorphism and 
plutonism, subsequent overlayering of late Cretaceous and early 
Tertiary volcanic and sedimentary rocks, and Quarternary erosion and 
deposition resulting from continental glaciation.
    In the immediate vicinity of the impoundment, highly deformed 
Triassic/Permian metamorphic rocks of the Kobau and Spectacle 
formations are unconformably overlain by Jurassic/Cretaceous 
metaconglomerate and metavolcanic rocks of the Ellemeham Formation. 
These are in turn again unconformably overlain by Eocene sandstone and 
conglomerate, and the latter are again unconformably overlain by 
Quaternary glacial drift, colluvium, and alluvial deposits.
    Within the impoundment itself, from Shanker's Bend downstream to 
approximately 1,600 feet above the dam, the Similkameen River lies at 
the boundary of the Kobau and Ellemeham formations (between 1,600 feet 
above and 1,000 feet below the dam). The stretch of the river flows 
over Eocene sandstone and conglomerate. Enloe dam is located above the 
falls on resistant Eocene granitic-clast conglomerate. Downstream of 
the dam and falls, the river again flows over Triassic/Permian 
metamorphic rocks of the Kobau and Spectacle Formations.

[[Page 28524]]

Soils

    Most of the soils present within or adjacent to the proposed 
project boundary are classified as Nighthawk loam or Nighthawk 
extremely stony loam. Ewall loamy fine sand and Lithic Xerochrepts-
Nighthawk complex soils and riverwash and rock outcrop areas are also 
present within or adjacent to the project boundary.
    Nighthawk loam soils are formed in glacial till deposited over 
shale and are present just upstream of the dam and upstream of 
Shanker's Bend. These soils are deep and well drained. Nighthawk loam 
soils with 3 to 8 percent slopes are characterized by slow runoff and 
present a slight erosion hazard. Nighthawk loam soils with 8 to 15 
percent slopes are characterized by medium runoff and present a high to 
very high erosion hazard.
    Nighthawk extremely stony loam soils are generally formed in 
glacial till and are located adjacent to the dam and powerhouse and a 
portion of Shanker's Bend. These soils are deep and well drained. 
Nighthawk extremely stony loam soils with 8 to 25 percent slopes are 
characterized by medium runoff and present a high to very high erosion 
hazard. When slopes reach 25 to 65 percent, these soils are 
characterized by rapid to very rapid runoff and present a high to very 
high erosion hazard.
    Ewall loamy fine sand soils are formed in glacial outwash sand and 
are located in a small area immediately downstream of Shanker's Bend. 
These soils are deep and excessively drained. Ewall loamy fine sand 
soils with 0 to 15 percent slopes are characterized by slow runoff, and 
present a slight erosion hazard and a high soil-blowing hazard.
    Lithic Xerochrepts soils are generally shallow and well drained and 
are located downstream of the dam. Lithic Xerochrepts-Nighthawk complex 
soils with 15 to 45 percent slopes are characterized by medium runoff 
and present a moderate erosion hazard.
    Areas classified as riverwash and rock outcrops are also present 
within or adjacent to the project boundary. Riverwash consists of 
coarse sand and gravelly alluvium. Rock outcrop areas contain little or 
no shallow soil material.

Geologic Hazards

    Enloe dam is located in an area of historically low seismicity. 
Peak ground acceleration with a 2 percent probability of occurrence in 
50 years is approximately 0.16 times the force of gravity (g) and peak 
ground acceleration with a 10 percent probability of occurrence in 50 
years is approximately 0.07 g (U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2002). 
Localized faults have been mapped in upland areas adjacent to 
Similkameen Valley. An active fault is present in the conglomerate 
bedrock approximately 100 feet downstream of the proposed tailrace 
outlet. The fault does not displace overlying glacial drift, which 
indicates that it has not been active in more than 10,000 years.
    No significant historical earthquakes (magnitude 5.5 or intensity 
VI or larger) have been recorded within 50 miles of the dam since 1568 
(USGS-NEIC, 2007 a, b).
    During geological field mapping conducted in December 2006, some 
seepage was detected along joints and bedding planes in the 
conglomerate and sandstone that form the east abutment of the dam 
(Christensen Associates, 2007). Okanogan PUD proposes to grout and 
stabilize these areas during the construction of proposed facilities.
    Some of the soils adjacent to the Similkameen River present high to 
very high erosion potential. Nighthawk extremely stony loam soils that 
occur on slopes in excess of 8 percent have a high to very high erosion 
hazard. Nighthawk extremely stony loam soils are present upstream of 
Shanker's Bend, adjacent to portions of Shanker's Bend, and on either 
side of the river adjacent to the dam, and proposed intake location. 
Landslide or mass wasting hazards are most likely to occur in these 
areas; however, no signs of recent instability were noted during the 
December 2006 geological field investigations (Christensen Associates, 
2007).
3.3.1.2 Environmental Effects
    Okanogan PUD's proposed land-disturbing activities associated with 
the construction of project facilities (new crest gates on Enloe dam, 
new east-bank approach channel, new intake structure, new intake canal, 
new penstock intake, new penstocks, new powerhouse, new tailrace 
channel, a short section of new road, modifications to existing project 
roads, and improvements to existing recreation areas) could cause 
erosion and sedimentation.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to develop and implement the ESCP (WQ-06) to 
minimize the effects of land-disturbing activities associated with 
construction of new facilities, as well as modifications and 
improvements to existing facilities. The plan would also be implemented 
during project operation and maintenance. Okanogan PUD also proposes to 
develop and implement the CSMP (WQ-08) to minimize sediment disturbance 
and maximize sediment containment during construction. In response to 
agencies' comments and recommendations, Okanogan PUD developed a Spill 
Response Plan and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (see section 
3.3.2.2, Water Quality). The resource agencies recommend that the 
sediment excavated for project construction be tested for arsenic, 
copper, cadmium, zinc, and lead; and that the sediments be stored on 
site until test results are known so that sediments can be disposed of 
properly.
    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD develop and implement a Spoil 
Disposal Plan prior to any construction activities that may affect the 
BLM-administered public lands. The plan would address disposal and/or 
storage of waste soil and/or rock materials (spoils) generated by road 
maintenance, slope failures, and construction projects. A Spoil 
Disposal Plan would include provisions for the following: (1) 
Identifying and characterizing the nature of the spoils in accordance 
with applicable BLM regulations; (2) identifying sites, including 
locations of the public lands, for the disposal and/or storage of 
spoils so contamination of water by leachate and surface water runoff 
can be prevented; and (3) developing and implementing stabilization, 
slope reconfiguration, erosion control, reclamation, and rehabilitation 
measures.

Our Analysis

    As we've said, land-disturbing activities associated with project 
construction, operation and maintenance, and soils within the project 
area are susceptible to soil erosion and sedimentation. Excavated 
materials could possibly contain higher levels of arsenic, copper, 
cadmium, zinc, and lead than is acceptable under the criteria of the 
U.S. EPA's Maximum Contaminant Level.
    Okanogan PUD's proposal to finalize and implement the ESCP (WQ-06) 
and the CSMP (WQ-08) would lessen the potential effects associated with 
land-disturbing activities during project construction, modifications, 
and improvements of project facilities, as well as during project 
operation and maintenance.
    Our analysis of the Spill Response and Storm Water Pollution 
Prevention Plans are discussed in section 3.3.2.2, Water Quality.
    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD consult with BLM for the 
development and implementation of a Spoil Disposal Plan prior to any 
construction activities that may affect the BLM-administered public 
lands. This plan would ensure that there would be little or no effects 
from

[[Page 28525]]

excavated materials on water quality or the surrounding environment 
within the project boundary.
3.3.2 Water Quantity and Quality
3.3.2.1 Affected Environment
    The drainage area of the Similkameen River above Enloe dam is 
approximately 3,575 square miles most of which is in British Columbia. 
The headwaters of the Similkameen River Basin occur in rugged terrain 
along the international boarder and to the north. Much of the upper 
basin is used for timber harvest, mining, and grazing. The river valley 
widens near Princeton, British Columbia. Irrigation of agricultural 
land is a primary water use upstream of Nighthawk, Washington, located 
about 9 miles upstream of the project. Existing uses in Canada include 
aquatic and wildlife habitat, stock watering, domestic water supply, 
agriculture and mining.

Water Quantity

    On average approximately 78 percent of the annual flow on the 
Similkameen River occurs from April through July (table 2). Minimum 
flows occur between late summer (August) and stay low through early 
spring (March) until the snowmelt season begins in April, peaking in 
late May or early June. The maximum average monthly flow was 24,900 cfs 
in June 1972, while the minimum average monthly flow was 191 cfs in 
September 2003.

                             Table 2--Summary of Similkameen River Flows at the USGS Nighthawk Gage No. 12442500, 1929-2005
                                                              (Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Month                                   Mean                    Median               Maximum daily            Minimum daily
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October.............................................                      697                      576                    8,430                      161
November............................................                      938                      681                   14,400                      160
December............................................                      798                      576                   12,400                      120
January.............................................                      659                      540                    5,270                      120
February............................................                      682                      551                    7,790                      120
March...............................................                      746                      600                    5,260                      290
April...............................................                    2,086                    1,390                   26,400                      297
May.................................................                    2,086                    1,390                   26,400                      539
June................................................                    8,597                    7,580                   44,800                    1,160
July................................................                    2,965                    2,220                   15,800                      408
August..............................................                      916                      764                    3,770                      195
September...........................................                      596                      514                    2,430                      164
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The Nighthawk gage is located about 7 miles upstream of the project with a drainage area of about 3,550 square miles.

    The maximum recorded average daily flow was 44,800 cfs on June 1, 
1972, when the peak instantaneous flow was estimated to be 45,800 cfs 
at a stage height of 18.0 feet above the approximate channel bottom. 
The minimum recorded daily flow was 65 cfs on January 3, 1974; this 
abnormally low flow was attributed to ice effects.
    The mean annual flood (at the Nighthawk gage), between 1929 and 
2005, was 16,100 cfs. Annual maximum mean daily discharges range from a 
low of 4,590 cfs (June 8, 1941) to a high of 44,800 (June 1, 1972). The 
water level recorded was 13 feet above the spillway crest at Enloe dam 
during the 1972 flood. The calculated return period of the 1972 flood 
is approximately 180 years.
    Annual instantaneous peak flows at the Nighthawk gage have occurred 
almost exclusively (except on October 21, 2003) during spring and early 
summer for the period of record. The earliest recorded peak event 
occurred on April 26, 1934, while the latest occurred on June 23, 1967. 
The mean/median peak flow day for the period of record was May 28, 
although for the last 20 years (1987-2006), the mean/median peak flow 
day occurred about one week earlier (May 22). However, winter floods 
associated with the inland penetration of coastal storms have 
occasionally been of similar magnitude to these spring and early summer 
freshets. The winter floods, although less common, are usually 
associated with ice flows and snowmelt runoff.
    Certified water rights on the Similkameen River are listed in table 
3. Okanogan PUD holds senior water rights on the river, a 1,000-cfs 
water right with a priority date of 1912 for power generation purposes. 
The proposed project maximum hydraulic capacity is 1,600 cfs. Thus, 
Okanogan PUD would need to obtain an additional 600-cfs water right for 
non-consumptive use in order to divert the maximum hydraulic capacity 
for the project.

                                                         Table 3--Similkameen River Water Rights
                                                              (Source, Okanogan PUD, 2008a)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Priority                                                          Acres
          Document No.                  Status            (year)        Flow  (cfs)   Acre-feet/year      Purpose        irrigated           Owner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCVOL1P243......................  Certificate.......            1912           1,000                              PO                  Okanogan PUD
                                  (Change)..........
S3-22053C.......................  Certificate.......            1973             1.5             372          IR, SW              80  Private
S4-26618C.......................  Certificate.......            1980               1             202          IR, SW              50  Private
SWC00723........................  Certificate.......            1930             0.5              --              IR              12  Private
SWC03557........................  Certificate.......            1948            0.05              --              IR             7.5  Private
SWC06242........................  Certificate.......            1955            0.05              --          DS, IR               3  Private
SWC09018........................  Certificate.......            1955               2             400              IR             100  Private
SWC09834........................  Certificate.......            1966             1.4             280              IR              70  Kernan Farms

[[Page 28526]]

 
    Total of all Certificates:......................................             6.5           1,254                           322.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: DS--Domestic
IR--Irrigation
SW--Stock water
PO--Power

    Enloe reservoir occupies a narrow, channelized basin and has a very 
high inflow/volume ratio; therefore, the reservoir is more river-like 
than lake-like in character. The mean hydraulic residence time is 
estimated to be about 2.4 hours for the mean annual flow of 2,290 cfs, 
45 minutes for the mean annual peak flow of 16,100 cfs, 7.3 hours for 
the mean September flow of 596 cfs, and more than 20 hours for flows 
less than 200 cfs (table 4).

                                 Table 4--Enloe Reservoir Characteristics at Existing and Proposed Operations and Spills
                                                              (Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Reservoir
                                             Reservoir       Reservoir       shoreline       Reservoir    Reservoir mean     Reservoir       Reservoir
                Location                     elevation        length          length       surface area    depth  (feet)   maximum depth  volume  (acre-
                                            (feet msl)        (miles)         (miles)         (acres)                         (feet)           feet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At existing dam crest elevation.........         1,044.3             2.0             4.1            60.1             8.4            54.3             507
At mean annual flow of 2,290 cfs........           1,046             2.1             4.2            67.1             9.1            56.0             613
During proposed low-flow project                 1,048.3             2.2             4.8            76.6            10.1            58.3             775
 operations.............................
During spill periods....................         1,050.3             2.3             4.9            88.3            10.6            60.3             938
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Most of the bed-surface substrate is medium sand, with a typical 
(median) diameter of 0.4 millimeter (mm); gravel is present at the 
upstream end of the reservoir near Shanker's Bend and at depth within 
the accumulated sediment. The volume of stored sediment is estimated to 
be around 2.4 million cubic yards.
    Groundwater in this sub-basin is primarily supplied from glacial 
and alluvial deposits in the lower valley areas. The Similkameen River 
once flowed southward through the valley now occupied by Palmer Lake 
and Sinlahekin Creek. During the last glaciation, the river was 
rerouted through several temporary channels until it finally settled 
into its current channel as the glacier retreated. Glacial and alluvial 
deposits in the original channel and the temporary channels are several 
hundred feet thick with moderate to high yield aquifers. The alluvial 
and glacial deposits are composed largely of fine sand, silt, and clay, 
with some thin lenses of coarse sand and gravel. Permeability and 
yields can be quite high.
    In places where there is a lack of glacial or alluvial deposits, 
groundwater is scarce. Subsurface rock consists of metamorphic, 
granitic, and consolidated sedimentary rock with low permeability and 
porosity.
    During low flow periods, very little flow is added to the river 
between the USGS Nighthawk gage (RM 15.8) and the Washington DOE flow 
gage at RM 5.0, indicating that groundwater discharge is not a 
significant contributor to flow in the lower Similkameen River. The 
City of Oroville withdraws its municipal water supply from a well field 
located at the confluence of the Similkameen and Okanogan rivers. The 
wells are considered to be in continuity with the Similkameen River. 
Groundwater would not be affected by the project regardless of its 
location relative to the river or degree of continuity because the 
project would operate in a run-of-river mode and would not affect flows 
or recharge.

Water Quality

    This section describes existing water quality in the lower 
Similkameen River and focuses on water quality characteristics that 
could be influenced by project construction and operation: Temperature, 
DO concentration, total dissolved gas concentration, and contaminants 
associated with river sediments.

Water Temperature

    Water temperatures in the Similkameen River upstream of the project 
can exceed freshwater aquatic life criteria during the summer months, 
and water temperatures generally increase from upstream to downstream. 
Okanogan PUD conducted water temperature monitoring in the project area 
from late spring through early fall of 2006 to characterize potential 
project effects on the water temperature regime. The monitoring study 
was designed to measure changes in water temperatures in the 
Similkameen River as it flowed through the project area.
    One of the designated uses for the Similkameen River is salmonid 
spawning, rearing, and migration. The aquatic life maximum water 
temperature criterion set by Washington DOE to protect this use is 17.5 
degrees Celsius ([deg]C), measured by the 7-day average of the daily 
maximum temperatures (7-DADMax). When a water body's temperature is 
warmer than the criterion and that condition is due to natural 
conditions, human actions (considered cumulatively) may not cause the 
7-DADMax temperature of that water body to increase more than 0.3 
[deg]C. In applying this standard to hydroelectric projects, Washington 
DOE has interpreted natural conditions to be

[[Page 28527]]

the water temperature regime before construction of any dams or other 
human influences.
    Washington DOE has identified the Similkameen River below Enloe dam 
as a water body requiring special protection for salmonid spawning and 
incubation (Okanogan PUD, 2008a). This special criterion identifies a 
maximum 7-DADMax temperature of 13 [deg]C at the initiation of spawning 
for salmon and at fry emergence for salmon and trout. A maximum 0.3 
[deg]C increase also applies to the seasonal criteria for spawning and 
incubation. This requirement is applied to the Similkameen River from 
February 15 through June 15.
    The 2006 monitoring results showed that the Similkameen River 
exceeded the 17.5 [deg]C criterion both upstream and downstream from 
Enloe dam from late June through mid-September, with additional 
exceedances in late-September (figure 2). The highest temperature of 
26.9 [deg]C was recorded both at China Rock (RM 12.2) upstream from the 
project site, and at the bridge in Oroville (RM 5.3) downstream from 
the project site.
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.001

    Comparisons of 7-DADMax temperatures at different monitoring 
stations indicate that water temperatures did not increase through the 
project area by more than 0.3 [deg]C at any time during the 2006 
monitoring season, and all stations showed a similar trend in 
temperatures. The 7-DADMax temperatures decreased after August 4, 
although remained above the 17.5 [deg]C criterion for most of the 
remainder of the monitoring period. Figure 3 plots the 7-DADMax 
temperatures at the upper end of the reservoir (RM 10.3) and the lower 
end of reservoir (RM 9.1).

[[Page 28528]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.002

BILLING CODE 6717-01-C

Dissolved Oxygen

    The Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters for Washington state 
that the 1-day minimum DO concentration for salmonid spawning, rearing, 
and migration is 8.0 milligram per liter (mg/L) (Chapter 173-201A 
Washington Administrative Code). When a water body's DO concentration 
is lower that this criterion and that condition is due to natural 
conditions, human actions considered cumulatively may not cause the 
concentration to decrease more than 0.2 mg/L.
    Okanogan PUD measured DO profiles on September 14 and 15, 2006, in 
the vicinity of Enloe dam. All measurements were above the 8.0 mg/L 
minimum water quality standard. As expected, the DO concentrations were 
higher where colder water was encountered in the morning hours below 
the dam and at China Rock upstream of the reservoir. Warmer water and 
lower DO concentrations were measured in the afternoon hours in the 
reservoir pool above the dam.

Total Dissolved Gases

    The Water Quality Standard for Surface Waters for Washington State 
requires that TDG shall not exceed 110 percent of saturation at any 
point of sample collection (Chapter 173-201A Washington Administrative 
Code). The TDG criteria contained in the standards do not apply when 
the stream exceeds the 7-day, 10-year frequency flood. The standards 
provide allowances for the criteria to be adjusted to aid fish passage 
over hydroelectric dams when consistent with a Washington DOE approved 
gas abatement plan. However, this allowance does not apply to the Enloe 
Project because it would not provide spill to aid fish passage.
    TDG concentrations measured between May 26 and 30, 2006, were below 
the 110 percent saturation water quality criterion in the lower 
reservoir (RM 9.1) and between Enloe dam and the falls (RM 8.9), but 
exceeded the criterion below the falls (RM 8.8) and below the railroad 
trestle at the mouth of the canyon downstream from the project area (RM 
6.7). Flows ranged between 10,700 cfs at Nighthawk and 12,100 cfs at 
Oroville on May 26, 2006, to 8,780 cfs at Nighthawk and 9,640 cfs at 
Oroville on May 30, 2006. TDG levels increased by 3 to 7 percent of 
saturation after flowing over Enloe dam but remained below the water 
quality criterion, with mean hourly TDG levels ranging from 106.1 to 
108.7 percent of saturation between the dam and the falls.
    TDG increased substantially after flowing over the falls, 
increasing by an additional 12 to 14 percent of saturation. Downstream 
of the falls, mean TDG levels ranged from 118.5 to 120.7 percent of 
saturation. This TDG increase below the falls is due to the additional 
turbulence caused by the falls and the plunging flow into a deep pool 
where the increased pressure causes bubbles to dissolve. Near the 
railroad trestle located about 2.2 miles downstream of the falls, the 
mean TDG saturation was slightly lower (115.3 to 116.2 percent of 
saturation), but still remained above the criterion. Table 5 provides 
the results of Okanogan PUD's TDG sampling.
    A generalized longitudinal profile adapted from a 1934 USGS survey 
indicates that the river drops 46 vertical feet in the 1.6-mile reach 
upstream from the dam. This steep gradient suggests that historically 
turbulent flows in the reservoir reach before impoundment likely 
created aeration and may have contributed to increased TDG saturation 
above the 110 percent criterion during high flows. Thus, TDG saturation 
above 110 percent was likely a naturally occurring condition below the 
falls before the dam was built.

[[Page 28529]]

Contaminated Sediments

    Contamination from historical mining operations in the Similkameen 
River watershed has resulted in arsenic concentrations exceeding water 
quality criteria in samples from Chopaka Bridge in British Columbia (RM 
36.1) and Oroville, Washington (RM 5.0) (Peterschmidt and Edmond, 2004; 
Johnson, 2002). Washington DOE has completed a total maximum daily load 
(TMDL) evaluation and prepared a draft plan to address the arsenic 
contamination. The loading capacity for the river was set equal to the 
natural background concentration of arsenic (i.e., 0.4 to 0.6 microgram 
per liter total recoverable arsenic), because arsenic levels naturally 
exceed water quality criteria. The greatest amount of arsenic loading 
identified by the TMDL evaluation was caused by resuspension of 
sediments in the vicinity of Palmer Creek at RM 20, approximately 10 
miles upstream from the project area.

            Table 5--Summary of Total Dissolved Gas Measurements Near Enloe Dam From May 26-30, 2006
                                          [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              One-hour mean TDG saturation  (percent)
                Time and location                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   May 26 and 27      May 28          May 29          May 30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a.m.:
    Lower reservoir.............................           103.4           101.9           102.0           101.1
    Between dam and the falls...................           107.6  ..............           106.2           106.8
    Below the falls.............................           129.7           119.6           118.9           118.5
    Below railroad trestle......................           116.2           115.9           115.6           115.3
p.m.:
    Lower reservoir.............................           102.0           103.3           103.3           102.5
    Between dam and the falls...................           108.7  ..............           106.1           106.8
    Below the falls.............................           120.7           120.6           120.0           119.4
    Below railroad trestle......................           116.2           116.1           115.8           116.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An analysis of shallow sediment core samples for trace metals, 
performed for the Colville, confirmed arsenic contamination in the 
Similkameen River and Palmer Creek upstream from Nighthawk, Washington. 
Copper also exceeded a Colville sediment quality standard in several 
samples, and cadmium exceeded the standard in one sample.
    There are no established state regulatory criteria for chemical 
contaminants in freshwater sediments; however, several sediment quality 
values have been used to indicate potential toxic effects to aquatic 
life. The current Colville Tribal Code contains sediment cleanup levels 
both for the protection of human health and for the protection of 
sediment-dwelling organisms. The Colville adopted cleanup screening 
levels for eight metals, including arsenic, cadmium, and copper. 
Washington DOE also set non-regulatory sediment quality values and 
cleanup screening levels for freshwater sediment (Michelson, 2003, in 
Okanogan PUD, 2008a). Okanogan PUD collected sediment samples in 2007 
that were analyzed for pesticides, arsenic, cadmium, and copper. The 
sample results, along with the Colville criteria and Washington DOE 
non-regulatory sediment quality values are presented for comparison in 
table 6.

                                         Table 6--Summary of Preliminary Enloe Dam Sediment Trace Metals Results
                                                   [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a, as modified by staff]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                      Milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)
             PMX sample ID                River mile           ARI sample ID                  Depth (feet)        --------------------------------------
                                             (RM)                                                                    Arsenic      Cadmium       Copper
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow Core Samples:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    EDSG01.............................         10.6  07-16068-LK08A.................  0 to 1....................         15.7     \a\ 0.3U         22.3
    EDSG02.............................           10  07-16069-LK08B.................  0 to 1....................         23.5         0.3U         33.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VanVeen Grab Samples:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    EDSG03.............................          9.4  07-16070-LK08C.................  0 to 0.5..................         11.2          0.2         18.4
    EDSG05.............................          9.0  07-16071-LK08D.................  0 to 0.5..................         20.4         0.3U         27.9
    EDSG06.............................          9.0  07-16072-LK08E.................  0 to 0.5..................         10.0         0.3U         17.1
    EDSG08 \b\.........................          9.0  07-16073-LK08F.................  0 to 0.5..................          9.2         0.3U         17.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freeze Core Samples:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    EDSC04-0-4.........................          9.0  07-16099-LK13A.................  0.0 to 5.0................          8.8         0.2U         16.3
    EDSC04-4-8.........................          9.0  07-16100-LK13B.................  5.0 to 6.6................         29.3          0.4         47.5
    EDSC04-8-12........................          9.0  07-16101-LK13C.................  6.6 to 8.0................         10.3         0.2U         16.2
    EDSC08-0-4 \c\.....................          9.0  07-16102-LK13D.................  0.0 to 5.0................          7.0         0.2U         13.6
    EDSC08-8-12 \d\....................          9.0  07-16103-LK13E.................  6.6 to 8.0................          8.6         0.2U         16.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Grab Samples Below Enloe Dam (RM 8.9):
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 28530]]

 
    07-16081-LK11A.....................          8.7  SR-1...........................  0.0 to 0.1................         24.8          0.3         31.8
    07-16082-LK11B.....................          8.2  SR-2...........................  0.0 to 0.1................          9.3         0.3U         16.0
    07-16083-LK11C.....................          7.6  SR-3...........................  0.0 to 0.1................         10.6         0.2U         15.9
    07-16088-LK11H \e\.................          7.6  SR-8...........................  0.0 to 0.1................         10.4         0.3U         14.4
    07-16084-LK11D.....................          6.8  SR-4...........................  0.0 to 0.1................          9.1         0.3U         15.1
    07-16085-LK11E.....................          6.6  SR-5...........................  0.0 to 0.1................          8.2         0.3U         12.8
    07-16086-LK11F.....................          6.1  SR-6...........................  0.0 to 0.1................          9.5         0.3U         15.1
    07-16087-LK11G.....................          5.7  SR-7...........................  0.0 to 0.1................         13.1         0.3U         17.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freshwater Sediment Quality Values:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sediment Quality Standard \f\......  ...........  ...............................  ..........................           20          0.6           80
    Cleanup Screening Level \f\........  ...........  ...............................  ..........................           51            1          830
    Cleanup Screening Level \g\........  ...........  ...............................  ..........................         9.79         0.99         31.6
    Probable Effect Concentration \h\..  ...........  ...............................  ..........................           33         4.98          149
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ Results with ``U'' were not detected in the sample at the accompanying detection limit.
\b\ Duplicate of EDSG06.
\c\ Duplicate of EDSC04-0-4.
\d\ Duplicate of EDSC04-8-12.
\e\ Duplicate of SR-3.
\f\ Michelsen, 2003.
\g\ Colville, 2003.
\h\ MacDonald et al., 2000.

    Cadmium was detected in 3 of 15 samples, but in all cases was below 
the Colville criterion and Washington DOE sediment quality values 
(table 6). Pesticides were not detected in any sample.
    Copper was detected in all samples, and in all cases was below 
sediment quality values. Three samples exceeded the Colville copper 
criterion, but were below the sediment quality standard proposed by 
Michelsen (2003).
    Arsenic exceeded the Colville criterion in 11 of the 15 samples; 
and 4 of 15 exceeded Washington DOE's lower sediment quality value. All 
arsenic concentrations were below levels known to cause adverse 
effects; however, several of the arsenic concentrations were in the 
range where there could be a potential for adverse effects. Samples 
from the 2007 study contained higher concentrations of each trace metal 
than corresponding samples from the 2002 study (Johnson, 2002). This 
was likely due to the 2007 sediment samples containing more fine 
organic particles mixed with the sand and silt.
    Fine organic particles were most evident in the 2007 study in a 
freeze core sample taken from between 5.0 and 6.6 feet deep near the 
site of the new intake structure. This sample had a darker color, finer 
texture, an organic odor, visible organic material in various stages of 
decomposition, and higher concentrations of arsenic and copper. This 
core sample was collected from the area of the reservoir where buried 
sediments are most likely to be disturbed during project construction. 
To a lesser degree, deposits of fine organic material were observed in 
a patchy distribution in areas throughout the reservoir and on sandbars 
downstream from Enloe dam.
    In addition to the analysis of contaminant concentrations in the 
sediment, the same contaminants were analyzed in the water column using 
the Dredging Elutriate Test to mimic water column concentrations that 
could occur if sediments were disturbed by dredging (table 7). As with 
the bulk sediment samples, pesticides were not detected in any 
elutriate sample. Cadmium was detected at the detection limit in 
several samples, but was well below the water quality criteria in all 
samples. Arsenic was detected in all samples, but was also well below 
the water quality criteria. Copper was detected in all samples, and 
exceeded both chronic and acute criteria in 5 of the 8 primary samples. 
All elutriate samples exceeded the arsenic and copper concentrations in 
the ambient water sample from mid-reservoir.

                      Table 7--Summary of Preliminary Enloe Dam Sediment Elutriate Results
                                          [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Microgram per liter ([mu]g/L)
         PMX sample ID               ARI sample ID         Depth (feet)   --------------------------------------
                                                                             Arsenic      Cadmium       Copper
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow Core Samples:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    EDSG01....................  07-16494-LK86A........  0 to 1...........         12.5          0.2         12.1
    EDSG02....................  07-16495-LK86B........  0 to 1...........         29.1          0.2         28.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VanVeen Grab Samples:
    EDSG03....................  07-16496-LK86C........  0 to 0.5.........          5.6     \a\ 0.2U          4.6

[[Page 28531]]

 
    EDSG05....................  07-16497-LK86D........  0 to 0.5.........         20.9          0.2         28.1
    EDSG06....................  07-16498-LK86E........  0 to 0.5.........          7.5         0.2U          9.9
    EDSG08 \b\................  07-16499-LK86F........  0 to 0.5.........          6.4         0.2U          6.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freeze Core Samples:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    EDSC04-0-4................  07-16099-LK13A........  0.0 to 5.0.......          5.3         0.2U          4.7
    EDSC04-4-8................  07-16100-LK13B........  5.0 to 6.6.......         53.6          0.2         52.2
    EDSC04-8-12...............  07-16101-LK13C........  6.6 to 8.0.......          6.3         0.2U          4.6
    EDSC08-0-4 \c\............  07-16102-LK13D........  0.0 to 5.0.......          5.1         0.2U          3.4
    EDSC08-8-12 \d\...........  07-16103-LK13E........  6.6 to 8.0.......          7.7         0.2U          6.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ambient Water Sample:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    07-16054-LK07A............  EDW01.................  3.5..............          3.6         0.2U          0.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water Quality Criteria:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acute, aquatic life.......  ......................  .................          360     \e\ 1.82      \e\ 9.2
    Chronic, aquatic life.....  ......................  .................          190     \e\ 0.64      \e\ 6.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ Results with ``U'' were not detected in the sample at the accompanying detection limit.
\b\ Duplicate of EDSG06.
\c\ Duplicate of EDSC04-0-4.
\d\ Duplicate of EDSC04-8-12.
\e\ Criteria adjusted for 52 mg/L hardness (Washington DOE, 2005).

3.3.2.2 Environmental Effects

Water Quantity

    The existing dam has an uncontrolled spillway that passes all 
inflow. Okanogan PUD proposes to install new crest gates on the dam and 
install an intake channel adjacent to the dam crest to divert river 
flows to a new powerhouse and tailrace that would return flows to the 
Similkameen River approximately 480 feet downstream of the dam. The 
tailrace would discharge downstream of the falls, which is located 
approximately 370 feet downstream of the dam. Okanogan PUD proposes to 
operate the project in a run-of-river mode with no water storage for 
hydropower purposes; however, it has agreed to comply with interim 
ramping rate recommendations by Interior, Washington DFW, NMFS, and 
American Rivers et al. (see section 3.3.3.2, Aquatic Resources, 
Environmental Effects).
    Okanogan PUD proposes to provide minimum flows of 10 or 30 cfs in 
the 370-foot-long bypassed reach. American Rivers et al. recommends 
flow releases to the bypassed reach to adequately protect aquatic 
resources in the river and other designated beneficial uses in 
accordance with Washington state law for the Similkameen River.\14\ 
According to the code, this would consist of a minimum flow of 400 cfs 
during winter months up to a high flow of 3,400 cfs in the late spring/
early summer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Washington Administrative Code WAC 173-549-020 
Establishment of minimum instream flows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our Analysis

    Because the project would operate in a run-of-river mode with only 
minor flow variation caused by ramping rate restrictions, there would 
be no effect on the flow regime downstream of the project, compared to 
historical conditions. The issue of minimum flow releases for the 
bypassed reach is discussed below in this section and in sections 
3.3.3.2, Aquatic Resources, Environmental Effects, and 3.3.7.2, 
Aesthetic Resources, Environmental Effects.

Water Quality

Water Temperature (WQ-01)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to operate the crest gates to maintain the 
reservoir levels between elevation 1,048.3 feet and 1,050.3 feet msl 99 
percent of the time. The proposed crest gate operation would result in 
a small increase in the reservoir surface area (less than 12 percent) 
and larger increases in reservoir average depth (20 percent) and volume 
(21 percent) up to 10 months a year and may affect water temperature in 
the project reservoir. Okanogan PUD proposes to monitor water 
temperature at three locations for 5 years to determine if the crest 
gate operation causes an increase in the 7-DADMax water temperature in 
the reservoir compared to the river upstream of the reservoir.
    Interior, NMFS, and American Rivers et al. comment that increased 
reservoir size and area would result in more exposure to the sun, which 
would result in higher water temperatures above the dam and downstream 
of the dam, potentially affecting anadromous fish habitat. Interior 
recommends a study of the effects of the Enloe Project on water 
temperature. NMFS recommends that water temperatures be monitored for 5 
years with annual reporting, and American Rivers et al. requests more 
information about the effects of the project on temperature and water 
quality.
    The British Columbia Ministry of Environment (Ministry of 
Environment) comments that the project would not adversely affect water 
temperature in Canadian waters and that water quality standards would 
not be compromised as a result of project operations. The Ministry of 
Environment supports Okanogan PUD's measures to monitor water 
temperature in the reservoir and compensate for the potential decrease 
in production by including habitat enhancements, tailrace relocation, 
and entrainment studies.

[[Page 28532]]

Our Analysis

    Results of vertical temperature profile measurements (September 14 
and 15, 2006) show that water temperature varied less than 0.6 [deg]C 
from near surface to near bottom of the existing reservoir, indicating 
virtually no stratification in the reservoir during late summer 
(Okanogan PUD, 2008a). Comparisons of 7-DADMax temperatures indicated 
that water temperatures did not increase through the project area by 
more than 0.3 [deg]C at any time during the 2006 monitoring study (see 
figure 2), and decreased throughout the project area after reaching 
peak levels in late July. Based on these results, it appears that solar 
radiation did not warm the existing reservoir pool any more than the 
relatively shallow river reaches, with similar temperature patterns 
among all stations. Substantial warming probably did not occur because 
the existing reservoir is narrow and river-like in character. The 
proposed project would increase the reservoir surface area by about 27 
percent, comparing the existing reservoir at dam crest elevation to the 
proposed reservoir level during low-flow operations (see table 4). The 
actual increase in area would be from 60 to 76 acres, and the reservoir 
would remain a relatively small, narrow reservoir, unlikely to 
experience significant additional solar warming. In addition, the 
reservoir mean depth and volume would increase (table 4), which would 
act to counter any solar warming, in that more heat input would be 
required to effect a change in temperature. Okanogan PUD also proposes 
planting riparian vegetation along the reservoir to provide shading 
(discussed in section 3.3.4.2, Terrestrial Resources). Additional 
shading would reduce the amount of surface water exposed to solar 
warming. All these factors would act to minimize any heat gain and 
prevent any increase in water temperatures during the summer low-flow 
months. The greatest increase in reservoir size would occur during 
high-flow spill periods (table 4), but reservoir residence time would 
be short (only 45 minutes at the mean annual peak flow of 16,100 cfs), 
so there would be little opportunity for solar warming, even if warm, 
sunny conditions occurred during high-flow periods, which is not 
common.
    Studies conducted in the Similkameen River downstream of the dam 
indicate that water temperatures naturally increase during the summer 
with potential for lethal effects on salmonids (Okanogan PUD, 2008a). 
Based on our analysis, we conclude that construction and operation of 
this run-of-river hydroelectric project would have little effect on the 
existing water temperature pattern in the river, or affect compliance 
with water quality standards for water temperature.
    Okanogan PUD would monitor water temperature for at least the first 
5 years following license issuance to determine if the proposed 
increase in reservoir elevation and surface area are having an 
influence on water temperature in the reservoir and Similkameen River 
downstream of the dam. This measure would provide a water quality 
benefit. Development of the monitoring sites would be done after 
consultation with the TRG. The annual data resulting from this study 
could be used for adaptive management purposes and to design any 
required mitigation for any adverse effects on water temperature that 
may be observed. It would be appropriate for the Okanogan PUD to file a 
report with the Commission at the end of five years evaluating the need 
for continued monitoring and/or measures would ensure that the water 
quality is maintained at a level that will support aquatic resources at 
the project.

Dissolved Oxygen (WQ-02 Through WQ-04)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to inject air into the turbine draft tubes to 
increase DO in the plunge pool/tailrace, which may be used by 
anadromous fish as a holding pool and thermal refugia during the 
critical summer season (figure 4). The aeration vents would not be used 
during high spring flows when high TDG is a concern and DO 
concentrations are not low. Okanogan PUD would monitor DO levels during 
the first 5 years of project operations to determine the optimal time 
after high flows have receded in the early summer to provide aeration 
in the draft tubes.

[[Page 28533]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.003

    Okanogan PUD proposed to locate the project tailrace so that the 
discharged water circulates in the plunge pool below the falls. The 
average annual tailrace flows, as simulated by Okanogan PUD, would be 
similar in wet and normal water years (table 8).
    NMFS recommends that at the start of project operations, Okanogan 
PUD should monitor DO concentrations at the powerhouse intake and below 
the falls and continue monitoring for the term of the license.

                               Table 8--Simulated Average Annual Tailrace Flow for Three Normal and Three Wet Water Years
                                                              [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2009c]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Normal years                               Tailrace flow  (cfs)                Wet years               Tailrace flow  (cfs)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1989..........................................................                           842                          1991                         1,406
1993..........................................................                           896                          1996                         1,298
2000..........................................................                         1,051                          1997                         1,066
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our Analysis

    During the warm summer months, DO is naturally low in the 
Similkameen River. DO levels upstream and downstream of the project can 
drop below 8 mg/L, which is the minimum state standard set to protect 
salmonid fisheries. Currently, water passing over Enloe dam goes over 
the falls, which increases the DO concentration by about 1 mg/L, 
although this may vary depending on river flow and water temperature. 
Under Okanogan PUD's proposal, water that is diverted for generation 
would be routed around the falls and would not be naturally aerated as 
now occurs. Okanogan PUD's proposal for draft tube aeration would 
ensure protection of DO, despite loss of aeration by diverting flows 
into the powerhouse rather than over the falls. Monitoring below the 
powerhouse would assess the effectiveness of this measure and would 
ensure that water discharged to the project tailrace would meet state 
standards of 8 mg/L DO or higher at all times.
    Discharging powerhouse flows into the plunge pool would provide 
circulation to prevent stagnation and water quality degradation during 
the low flow summer months. The circulation pattern in the plunge pool 
may change as the tailrace flows would enter the pool approximately 90 
feet downstream from the falls at an angle. However, this change in 
pattern should not affect water quality or substantially

[[Page 28534]]

affect fish distribution in the pool. During high flow periods when 
water is passing over the dam and the falls, as well as through the 
powerhouse, flow patterns in the plunge pool would be more similar to 
current conditions, although there would be some reduced flow over the 
falls, and thus potentially reduced TDG levels. DO levels would be high 
during high-flow periods and heavy spillage over the dam and falls.
    Okanogan PUD's proposal to monitor DO levels during the first 5 
years of project operations to determine the optimal time--after high 
flows have receded in the early summer--to provide aeration in the 
draft tubes would not meet the NMFS recommendation to monitor DO over 
the term of the license.
    Monitoring DO during the first 5 years of operation would provide 
good information on possible project effects on DO, but if water 
quality standards are not met regularly, additional monitoring and 
alternative measures may provide additional useful information. 
Consultation with the TRG as to the need for an extension of the 
monitoring period, as well as in determining the location of the DO 
monitoring sites would ensure the proposal addresses the concerns of 
the agencies and the Commission.

Total Dissolved Gases (WQ-02 and WQ-04, FISH-09)

    TDG concentrations measured between May 26 and May 30, 2006, were 
below the 110 percent saturation water quality criterion in the lower 
reservoir (RM 9.1) and between the dam and the falls (RM 8.9), but 
exceeded the criterion below the falls (RM 8.8) and below the railroad 
trestle at the mouth of the canyon downstream from the project area (RM 
6.7). TDG concentrations increased substantially--an additional 12 to 
14 percent of saturation--in water flowing over the falls. The increase 
in TDG below the falls is due to the additional turbulence caused by 
the falls and plunging flow into a deep pool where the increased 
pressure causes air bubbles to dissolve into solution.
    Resident and anadromous fish can be negatively affected by 
supersaturated TDG levels. The tolerance of anadromous salmon and 
steelhead to TDG supersaturation varies greatly by life stage. Eggs 
appear to be quite resistant to high TDG levels, while yolk-sac fry are 
particularly vulnerable (Weitkamp and Katz, 1980). Juvenile fish appear 
more sensitive to TDG saturation with increasing size.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to divert water from the reservoir, through 
the turbines, and discharge flows downstream of the falls into the 
plunge pool. Okanogan PUD would monitor TDG concentrations at the 
project intake and in the plunge pool below the falls for a 5-year 
period after license issuance to determine the effects of the proposed 
operations on TDG levels at these locations.
    NMFS concurs with the proposal and adds that Okanogan PUD should 
maintain the ability to monitor TDG for the term of the license.
    The Ministry of Environment comments that TDG levels are expected 
to decrease as a result of project operations, which may benefit 
downstream salmonids. American Rivers et al. requests more information 
about potential water quality effects, including potential effects on 
TDG during times of higher water temperatures.

Our Analysis

    Water diverted for power production would be discharged into the 
plunge pool below the falls and would reduce spillage and plunging 
flows over the falls, in turn decreasing TDG levels. Some flows would 
continue over the falls when inflow to the reservoir exceeds 1,600 cfs 
and excess flow is spilled over the dam. During these conditions, 
powerhouse operation would continue and would act to reduce TDG 
concentrations downstream of the falls. The beneficial reduction in TDG 
would be directly related to the proportion of river flow that is 
diverted through the powerhouse. For normal water years, substantial 
reductions in TDG would be expected during all but a few days around 
the annual peak flow. The recently proposed minimum flow releases of 10 
or 30 cfs from the dam would maintain a small flow release over the 
falls during periods when most of the river flow is diverted for power 
generation. This volume of flow, however, would be much lower than 
flows that now occur over the falls (see table 2), so there still would 
be reductions in TDG compared to existing conditions.
    Normal turbine operation would not increase TDG except when air is 
introduced in the turbine draft tube to protect DO concentrations 
downstream during the summer months (see below). However, this would 
typically occur after high flows have receded and high TDG is no longer 
a concern.
    Any changes in TDG levels would have the potential to affect 
resident juvenile UCR steelhead and other species in the plunge pool 
and in the lower Similkameen River year-round. Okanogan PUD proposes to 
monitor TDG at the powerhouse intake and in the plunge pool below the 
falls for a period of 5 years. These data would be used to monitor the 
effects of the project on TDG levels and to determine if alternative 
measures are needed. This measure would provide a water quality 
benefit; however, it would be appropriate for the Okanogan PUD to file 
if a report with the Commission at the end of five years evaluating the 
need for continued monitoring and/or measures would ensure that the 
water quality is maintained at a level that will support aquatic 
resources at the project.
    It would also be appropriate for Okanogan PUD to select the sites 
for TDG monitoring in consultation with the TRG.

Sediment Management (WQ-05 and WQ-08)

    A 2007 licensing study that included sediment elutriate analyses 
indicated that water quality standards for copper could be exceeded if 
sediment is disturbed during proposed project construction and 
operation (Okanogan PUD, 2008a). The shallowest part of the reservoir 
is adjacent to the proposed intake location, and there is concern that 
sediment in this location could be mobilized during excavation of the 
intake channel and by project operations. Okanogan PUD proposes to 
excavate as much of the intake channel as possible in the dry, because 
underwater excavation poses the greatest risk of mobilizing sediment. 
To contain any resuspended sediments that may occur, Okanogan PUD 
proposes to install a floating silt barrier to contain sediments around 
construction areas.
    As we've said in section 3.3.1, Geology and Soils Resources, 
Okanogan PUD also proposes other measures to mitigate any effects of 
erosion and sediment mobilization during construction. Excavated 
material would be placed in a lined stockpile and tested for arsenic, 
copper, cadmium, zinc, and lead. Okanogan PUD would develop a sampling 
and analysis plan based on the chemical characteristics of 
representative samples from established stockpiles, and the results 
would be compared with relevant state criteria to determine if 
materials could be disposed of onsite, in a licensed solid waste 
landfill, or in a landfill licensed for the disposal of state-
designated dangerous waste.
    Okanogan PUD also proposes a Vegetation Plan that would include 
hydroseeding of the disposal sites, in addition to the seeding and 
other methods that would be used to revegetate all areas of exposed 
soil as per the site revegetation requirements.

[[Page 28535]]

    Washington DOE recommends that the sediment excavated from the 
intake channel entrance be tested for arsenic, copper, cadmium, zinc, 
and lead, and the results compared to the MTCA Method A water quality 
criteria of the EPA's Maximum Contaminant Level. Washington DOE also 
recommends storing excavated material onsite until it is characterized, 
then dispose of it in an appropriate manner based on analysis results 
and including a sampling and analysis plan.
    In response to the agency comments and recommendations, Okanogan 
PUD proposes to develop a Spill Response Plan and a Storm Water 
Pollution Prevention Plan to be filed with the Commission within one 
year of license issuance. The Spill Response Plan would be implemented 
at the beginning of project construction.

Our Analysis

    Project construction has the potential to resuspend sediments 
during excavation of the intake channel and installation of other 
project facilities. This construction and any reservoir erosion due to 
fluctuating water levels could cause short-term turbidity plumes, 
release of contaminated sediments, and downstream sedimentation.
    To avoid resuspension of sediments to the extent possible, Okanogan 
PUD would conduct as much of the excavation in the dry as possible. To 
avoid mobilizing resuspended sediments downstream of the reservoir 
during any instream excavations, Okanogan PUD would place a floating 
silt barrier to contain suspended sediments. We expect Okanogan PUD's 
other proposed measures, including the Spill Response Plan, the Storm 
Water Pollution Prevention Plan, testing excavated materials for 
arsenic, copper, and cadmium contamination, and employing BMPs, would 
reduce the risk for short-term degradation of water quality and aquatic 
habitat during construction, including critical habitat for UCR 
steelhead and EFH for Chinook salmon.
    To estimate the likelihood of sediment transport occurring during 
project operations, Okanogan PUD constructed a two-dimensional 
hydraulic model of the reservoir using the program River 2D.\15\ Models 
were developed for combinations of flow and forebay geometry, 
including: 2,200 cfs under existing and proposed conditions; 10,200 cfs 
under existing conditions; and 16,100 cfs under existing and proposed 
conditions. The modeled range of flows spans the range of flow 
magnitudes over which the 1-D impoundment hydraulic model predicted a 
transition from potential deposition to potential erosion. The model 
incorporates two assumptions: (1) Horizontal flow direction would not 
change with changes in bed topography, and (2) threshold velocities do 
not change with depth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The River 2D model, methods, and results are detailed in 
Okanogan PUD (2008a), appendix e.2.3, section 4.2.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The volume and weight of potential erosion/deposition were 
estimated for each flow condition, assuming a characteristic grain size 
of approximately 0.6 mm, an erosion/transport threshold of 1 foot per 
second and a deposition threshold of 0.1 foot per second, and a 
constant bulk density of sand equal to 100 pounds per cubic foot. The 
results of the River 2D model are consistent with the expectation that 
the addition of the intake channel would change flow velocities within 
the reservoir near the intake. The intake channel causes the flow to 
veer southeast toward the intake at both 2,200 and 16,100 cfs.\16\ The 
model also indicates that increased velocities would be likely just 
upstream of the pinch point that defines the upstream end of the 
forebay (the lower end of the reservoir immediately adjacent to the 
intake channel). The model predicts very high velocities in the intake 
channel at both modeled flow volumes, indicating that sediment 
transport and potential erosion would likely occur under the proposed 
operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The median annual flood discharge that would occur on 
average once every 2 years is 16,100 cfs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The results of this model-based analysis suggest that the Enloe 
reservoir currently undergoes an annual cycle of erosion and 
deposition, and that the additional erosion and sediment deposition 
that would occur at relatively low flows due to project operations 
would be minimal, compared to the amount of erosion and deposition that 
occurs every year during peak flows. At higher flows, the additional 
erosion and deposition under proposed operations would also be minor.
    Okanogan PUD acknowledges uncertainties associated with this 
analysis ; however, the general pattern shown by the model is probably 
reasonable. Sediment builds up in the forebay during relatively low 
flow portions of the year and is largely flushed out during annual peak 
flows. This general pattern would likely continue during proposed 
project operations, with increased levels of erosion and decreased 
levels of deposition occurring in the lower end of the reservoir near 
the dam and intake channel. The predicted small increases in reservoir 
erosion and decreases in deposition during proposed project operations 
indicate that some sediment deposition (sand and silt) would increase 
in the lower gradient reach of the lower Similkameen River (RM 0-4.7) 
(Okanogan PUD, 2008a). Increased deposition of fine sediment would 
modify aquatic habitat if measurable deposition was to occur, and could 
result in downstream contamination if the reservoir sediment 
transported downstream of the falls is contaminated. That potential, 
however, seems unlikely, because the River 2D model did not predict a 
significant increase in erosion, which would be required to mobilize 
contaminated sediment that has been deposited in the reservoir for many 
years. The mound of sediment observed in the lower end of the reservoir 
during low-flow bathymetric surveys is likely a transient feature that 
does not contain legacy sediments from early in the impoundment's 
history, and thus would not contain high contaminants levels (Okanogan 
PUD, 2008a).
    Increased deposition of fine sediment in the lower Similkameen 
River could have a negative effect on the spawning and rearing areas 
used by anadromous salmonids and affect water quality for other 
downstream beneficial uses. The potential effects on listed species are 
discussed in section 3.3.5, Threatened and Endangered Species.

Spill Plan (WQ-07)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to develop and implement a Spill Plan 
including spill prevention, containment, and clean-up plan at project 
initiation to reduce potential effects of accidental spill.
    BLM recommends Okanogan PUD develop and implement, after 
consultation with the BLM, a hazardous substances plan (essentially 
same as Spill Plan) for oil and hazardous substance storage, spill 
prevention, and clean up prior to any activity that may affect the BLM-
administered public lands. BLM recommends the plan address both 
construction and ongoing operations and maintenance of the proposed 
Enloe Project. At a minimum, the plan would: (1) Outline Okanogan PUD's 
procedures for reporting and responding to releases of hazardous 
substances, including names and phone numbers of all emergency response 
personnel and their assigned responsibilities; (2) outline Okanogan 
PUD's procedures for timely identification and remediation of spills, 
including procedures in the event that

[[Page 28536]]

personnel are not present on-site 24-hours a day; (3) identify and 
maintain a cache of spill cleanup equipment sufficient to contain any 
spill from the proposed Enloe Project; (4) call for Okanogan PUD to 
provide BLM with a report specifying the location of spill clean-up 
equipment on the BLM-administered public lands and the location, type, 
and quantity of oil and hazardous substances stored in the proposed 
Enloe Project area; and (5) require that Okanogan PUD inform BLM 
immediately as to the nature, time, date, location, and action taken 
for any spill affecting the BLM-administered public lands.

Our Analysis

    In accordance with 40 CFR 112.1 of the EPA's regulations, a spill 
prevention control and countermeasure plan is required to be in place 
for any facility where unburied storage capacity exceeds 1,320 gallons 
of oil or a single container has a capacity in excess of 660 gallons. 
In addition to the on-site storage of lubricants and other oil 
products, transformers are likely oil-cooled and would be of sufficient 
capacity to exceed the 1,320 gallon threshold that would require a 
plan. The Spill Plan proposed by Okanogan PUD and further described by 
BLM would provide a quick reference to procedures and notifications in 
case of oil spills to reduce the possibility of oil or other hazardous 
substances reaching the BLM-administered land and the Similkameen River 
if a spill occurs. Development and implementation of the Spill Plan 
after consultation with BLM and Washington DOE would minimize the 
potential for petroleum products to enter the project waters in the 
event of a spill.

Minimum Flow Proposal

    As we previously described in sections 1.3.2 and 2.2.4, by letter 
filed October 28, 2010, Okanogan PUD proposes minimum flows for the 
bypassed reach immediately downstream of Enloe dam. Okanogan PUD also 
proposes: A monitoring program for DO and water temperature for the 
bypassed reach for a period of time postconstruction; an adaptive 
management program to enhance DO and water temperatures should 
monitoring indicate that water quality standards are not being met; 
determining critical flow thresholds for downramping rates based on 
monitoring and field observations prior to operations; and determining 
a means for releasing minimum flows at Enloe dam.

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD's proposal would provide a minimum flow of 30 cfs from 
mid-July to mid-September, and 10 cfs the rest of the year into the 
bypassed reach.
    Providing a minimum flow of 10 and 30 cfs would ensure that some 
flow is passing over Enloe dam and falls at all times, even during the 
lowest flow months of the year when the project hydraulic capacity 
would allow diversion of the entire river flow for power generation. 
Effects on water quality would be related to potential changes in DO 
levels and water temperature. As we previously discussed, DO levels in 
the Similkameen River do not always meet the state standard of a 
minimum of 8 mg/L under existing conditions, although the falls act to 
aerate flows passing over them. Diversion of most of the river flow 
through the powerhouse during lower flow periods would reduce the 
aeration effect that now occurs over the falls. A study conducted by 
Okanogan PUD found that under current conditions, DO levels of water 
plunging over the falls increase by approximately 1.0 mg/L.\17\ 
Maintaining some flow in the bypassed reach and over the falls would 
continue to provide some natural aeration in this project reach, 
although flows of 10 and 30 cfs are relatively low and may not 
contribute substantially to aeration below the project tailrace. 
Okanogan PUD's proposal to aerate the water in the project draft tubes 
would be able to increase DO levels by 1.0 mg/L or more and would be 
able to offset the loss of this natural increase in DO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Okanogan PUD letter filed on November 10, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Water temperatures in the Similkameen River upstream and downstream 
of the project area are marginal for salmonid habitat under existing 
conditions, and often exceed state standards for salmonid spawning, 
incubation, and rearing. Effects of the proposed minimum flow on water 
temperature could occur by passage of a relatively low flow (10 and 30 
cfs) in the bypassed reach, exposing it to solar radiation and warming 
during the summer months, further reducing the suitability of salmonid 
habitat in the river. On November 10, 2010, Okanogan PUD filed an 
analysis of the effects of the proposed minimum flow on water 
temperature, which concluded that the passage of that flow through the 
bypassed reach would not result in a measurable increase in water 
temperature at the base of the falls, even under the lowest river flow 
conditions.\18\ Okanogan PUD, however, also concluded that a 
temperature increase of 0.5 to 1.0 [deg]C could occur in the bypassed 
reach if the proposed minimum flow was allowed to pass over the entire 
face of Enloe dam in a thin sheet flow.\19\ Passing the minimum flow 
through a pipe or a smaller gate to the base of the dam instead of 
providing it as a sheet flow over the dam could prevent this 
temperature increase. We find Okanogan PUD's analysis reasonable and we 
agree that passing this minimum flow would likely have a minor effect 
on water temperature downstream of the falls, assuming that the minimum 
flow is provided via a pipe or small gate at the dam.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Okanogan PUD letter filed on November 10, 2010.
    \19\ State water quality standards are that a water temperature 
increase should not exceed 0.3 [deg]C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Okanogan PUD's proposal for DO and temperature monitoring for a 
period of time postconstruction would allow for a characterization of 
the water quality in the bypassed reach under the proposed minimum 
flows of either 10 or 30 cfs. Consultation with the TRG to determine 
the length of DO and temperature monitoring in the bypassed reach, and 
adaptive management could help to develop means to protect water 
quality in this reach.
    Similarly, Okanogan PUD had previously proposed to implement the 
ramping rates recommended by the resource agencies downstream of the 
tailrace. Additionally, they have proposed to identify critical flow 
thresholds for downramping rates in the bypassed reach to protect 
aquatic resources in the bypassed reach during project start-up and 
shutdown. The topography of the bypassed reach is such that there are 
areas where fish would likely be stranded if spillage over the dam is 
reduced at a rate that does not allow fish to successfully vacate these 
areas. The best way to determine these critical flow thresholds would 
be by field observations as proposed.
    Okanogan PUD provided preliminary designs for alternative minimum 
flow release structures and stated that the preferred option would be a 
gate and release pipe using one of the two existing penstock intakes 
from the abandoned hydro station at the dam. This would minimize the 
potential for water temperature increases in the minimum flow releases. 
Okanogan PUD stated, however, that it and the resource agencies have 
not yet come to agreement on the final design of the flow release 
structure, and it proposes further consultations with the agencies to 
finalize the design. We agree that a flow

[[Page 28537]]

release structure consisting of a gate and pipe using one of the former 
penstock intakes would be the best option, because it would minimize 
any potential water temperature increases, would allow placement of the 
flow discharge at a point below the dam that would provide the greatest 
environmental benefit, and would provide the best control of the flows 
to be released. We also agree that the final design of this structure 
should be developed in consultation with the resource agencies 
(Washington DOE, Washington DFW, FWS, NMFS, BLM, and the Colville), 
prior to filing the design with the Commission for approval.
3.3.2.3 Cumulative Effects
    Historical land use in the Similkameen River drainage includes a 
legacy of mining, timber harvest, grazing, and agriculture. Commercial 
mining has probably had the greatest impact on the Similkameen River 
water quality. One of the largest mines in the area was the Kaaba-Texas 
Mine, located several miles upstream of Enloe reservoir near the 
community of Nighthawk. The mine operated from the late 1890s until 
1954 and discharged tailings directly into the Similkameen River until 
1946. In 1999, the EPA removed and disposed of approximately 81,000 
cubic yards of contaminated mine tailings from the mine site.
    Today the dominant land use is agriculture, grazing, and 
recreation. A number of orchards, vineyards and a public golf course 
are located along the Loomis-Oroville Road. The area is unfenced open 
range generally leased for grazing.
    The water quality of the Similkameen River has improved since the 
commercial mining has been discontinued in the drainage area above the 
project, and with the EPA efforts to remove contaminated mine tailings 
at the Kaaba-Texas Mine. However, much of the sediment contained in 
Enloe reservoir was deposited when upstream mining activities were 
active, and contains some arsenic, copper, and cadmium.
    The construction and operation of the project could result in a 
number of effects that when added to conditions already present in the 
basin, could have negative environmental effects. Project construction 
of the intake channel has the potential to remobilize contaminated 
sediments. Petroleum products stored and used during construction and 
during project operations could be released to project waters. The 
increase in reservoir surface area increases the potential for slightly 
higher water temperatures in the reservoir. Erosion from project 
construction could cause increased turbidity and sedimentation. 
Measures proposed by Okanogan PUD and additional staff recommended 
measures, however, would minimize the effects on water quality and the 
potential for cumulative effects during the construction and operation 
of the proposed project.
3.3.3 Aquatic Resources
3.3.3.1 Affected Environment
    The fisheries resources information presented in this section is a 
combination of recent and historical reports produced by state and 
federal resource agencies; investigations by universities and 
consulting groups; literature reviews; file materials from state and 
federal agencies; and ongoing studies. These materials were 
supplemented by information from Okanogan PUD studies that were 
conducted in consultation with NMFS, FWS, Washington DFW, Washington 
DOE, and the Colville from 2005 through 2008.
    The Similkameen River is approximately 72 miles long and originates 
in the Cascade Mountains of British Columbia, Canada. The 27-mile reach 
of the Similkameen River between the U.S./Canadian border and the 
Okanogan River flows through semi-arid mountainous terrain. The 
licensing study area extends from the confluence of the Similkameen and 
Okanogan Rivers upstream to Shanker's Bend at RM 10.1. Enloe dam is 
located immediately upstream of the Similkameen Falls,\20\ about 8.8 
miles upstream from the confluence with the Okanogan River. Enloe dam 
is approximately 18 miles downstream of the U.S./Canadian border.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Also known as Coyote Falls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Downstream of the Dam

    The river below the falls is divided into three reaches based on 
habitat conditions and channel morphology. Reach 1 (RM 0-4.7) is a low 
gradient (<0.1 percent), braided channel. The dominant substrates are 
cobble and gravel with areas of sand and boulders. The majority of 
salmonid spawning occurs in this reach, although gravel is relatively 
scarce--limiting the amount of spawning habitat. Reach 2 (RM 4.7-7.1) 
has a wider active channel than reach 1 and a few side channels. The 
gradient is low to moderate (0.1 to 2 percent; average 0.4 percent). 
The substrates are cobble, sand, and boulders. Reach 3 (RM 7.1-8.8) is 
a canyon reach. The channel gradient in reach 3 averages greater than 2 
percent. Although the dominant substrate is bedrock, sand deposits 
occur in the center of the channel.
    The Similkameen River supports anadromous and resident fishes below 
the falls. Native species in the lower river include summer-run Chinook 
salmon, sockeye salmon, UCR steelhead, bridgelip sucker, largescale 
sucker, mountain whitefish, longnose dace, northern pikeminnow, redside 
shiner, rainbow trout, and unidentified sculpin species (table 9). Non-
native species include common carp, largemouth and smallmouth bass, and 
black crappie. The relative abundance (percent composition) of these 
species is shown in table 10.

             Table 9--Native and Non-Native Fishes in the Similkameen River Based on Snorkel Surveys
                                          (Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Okanogan PUD                           ENTRIX  (2007)
           Common name             IEC beak  (1984)         (1991)          ENTRIX  (2006)      (upstream only)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinook salmon..................  ..................  ..................  D.................  ..................
UCR Steelhead/rainbow trout.....  D & U in Canada...  D.................  D.................  ..................
Sockeye salmon/kokanee..........  U kokanee.........  ..................  ..................  ..................
Bridgelip sucker................  D.................  U.................  U.................  U (unidentified
                                                                                               species)
Largescale sucker...............  ..................  D & U.............  D & U.............  U (unidentified
                                                                                               species)
Sculpin spp.....................  D.................  D & U.............  D & U.............  U

[[Page 28538]]

 
Northern pikeminnow.............  D.................  U.................  D.................  U
Longnose dace...................  D & U.............  ..................  ..................  U
Redside shiner..................  ..................  U.................  D & U.............  U
Burbot..........................  ..................  U.................  ..................  ..................
Mountain whitefish..............  D.................  D & U.............  D.................  U
Chiselmouth.....................  ..................  ..................  ..................  U
Peamouth........................  ..................  ..................  ..................  U
Smallmouth bass.................  ..................  ..................  U.................  ..................
Largemouth bass.................  ..................  D & U.............  D & U.............  U
Black crappie...................  D.................  D.................  ..................  ..................
Common carp.....................  ..................  ..................  ..................  U
Yellow perch....................  ..................  ..................  ..................  U
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: D = downstream of Enloe dam; U = upstream of Enloe dam.

         Table 10--Numbers and Percent Composition of Native and Non-Native Fishes in the River Downstream of Enloe Dam Based on Snorkel Surveys
                                                              (Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Reach 1  RM 0-4.7              Reach 2  RM 4.7-7.1             Reach 3  RM 7.1-8.8
               Common name               ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------   % of  Total
                                                Aug             Sep             Aug             Sep             Aug             Sep            catch
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sucker spp..............................              29             314              53             176               0               1            22.0
Largemouth bass.........................              42              25              12               7               0               0             3.3
Smallmouth bass.........................             101              92              32               8              13              20            10.2
Sculpin spp.............................               3               6               1               3               0               0             0.5
Common carp.............................               0              13               0               0               0               0             0.5
Minnow spp..............................             472             737               5               0               0               0            46.6
Northern pikeminnow.....................              15               0              21              21               0               1             2.2
Juvenile UCR steelhead/rainbow trout....             115              77              16               8               3               1             8.4
Adult UCR steelhead/rainbow trout \a\...               0               3               0               0               0               0             0.1
Sockeye salmon..........................               0              13               2               0               0               0             0.6
Chinook salmon..........................               0              33               0               0               0               0             1.3
Mountain whitefish......................              41              47               1              24               0               0             4.3
    Totals..............................             818           1,360             143             247              16              23             100
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The numbers of adult anadromous fish observed during the 2006 snorkel surveys were not considered representative of population strength because
  adult anadromous fish are most abundant in the river during their respective spawning migrations, and the survey occurred outside of the spawning
  migration period.

    The summer-run Chinook salmon in the Similkameen River enter the 
river from July through late September. In its February 26, 2010 
letter, NMFS stated that adults are known to hold in the plunge pool 
below the falls until spawning takes place in October through early 
November, peaking in mid-October from RM 0 to RM 8.8. There are no 
known spawning areas within the project area. Most of the Chinook 
salmon spawning occurs in the lower 5 miles of the river. Washington 
DFW counted 1,660 Chinook salmon redds in 2004 and 1,423 in 2005 in the 
lower Similkameen River. Based on these redd counts, Washington DFW 
estimated Chinook spawning escapement \21\ to be approximately 4,169 
fish in 2004 and 3,770 in 2005. Chinook fry emergence occurs in January 
through April; juveniles emigrate to the ocean within 1-4 months after 
emergence, when water temperatures begin to increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Anadromous adults returning to spawn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Washington DFW operates a Chinook salmon rearing and acclimation 
facility called Similkameen Pond at RM 3. Juveniles are released from 
the pond in mid-April to mid-May.
    Sockeye salmon enter the Columbia River from late May to mid-June, 
and migrate into the Okanogan River. Sockeye salmon spawn primarily in 
the main stem of the Okanogan River upstream of Lake Osoyoos in Canada, 
typically in October. Fry emerge in March through May and move 
downstream to Lake Osoyoos. The juveniles rear in the lake for 1-2 
years before emigrating to the ocean, usually in May. Although some 
sockeye have been reported in the lower Similkameen River, there is no 
sockeye spawning habitat in the river.
    Chinook salmon and sockeye salmon pre-spawn mortalities in the 
Similkameen and Okanogan Rivers have been associated with high water 
temperatures. Dead female Chinook salmon were examined to estimate pre-
spawn mortality in the Similkameen River from 2004-2006. Examinations 
in 2004 and 2005 indicated approximately 1 percent of females died 
prior to spawning. This percentage could vary

[[Page 28539]]

depending on the annual flow and temperature conditions.
    High water temperatures can also delay upstream migration of the 
anadromous salmonids into the Okanogan River and can lead to the pre-
spawn mortality noted above, or affect the timing of spawning. UCR 
steelhead, Chinook salmon, and sockeye salmon enter the cooler 
Similkameen River and migrate as far upstream as the falls during the 
summer months. The larger, deeper pools (e.g., the plunge pool below 
the falls) and areas with overhead structure (e.g., large woody debris, 
bridges) are the preferred holding habitat until temperatures in the 
Okanogan River decrease and these species can commence their spawning 
activities. These spawning delays can adversely affect reproductive 
success by extending incubation and fry emergence into time periods 
with less suitable conditions for survival, or by shortening the 
rearing period for juvenile fish prior to their emigration to the 
ocean.
    During snorkel surveys, Okanogan PUD observed juvenile steelhead/
rainbow trout in the side channels of reach 1 and 2, where water 
temperatures were several degrees cooler than the surrounding water. In 
dry years, flow in the side channels is intermittent, resulting in 
dewatered segments. Small amounts of large woody debris also occur in 
these reaches, and sections of the river have been channelized and 
diked, particularly near Oroville.
    In its February 26, 2010, letter, Interior stated that historically 
significant runs of anadromous Pacific lamprey may have occurred in the 
project area, and the lamprey has had economic and cultural 
significance to local Native American tribes. Lamprey larvae are filter 
feeders that burrow into fine silty substrate in the lower velocity 
areas of streams (Wydoski and Whitney, 1979). Pacific lamprey remain in 
the larval stage for 5 to 6 years before they metamorphose and migrate 
to the ocean as predatory adults. The adult stage is generally short 
(less than 1 to 2 years) (Moyle, 2002).
    Probable suitable Pacific lamprey spawning and rearing habitats are 
present in the Similkameen River below the dam; however, recent 
attempts to document adult lamprey have been unsuccessful. Washington 
DFW has documented unidentified larval lamprey in the hatchery ponds on 
reach 1, close to the confluence with the Okanogan River. In 2006, the 
Colville collected adult and juvenile lamprey from screw traps in the 
Okanogan River, downstream of Salmon Creek. Unconfirmed lamprey redds 
were observed in the middle reach of the Okanogan River in 2008.

Proposed Bypassed Reach

    The 33-foot-long, 20-foot-high Similkameen Falls below Enloe dam is 
a natural barrier to upstream salmonid fish passage. The falls presents 
less of an impediment to Pacific lamprey since they use their oral 
disks to attach to surfaces allowing them to withstand higher current 
velocities. Fish habitat in the 370-foot-long, bedrock-boulder 
dominated bypassed reach between the dam and the falls is limited and 
it was believed that there are few, if any fish in this reach. A 
snorkel survey of the bypassed reach between Enloe dam and the head of 
Similkameen Falls was conducted in August 2006. No fish were observed. 
The dominant substrate is bedrock strewn with large boulders; smaller 
substrate occurred in sparse patches. There is no overhanging 
vegetation or large woody debris.
    On September 15, 2010, another snorkel survey and hook and line 
sampling was conducted by Washington DOE and DFW biologists in the 
plunge pool downstream of Enloe dam, with participation by Okanogan PUD 
representatives and a biologist from the Colville (report included in 
filing from Donald H. Clarke, Counsel to Public Utility District No. 1 
of Okanogan County, to Kimberly Bose, Secretary, FERC, November 10, 
2010). Flow conditions did not allow a complete survey of the plunge 
pool, and only the east side of the pool was safely accessible to 
swimmers. Biologists observed small numbers of juvenile suckers, 
smallmouth bass, rainbow trout, and one sculpin, and two rainbow trout 
and a northern pikeminnow were captured by hook and line. No anadromous 
species were observed. Fish were observed actively feeding, indicating 
that the plunge pool is used as feeding habitat by resident fish 
species when flow conditions allow. Fish observed in the pool likely 
gained access to the pool by dropping downstream from upstream of Enloe 
dam.
    Flow in the bypassed reach becomes extremely turbulent during high 
water. Fish in the bypassed reach and plunge pool would encounter 
extreme flow conditions during high flow, and may be flushed downstream 
of the falls unless they can access flow refugia within the plunge pool 
or elsewhere in the bypassed reach. Aquatic benthic macroinvertebrates 
would also be subject to high shear stress and scour during high flows.

Upstream of the Dam

    Habitat in Enloe reservoir consists mostly of sand and silt 
substrate with some gravel. Cobble occurs at a few sites near the 
upstream end. From the middle of the reservoir to the upstream end the 
banks are also relatively steep. There is more shallow water habitat in 
this section of the reservoir, although the majority of habitat is 
still deep and open water. Overhanging vegetation that provides shade 
and cover is limited along the reservoir, and includes a few large 
willows. Small amounts of aquatic vegetation and a few patches of 
submerged grasses occur in the reservoir. Large woody debris is scarce; 
the most common habitat structure and cover were steep rock walls, 
submerged boulders, and partially submerged boulders along the 
shoreline.
    There are fewer fish species in Enloe reservoir than in the river 
below the dam (tables 9 and 11). Native resident fishes in the 
reservoir include chiselmouth, peamouth, bridgelip sucker, largescale 
sucker, mountain whitefish, longnose dace, burbot, northern pikeminnow, 
redside shiner, and unidentified sculpin species. Non-native species 
include largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, yellow perch, and common 
carp. Native rainbow trout are found upstream of the project boundary 
in Canada but were not found in the project reservoir but were found in 
the bypassed reach.
    Most of the species in Enloe reservoir are introduced, non-native 
fish that are better adapted to warmer, slower velocity habitat (table 
11). Most fish captured in the reservoir were small and were found in 
shallow areas associated with the limited presence of cover (mostly 
vegetation). The larger fish, mostly northern pikeminnow, chiselmouth, 
and unidentified suckers, use open water areas of the reservoir. No 
rainbow trout and very few mountain whitefish were found in the 
reservoir, likely due to a combination of northern pikeminnow 
predation, warm water temperatures, and lack of cover. Introduced 
warmwater species, such as largemouth bass, yellow perch, and common 
carp, may be spawning in the reservoir littoral zones, but more likely 
are transported to the reservoir from upstream sources such as Palmer 
Lake.

[[Page 28540]]

                    Table 11--Numbers and Percent Composition of Native and Non-Native Fishes in the Reservoir Upstream of Enloe Dam
                                                              [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   2006                                                    2007
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Beach seine             Minnow trap                 Beach seine     Minnow trap      Gill net
               Common name               ------------------------------------------------  % of  ------------------------------------------------  % of
                                                   Aug.    Sept.           Aug.    Sept.   total   March   July    March   July    March   July    total
                                          July 7    11      14    July 7    11      14     catch    22      24      22      24      22      24     catch
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suckers spp.............................      22       1       0       0       1       0    10.2       0       2       1       0       0       2     6.7
Sculpin spp.............................       2       0       0       0       0       1     1.3       0       0       1       0       0       0     1.3
Largemouth bass.........................      53      16       0       0       0       0    29.4       0      16       0       0       0       0    21.3
Chiselmouth.............................       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       8    10.7
Common carp.............................      14       0       0       0       0       0     6.0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0
Minnow spp..............................      68      28       1       4       4       3    46.0       0       1       0       1       0       0     2.7
Peamouth................................       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       2     2.7
Northern pikeminnow.....................       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       3       0      16    25.3
Redside shiner..........................       2       0       0       1       0       0     1.3       1       0      11       1       0       0    17.3
Longnose dace...........................       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       3       3       0       0       0       0     8.0
Yellow perch............................      13       1       0       0       0       0     6.0       0       1       0       0       0       0     1.3
Mountain whitefish......................       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       2       0       0       0       0     2.7
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals..............................     174      46       1       5       5       4     100       4      25      13       5       0      28     100
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similkameen River aquatic benthic macroinvertebrate data were 
collected by Vinson (1994) from three riverine sites between the 
Canadian border and the project area at RMs 12, 16, and 17. Eighty-five 
taxa were collected; 10 taxa made up 80 percent of the total sample 
(table 12). The majority of macroinvertebrates collected were 
chironomid larvae (50.3 percent relative abundance). Ephemeroptera from 
the family Ephemerellidae accounted for 19 percent of the relative 
abundance; Trichopterans represented 9 percent.

      Table 12--Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertebrate Taxa Found in the Similkameen River Above Enloe Reservoir
                                          [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Portion of
            Order                   Family         Sub-Family         Genus         sample  (%)    Cumulative  %
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diptera......................  Chironomidae...  Orthocladiinae.  ...............            21.0            21.0
Diptera......................  Chironomidae...  Chironominae...  ...............            19.2            40.2
Ephemeroptera................  Ephemerellidae.  ...............  Ephemerella....            11.0            51.2
Diptera......................  Chironomidae...  Tanypodinae....  ...............             8.0            59.2
Trichoptera..................  Hydropsychidae.  ...............  Hydropsyche....             7.1            66.3
Ephemeroptera................  Baetidae.......  ...............  Baetis.........             5.4            71.7
Ephemeroptera................  Ephemerellidae.  ...............  ...............             2.6            74.3
Diptera......................  Chironomidae...  ...............  ...............             2.1            76.4
Trichoptera..................  Brachycentridae  ...............  Brachycentrus..             1.9            78.3
Oligochaeta..................  Tubificidae....  Naidinae.......  ...............             1.8            80.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are no benthic macroinvertebrate data for Enloe reservoir or 
the river below Enloe dam. It is likely that the reservoir benthic 
macroinvertebrate community is less diverse than the riverine 
community. A significant increase in non-insect taxa that are tolerant 
of silt conditions, such as oligochaete worms and isopods, would be 
expected in the reservoir. The macroinvertebrate communities in reaches 
2 and 3 below Enloe dam are likely similar to communities found in the 
upper Similkameen River. Reach 1 is a lower velocity, braided channel 
with more fine sediment deposition; as such, it is likely to have a 
higher percentage of taxa that burrow, swim, or sprawl, with a 
corresponding reduction in the percentage of macroinvertebrates that 
cling and/or crawl.

3.3.3.2 Environmental Effects

Effects of Project Construction (WQ-05 Through WQ-08, FISH-01, BOTA-03 
and BOTA-04, BOTA-07 Through BOTA-13)
    As proposed by Okanogan PUD, construction of the project access 
road, intake channel, penstock, and powerhouse would require excavation 
and placement of spoil using heavy equipment, blasting, and would be 
supported by staging and laydown areas and fuel and lubricant storage 
facilities.
    Okanogan PUD proposes a Blasting Plan that includes environmental 
measures to minimize potential negative effects on anadromous and 
resident fish that are in the large pool at the base of the falls. The 
Blasting Plan incorporates the following mitigation measures to avoid 
adverse effects on anadromous and resident fish:
     Small charges would be set off with time delays to 
minimize peak vibration and avoid creating excessive pressure waves and 
noise. Threshold criteria for pressure waves and noise have been 
adopted in the Blasting Plan to avoid potentially harmful levels of 
pressure and noise.
     Impacts would be minimized by timing near- and in-water 
blasting to coincide with the lowest water levels (low flows) combined 
with lowest potential for fish occupation in the area.
     Blast scheduling would avoid periods when federally listed 
or sensitive fish species are present.
     Blasting adjacent to the river would take place prior to 
spring high flow or during fall low flow.

[[Page 28541]]

     The amount of time that near- or in-water construction and 
blasting occurs would be minimized when the downstream end of the 
tailrace channel is excavated. During this period, construction 
activities would be expedited to reduce the amount of time fish may be 
exposed to the effects of blasting activities.
     Impacts would be minimized or avoided by removing as many 
fish as practical from the area adjacent to the proposed blasting and 
installing an exclusion barrier downstream of the potentially affected 
area to prevent entry of additional fish into the affected area.
     Mechanical excavators with hydraulic rock hammer 
attachments would be used in lieu of blasting to trim the excavation, 
excavate rock in areas unsuitable for blasting, and to excavate loose 
rock. Okanogan PUD would remove residues from the blasting operation to 
the extent practical.
     Hydrophones would be used to monitor pressure waves from 
blasting that could affect fish.
     Creation of hydrostatic pressure waves greater than 100 
kilopascals (or about 14.5 pounds per square inch), or noise levels 
exceeding 190 decibels (dB) would be avoided, as practical.
    In response to a comment by Washington DFW, Okanogan proposes to 
station biological monitors in the field during blasting to observe 
mortalities or changes in fish behavior that might make them more 
susceptible to predation.

Our Analysis

Blasting

    The large, deep plunge pool downstream of the falls is an important 
habitat feature for anadromous and resident fishes that is not found 
elsewhere in the Similkameen River. Blasting would expose fish in the 
plunge pool to short-term physiological stress, sublethal injuries, 
mortality, or predation. Okanogan PUD's proposed Blasting Plan, as 
described above, however, would minimize these impacts and be 
protective of the fishery.
    Additionally, Okanogan PUD proposes to capture anadromous and 
resident fish in the pool and relocate them prior to blasting 
activities. This measure would physically remove fish from areas where 
they could experience negative impacts due to blasting and would be 
protective of these fishes. This measure could result in some negative 
effects to captured fish including net abrasion, short-term 
physiological stress, sublethal injuries, mortality, and increased 
predation during transport or as a result of relocation to less optimal 
habitat. Capture of all individuals in the plunge pool prior to 
blasting would be difficult given the size of the pool (400 feet long 
by 80 to 100 feet wide by = 20 to 30 feet deep) and the 
turbulence created by the falls. Accordingly, some fish, particularly 
smaller fish such as juvenile UCR steelhead, would remain in the deep 
pool below the falls after removal efforts. After fish are removed from 
the plunge pool, Okanogan PUD proposes to use netting across the 
Similkameen River which would exclude fish from re-entering the blast 
zone.
    Okanogan PUD proposes visual biological monitoring during 
construction of project facilities to observe mortalities or changes in 
fish behavior that might make them more susceptible to predation. As 
noted by Okanogan PUD, however, the physical characteristics of the 
plunge pool would make it difficult to effectively monitor the area of 
impact effectively. If biological monitors were to observe mortalities 
or changes in fish behavior, Okanogan PUD also does not specify what 
kind of mitigative or protective actions may be taken.
    Direct or indirect effects of the blasting activities may cause 
mortality or injury to ESA listed UCR steelhead. Additional discussion 
of effects on the listed steelhead is included in section 3.3.5, 
Threatened and Endangered Species.
    Because there is the potential for adverse effects on a listed 
species (UCR steelhead) and other high-value species (Chinook salmon), 
and that the PUD's proposed Blasting Plan does not resolve all issues 
related to blasting, it would be appropriate for Okanogan PUD to 
consult with the TRG in preparing a final Blasting Plan. Involving the 
agencies that comprise the TRG in the development of this plan would 
ensure that all appropriate protection measures are considered and 
included in the plan.

Sediment

    In its comments in response to the REA notice, NMFS recommends that 
Okanogan PUD prepare and implement a Soil Erosion Control Plan to guide 
project construction, as well as operation and maintenance of the 
project. Interior recommends that Okanogan PUD develop and implement an 
Erosion and Sedimentation Management Plan.
    In response to the agency comments and recommendations, Okanogan 
PUD developed a Spill Response Plan, and a Storm Water Pollution 
Prevention Plan. The Spill Response Plan would be implemented at 
project initiation. Construction plans would be developed prior to 
construction, and BMPs would be implemented during all construction 
activities.
    To characterize the hydraulic transport of sediment through the 
project, Okanogan PUD performed a modeling effort using the River 2D 
model. Results of the modeling show that sediment in the Enloe 
reservoir undergoes an annual deposition and erosion cycle.\22\ 
Currently, Enloe dam acts as a sediment trap during low flow portions 
of the year (May through December). Low flow periods correspond with 
low water velocities from which suspended sediments settle creating a 
mound of sediment in the project reservoir near the dam. This mound of 
sediment is washed downstream annually during high flow periods 
(January through April) when flows increase by a factor of 20 or more. 
This sediment is washed over the dam and is transported downstream.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Results of the River 2D modeling are found in Appendix 
E.2.3 to the license application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Okanogan PUD's proposed project operations, sediment 
transport in the Similkameen River in the project vicinity would change 
slightly. Okanogan PUD would divert up to 1,600 cfs through the 
turbines during all months of the year. Sediment carried in this water 
would still be transported downstream of the dam, but would do so by 
traveling through the powerhouse as opposed to spilling over the dam. 
Flows during the high flow portion of the year (January through April), 
which range on average from 1,800 to 7,600 cfs, would exceed the 
hydraulic capacity of the project and would spill over the dam as now 
occurs, transporting sediment out of the project reservoir and into the 
river downstream of the powerhouse. Overall, proposed project 
operations would have a negligible effect on the current cycle of 
sediment transport in the Similkameen River.
    Sediment deposited in the reservoir may be transported downstream 
during project construction and operation. This could result in both 
adverse and beneficial impacts to aquatic resources. Adverse impacts 
would include short-term turbidity plumes and sedimentation from 
construction activities, which could cause mortality of eggs, fry, and 
juvenile fish due to smothering or abrasion. Re-suspension of 
contaminated sediments containing elevated levels of copper or arsenic 
could also occur and lead to bioaccumulation of those contaminants in 
fish eggs or fry, and to acute levels in predatory fish and 
insectivores such as salmonids and bass. Additional sedimentation, 
however, could provide

[[Page 28542]]

benefits to species that utilize sediment as their preferred habitat. 
Species potentially benefiting from any deposition of finer sediments 
would include the Pacific lamprey (which spends most of its life in 
freshwater submerged in fine sediment), western ridged mussel, western 
pearlshell mussel, western floater mussel, and the California floater.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to develop and implement two measures to 
mitigate for possible sediment inputs into the Similkameen River due to 
project construction and operation: an ESCP and a CSMP. These measures 
are discussed in more detail in section 3.3.1.2.
    As noted above, Okanogan PUD proposes a Spill Response Plan and a 
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. The Spill Response Plan includes 
practices to minimize the chances or severity of spills of hazardous 
materials into or near the river. These practices include: Ensuring all 
hazardous materials are safely sealed; immediate cleaning-up of all 
spills according to manufacturer's recommended methods; properly 
disposing of waste generated during spill clean-up; and notifying state 
and local government agencies in the case of spills. The Storm Water 
Pollution Prevention Plan includes BMPs to prevent erosion in project 
areas and to protect water quality. The BMPs include: visibly marking 
land-clearing limits; controlling river flow rates; installing sediment 
controls such as straw bales, silt fences, and sandbags; stabilizing 
all disturbed soils; protecting slopes in the project area; stabilizing 
all channels and outlets; and controlling pollutants. The 
implementation of these plans would be protective of aquatic resources 
in the project area.
    Okanogan PUD's proposals for an ESCP, a CSMP, a Spill Response 
Plan, and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan would minimize short-
term degradation of aquatic habitat during construction, including 
critical habitat for UCR steelhead and EFH for Chinook salmon.

Enhancement Measures for Resident Fish (FISH-02)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to construct light-colored boulder clusters 
to improve mountain whitefish habitat and recreational fisheries in the 
river upstream of the reservoir.
    Washington DFW and Interior do not recommend the proposed boulder 
clusters because they say that the mountain whitefish fishery above the 
dam is limited and restricted to the winter months. Interior also 
suggests that the boulder placement may create a further heat sink and 
increase water temperatures. Instead, these agencies as a part of the 
Fisheries Enhancement Plant and Resident Fish Habitat Management Plan, 
respectively, recommend annual stocking of catchable-size sterile, 
triploid rainbow trout to provide a greater recreational fishery 
opportunity. Okanogan PUD states that it would consider contributing up 
to $60,000 (the cost of the boulder clusters) towards a trout stocking 
program for the term of the license, if the other state and federal 
agencies, tribes, and other stakeholders agree.
    The Colville, the Ministry of Environment, and the Canadian Parks 
and Wilderness Society have expressed concerns throughout the licensing 
process that Washington DFW and Interior's recommendation for 
introduced fish stocks of triploid rainbow trout would pose an 
unacceptable risk to resident fishes due to potential disease transfer 
and competition for food and space, while providing a limited 
contribution to the recreational fishery.

Our Analysis

    Most of the fish in the reservoir are non-native species that are 
better adapted to warmer, slower velocity habitat than native coldwater 
salmonids. The project would raise the elevation of the reservoir by 4 
feet, and therefore, would result in more lake habitat and less 
riverine habitat for coldwater resident fishes. Okanogan PUD's proposal 
to add boulder clusters upstream of the reservoir to provide habitat 
for resident fish would create a small amount of pool habitat behind 
the clusters that could be utilized by native mountain whitefish. 
However, very few whitefish (0 in 2006; 2 in 2007) have been found in 
the reservoir during recent surveys, likely due to a combination of 
northern pikeminnow predation, warm water temperatures, lack of cover, 
and the sand-silt substrate. Therefore, it is unlikely that the 
proposed boulder clusters would provide much of any benefit to the very 
limited mountain whitefish fishery in this section of the river.
    The introduction of hatchery fish stocks would provide a limited 
and short-term contribution to the recreational fishery, because water 
quality and high water temperatures in the Similkameen River would only 
allow a fishery during the cooler months of the year. The stocked 
rainbow trout may not survive in the river during the warmer summer 
months. Stocked rainbow trout would also pose a threat to native fish 
stocks in the United States and Canada due to potential for disease 
transfer and competition for food and habitat. In addition, although 
fish occurring in the river upstream of the project may utilize the 
project reservoir at times, the proposed run-of-river operation of the 
reservoir would likely have no effect on these species and would not 
affect the riverine habitat upstream of the reservoir.

Large Woody Debris Transport (FISH-03)

    Large woody debris is an important component of a healthy stream 
ecosystem. Large trees that fall into streams perform an important role 
in forming pools, regulating storage and routing of sediment, and 
trapping spawning gravel. Large woody debris also provides complex fish 
habitat that increases carrying capacity, high flow refugia for fish, 
and substrate for macroinvertebrates. Enloe dam prevents the supply and 
transport of all large woody debris from the upper Similkameen River 
Basin to the lower river, except during high flows. The lower river has 
low levels of large woody debris, and currently all wood that enters 
the reservoir from the upper basin is either passed over the dam during 
flood stage or removed from the reservoir and not returned to the river 
below the dam. Lack of large woody debris from the upper basin may 
contribute to a reduction in structural habitat complexity for fish and 
macroinvertebrates downstream of the dam.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to allow large woody debris to pass over the 
spillway during the annual flood flows; allow natural downstream 
transport of the woody debris; and would transport some large woody 
debris around the dam and place it in the river downstream of the dam, 
if needed. Transport of large woody debris would occur once annually 
during the recession of the annual high flow.
    Interior recommends a plan \23\ for the collection and relocation 
(downstream transport) of large woody debris to be completed at least 1 
year before the start of any land-disturbing or land-clearing 
activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ As a part of their recommended Fisheries Enhancement Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD's proposal to allow natural wood passage over the dam 
during large flood events when the crest gates on the spillway would be 
fully open, and to supplement that supply of woody debris by 
transporting large wood impounded by the dam to the

[[Page 28543]]

river below the dam, would provide additional anadromous and resident 
fish and macroinvertebrate habitat and would increase productivity 
downstream of the dam. Development of a large woody debris transport 
plan after consultation with FWS, NMFS, Interior, Washington DFW, and 
the Colville would help to guide implementation of the measures, 
including providing direction on determining when such transport would 
be required, the methods to be used for collection and transport of the 
wood, and the best locations for release of the woody debris downstream 
of the dam.

Intake Trashrack, Entrainment Studies, and Fish Monitoring (FISH-04 and 
FISH-05)

    Entrainment into the intakes and passage through the turbines could 
result in injury or mortality to resident reservoir fish that are 
attempting to move downstream. Additionally, larger fish could become 
impinged on the trashrack causing possible injury or mortality. 
Okanogan PUD proposes to install a modified intake trashrack adjacent 
to the existing dam overflow spillway with provisions for a low 
velocity approach channel, and a trashrack at the intake with narrow 
(1-inch) bar spacing to prevent entrainment of large fish. Okanogan PUD 
also proposes to generate with Kaplan turbines, which generally cause 
low mortality for any small fish entrained into the power flow. 
Okanogan PUD proposes to file detailed design drawings of the modified 
trashrack intake and the trashrack cleaning system no later than 180 
days prior to start of construction. Okanogan PUD also proposes to 
monitor adult and juvenile impingement and entrainment effects and to 
conduct quarterly fish sampling over a 1-year period.
    Interior and Washington DFW recommend filing detailed design 
drawings of an intake fish screen and a schedule to build the screen 
before the start of any land-disturbing or land-clearing activities, as 
well as a monitoring plan and corrective actions to minimize fish 
impingement and entrainment.

Our Analysis

Impingement

    The proposed spillway would provide a 276-foot-long exit from the 
reservoir for any downstream moving fish. During high-flow periods, 
this route would have high approach velocities. By comparison, the 
proposed power intake is a much smaller outlet with a lower approach 
velocity. Diverting water from the spillway to the power intake would 
likely draw some fish toward the intake and away from passage over the 
spillway, potentially exposing these fish to impingement on the 
trashracks or entrainment through the turbines. However, the modified 
trashrack with 1-inch bar spacing proposed by Okanogan PUD would be 
designed so that smaller fish can pass safely through the racks without 
becoming impinged, and larger fish (greater than 6 inches in length) 
would be discouraged or prevented from passing through the racks and in 
turn the turbines.
    Okanogan PUD calculated the average monthly water velocities \24\ 
at the trashrack to examine impingement risk for larger fish. Estimated 
monthly average velocities at the trashrack ranged from 1.06 feet per 
second (fps) to 2.91 fps, depending on the intake flow and associated 
river flow and reservoir elevation. Swimming speeds of fish known to 
reside in the project reservoir were collected for comparison to water 
velocities at the trashrack, to examine if resident fish would be able 
to swim away from the trashrack, thus avoiding impingement. Nine of the 
fish species known to reside in the reservoir \25\ are able to reach 
burst speeds \26\ of between 4.6 and 10 fps (for adult life 
stages).\27\ These species would be able to swim away from the 
trashracks in all months of the year, avoiding impingement. From April 
to July, predicted velocities at the trashrack would average 2.65 fps, 
which could result in impingement for two species known to reside in 
the reservoir. Northern pikeminnow and chiselmouth have burst swimming 
speeds of 2.5 fps, and thus would be susceptible to impingement if 
unable to avoid the intake flow. Fishes impinged would be subject to 
injury and mortality, which would be most likely to occur from April to 
July.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Okanogan PUD AIR response filed on July 21, 2009. In 
this AIR response, Okanogan incorrectly stated that burst speed for 
largemouth bass is 2.1 fps. Appalachian Power Company (2009) 
collected critical swimming speeds for largemouth bass from 10 
studies identified in the literature and were able to estimate that 
the burst speed of juvenile largemouth bass is between 3.2 to 4.3 
fps, while adults would be capable of faster speeds.
    \25\ These species are bridgelip sucker, largescale sucker, 
unidentified sunfish species (genus Lepomis), common carp, yellow 
perch, rainbow trout, Kokanee salmon, and mountain whitefish.
    \26\ A speed that can be maintained for a short period of time, 
typically seconds.
    \27\ See Okanogan PUD AIR response filed on July 21, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Entrainment

    Reservoir sampling showed that most of the small, resident fish in 
the reservoir are found in shallow water areas with cover. Accordingly, 
very few small fish are expected to be in the area of the intake 
because of unsuitable habitat (deep open-water habitat with steep, 
almost vertical walls). Two native species--chiselmouth and northern 
pikeminnow--would have the greatest potential of occurring near the 
intake. Native suckers, mountain whitefish, and introduced species, 
such as largemouth bass, carp, and yellow perch, may also be present 
near the intake. Resident rainbow trout were not found between the 
U.S./Canadian border and Enloe dam during recent studies, and probably 
would not occur near the intake. Because the population density of fish 
in the reservoir is low, and the project would have narrow-spaced 
trashracks, the rate of entrainment at the project would likely be low 
resulting in undetectable effects of the population levels of resident 
fishes in the reservoir. Additionally, the survival rates of fish that 
would be susceptible to entrainment (those less than 6 inches in 
length) after passing through the turbines have been estimated to be 
84% to 95%.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Survival rates were calculated by Okanogan PUD using the 
U.S. Department of Energy's Advanced Hydro Turbine System Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Okanogan PUD proposes to monitor seasonal variation in entrainment 
susceptibility, entrainment mortality, and fish populations in the 
reservoir after project construction. Both entrainment levels and 
mortality of entrained fish are expected to be very low. Additionally, 
effects of project entrainment on reservoir populations are expected to 
be minor. Therefore, these data collection efforts likely would not 
produce useful data. Additionally, Okanogan PUD did not specify if 
these monitoring efforts would lead to adaptive management, if needed, 
to adjust the proposed measures to reduce any adverse effects 
associated with operation of the intake.
    The agencies recommendation for a fish screen did not include any 
design details, so we are unable to determine how the performance of 
the proposed narrow-spaced trashrack would compare to a fish screen. 
However, Okanogan PUD's proposed trashrack would achieve the same goal 
of physically excluding the majority of fish approaching the intake. 
Fish screens cost much more than trashracks to build, install, and 
maintain. The proposed trashrack would achieve similar results at a 
much lesser cost than a fish screen. To ensure that the applicant's 
proposed narrow-spaced trashrack achieves similar exclusionary goals of 
a fish screen, it would be beneficial for Okanogan PUD to consult

[[Page 28544]]

with the fisheries agencies during the final design of the intake 
structure and trashracks. By including some or most of the design 
features of a fish screen into the design of the narrow-spaced 
trashrack, fish protection would be provided concurrently with 
protection of the generating equipment from the influx of trash.

Tailrace Net Barrier and Tailrace Video Monitoring (FISH-06 and -07)

    Operation of the project may attract upstream migrating fish into 
the turbine discharge flow. It is expected that this behavior could 
result in UCR steelhead or anadromous salmonids attempting to enter the 
draft tubes and swim through the draft tubes to an area near the 
turbine runner blades. Fish may be injured or killed by impact with the 
spinning runner blades during partial load operation when velocities 
downstream of the turbine may be low enough for the fish to reach the 
turbine runner. Okanogan PUD proposes to design (after consultation 
with NMFS), install, and operate a net barrier at the outlet of each 
draft tube. Okanogan PUD proposes to maintain the nets and to develop a 
written operation plan in consultation with NMFS. Okanogan PUD also 
proposes to monitor the effectiveness of the tailrace barrier nets 
through the use of underwater videography. Okanogan PUD would submit 
draft and subsequent design plans to NMFS; obtain NMFS' approval of 
design specifications for the tailrace barrier; and file a detailed 
design of the barrier nets with the Commission at least 180 days before 
the start of any land-disturbing or land-clearing activities. Okanogan 
PUD also proposes to develop and implement a postconstruction 
evaluation and monitoring plan and an inspection and maintenance plan.
    NMFS recommends that when downstream oriented velocities in the 
draft tube are less than or equal to 27 feet per second (the highest 
burst swimming speed attainable by UCR steelhead) the tailrace barrier 
should be in place and operated as designed. NMFS states that 
development of the final detailed barrier designs (in consultation with 
NMFS), including expected approach velocities, be completed 180 days 
prior to the start of any land-disturbing activities. NMFS further 
recommends that these final designs include a hydraulic evaluation of 
the facilities; a written operation plan; a postconstruction evaluation 
and monitoring plan; a contingency plan in the event the proposed 
tailrace net barriers do not perform according to criteria; and an 
inspection and maintenance plan.
    Washington DFW and Interior make similar recommendations regarding 
the need for the tailrace barriers and consultation; however, these 
agencies recommend the filing of detailed design drawings with the 
Commission at least 1 year before the start of any land-disturbing or 
land-clearing activities.

Our Analysis

    Of the fishes that are found in the area where the tailrace would 
be located, UCR steelhead are the strongest swimmers, and therefore 
would be most likely to be able to access the draft tubes while the 
project is operating. Adult UCR steelhead are strong swimmers and are 
reported to have a burst speed of 27 feet per second (Bell, 1986). 
During full load operation, the water velocity immediately downstream 
of the turbine runner blades would exceed this burst speed, creating a 
velocity barrier that would prevent fish from reaching the area where 
injury or mortality could occur. Installation of a net barrier at the 
outlet of each draft tube, however, would provide a physical barrier to 
prevent injury to fish during periods of reduced generation, when water 
velocities would be lower than steelhead burst speed and too low to 
maintain the velocity barrier.
    Okanogan PUD would use underwater video cameras during the peak 
presence of UCR steelhead, Chinook, and sockeye salmon during the first 
two years of operation, to monitor the openings of the net barriers. 
The video would be reviewed to document if adult salmonids are able to 
enter the area where barrier nets are deployed, and if so, if the nets 
effectively prevent fish from moving further upstream into the draft 
tubes, and if fish are able to safely exit the barrier net locations. 
This measure would allow Okanogan PUD to monitor the effectiveness of 
the tailrace barriers nets. It would also allow for adaptive 
management, so that the tailrace barriers nets location or design could 
be adjusted or operated in a more efficient or effective manner, if 
possible. The use of underwater videography would ensure that 
anadromous salmonids and resident fishes are protected from entering 
the draft tubes where mortality or injury could result.
    It is expected that the final barrier design, the operation plan, 
postconstruction evaluation and monitoring plan, and the inspection and 
maintenance plan, to be developed after consultation with NMFS, and 
filed with the Commission for approval, would provide sufficient 
assurance that the proposed barrier net designs would provide adequate 
protection to fish downstream of the proposed powerhouse.

Run-of-River Operations (FISH-08)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to operate the Enloe project in a run-of-
river mode. The 370-foot-long bypassed reach would receive a minimum 
flow of 10 or 30 cfs (see below) during the lower flow months when 
river flow is equal to or less than the hydraulic capacity of the 
powerhouse. Powerhouse discharges would be returned to the river below 
the falls.

Our Analysis

    The proposed run-of river operations would have no effect on water 
quantity above the dam or downstream of the project powerhouse at the 
base of the falls. This would be protective of the current fisheries 
habitat in the lower Similkameen River downstream of the falls, as 
river flows would be unchanged from current conditions.

Ramping Rates

    Okanogan PUD proposes to implement interim ramping rates based on 
Washington State guidelines (Hunter, 1992) to protect aquatic resources 
downstream of the tailrace (table 13). The ramping rates would apply to 
changes in hourly water elevations associated with project operation 
during normal powerhouse start-up and shut-down. Temporary 
modifications to ramping rates may be needed to address operating 
emergencies or planned outage.

                                        Table 13--Proposed Ramping Rates
                                             [Source: Hunter, 1992]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Season                           Daylight \a\                         Night \b\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 16 to June 15...................  No ramping.................  2 inches per hour.
June 16 to October 31....................  2 inches per hour..........  1 inch per hour.

[[Page 28545]]

 
November 1 to February 15................  2 inches per hour..........  2 inches per hour.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ Daylight is defined as the period from 1 hour before sunrise to 1 hour after sunset.
\b\ Night is defined as the period from 1 hour after sunset to 1 hour before sunrise.

    Interior, Washington DFW, NMFS, and American Rivers et al. 
recommend implementation of the ramping rates shown in table 13 for the 
protection of aquatic resources. These agencies recommend that 
temporary modifications of the ramping rates that may be needed due to 
operating emergencies or planned outages should be developed by mutual 
agreement among Okanogan PUD and the interested agencies and tribes. To 
expedite these discussions, Okanogan PUD requests that these agencies 
be required to appoint a single local representative who has the 
authority to address such operational issues. If the interim ramping 
rates are so modified, Okanogan PUD would notify the Commission, as 
soon as possible, but no later than 10 days after each such incident. A 
second issue regarding ramping rates was described in the applicant's 
recent filings, related to ramping rates immediately downstream of 
Enloe dam when spillage flows are reduced as the project powerhouse is 
brought on line. The September 2010 snorkeling survey conducted by 
Washington DFW and Washington DOE identified bedrock benches along the 
shoreline of the plunge pool that could strand fish if spillage over 
the dam was to be reduced at a rate where fish could not vacate that 
habitat before it is dewatered. As a result, Okanogan PUD now proposes 
to determine the critical flow thresholds related to dewatering of 
these bedrock benches, based on field observations, so that appropriate 
downramping of spillage flows can be made between those flow thresholds 
(letter from Donald H. Clarke, Counsel to Public Utility District No. 1 
of Okanogan County, to Kimberly Bose, Secretary, FERC, October 28, 
2010).

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD proposes the interim ramping rates recommended by 
Interior, Washington DFW, NMFS, and American Rivers et al., for the 
protection, mitigation of damages to, and enhancement of aquatic 
resources downstream of the powerhouse. Rapid flow reductions in a 
stream channel, especially in low gradient stream areas, have the 
potential to strand fish in dewatered areas including pools and side 
channels. Fry and juvenile fish less than 2-inches-long are most 
vulnerable to potential stranding due to weak swimming ability; 
preference for shallow, low velocity habitat such as edgewater and side 
channels; and a tendency to burrow into the substrate to hide. The 
magnitude of change can also affect habitat use and the production of 
macroinvertebrates that are vulnerable to drift or stranding. Side 
channels are particularly susceptible to dewatering and disconnection 
from the main channel as flows recede. As a result, young-of-the-year 
salmonids that prefer to rear in side channels (e.g., UCR steelhead) 
may be stranded.
    Based on Hunter (1992), we expect that the interim downramping 
rates described in table 13 should protect Chinook salmon and UCR 
steelhead redds and fry, and juvenile Chinook salmon, UCR steelhead, 
sockeye salmon, and aquatic macroinvertebrates from stranding and 
mortalities associated with flow fluctuations downstream of the 
powerhouse. In addition, because the project would operate in a run-of-
river mode, any reductions in powerhouse flow would result in an 
immediate increase in spillway flows, which would also enter the pool 
at the base of the falls at about the same time that powerhouse flows 
are reduced. Thus, the pool at the base of the falls and the 
Similkameen River downstream of this pool would not experience wide 
water level fluctuations under normal operations. This proposed 
operation and the proposed ramping rates would also protect UCR 
steelhead designated critical habitat and Chinook salmon EFH downstream 
of Similkameen Falls.
    Recently proposed measures to limit downramping of spillage flows 
immediately downstream of Enloe dam would protect any resident species 
from potential stranding on bedrock benches along the shoreline of the 
plunge pool. Identifying the critical flow thresholds and associated 
water elevations in relation to the bedrock benches would allow 
development of actual ramping rates between those flow thresholds. 
Okanogan PUD proposes that these flow thresholds be determined by field 
observations and monitoring prior to initiation of project operations, 
but does not specify what the ramping rates would be once the flow 
thresholds are determined. It would be appropriate to determine the 
flow thresholds by field observations, because there have been no 
detailed surveys of the river bathymetry or instream flow modeling in 
the bypassed reach. Future ramping rates would still need to be 
determined, as appropriate rates in the bypassed reach may not 
necessarily be the same as those outlined in Hunter (1992). Therefore, 
a study plan would be required that would describe how the flow 
thresholds would be determined by field observation, and how future 
downramping rates for the bypassed reach would be developed. This study 
would need to be prepared in consultation with Washington DFW, 
Washington DOE, FWS, and the Colville, and filed with the Commission 
for approval.

Ramping Rate Compliance Monitoring

    Okanogan PUD proposes to use the existing Washington DOE gage in 
the lower Similkameen River to monitor ramping rate compliance 
downstream of the powerhouse. Interior, Washington DFW, NMFS, and 
American Rivers et al. recommend that the location to measure 
compliance should be determined by Okanogan PUD in consultation with 
Interior, NMFS, Washington DOE, Confederated Tribes and Bands of the 
Yakama Indian Nation (Yakama Nation),\29\ and the Colville, before 
project operation begins.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ NMFS and Interior's 10(j) recommendation for compliance of 
the ramping rates included consultation with the Yakama Nation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our Analysis

    The Washington DOE gage that Okanogan PUD proposes to use to 
monitor ramping rate compliance on the lower river is located in 
Oroville at river mile 5, nearly 4 miles downstream of the project 
site. Sites for monitoring compliance with ramping rates should be 
located in relatively close proximity to project discharges, so that 
gage heights recorded reflect the water surface elevations immediately 
downstream of the powerhouse. It is

[[Page 28546]]

unlikely that the existing DOE gage in Oroville would meet these 
criteria, because any small fluctuations in discharge from this 
proposed run-of-river project would likely be attenuated in the 4 miles 
of river between the tailrace and the gage.
    Interior, Washington DFW, NMFS, and American Rivers et al.'s 
recommendation that a monitoring site would need to be established as a 
result of consultation between those parties and Okanogan PUD would 
ensure that the location for monitoring ramping rate compliance would 
be near the project and would adequately measure the ramping rates. The 
result of this selection process could require the installation of a 
new monitoring gage on the Similkameen River near the project's 
tailrace. A plan detailing how Okanogan PUD would monitor compliance 
with their proposed ramping rates, including the location selected for 
doing so would be beneficial and would need to be filed with the 
Commission for approval.

Flow Continuation

    Interior recommends development of a plan that would provide up to 
48 hours of flow continuation in the event of emergency project 
shutdown at the unmanned, remotely operated powerhouse. Interior also 
recommends that the crest gates or flow continuation valves for each 
penstock be designed to open automatically to provide outflow into the 
lower river from a combination of the tailrace and spillway flows, so 
that river flow never drops below the level of inflow to the reservoir. 
Interior further recommends that the plan include detailed drawings and 
flow capacities for the proposed crest gates or flow continuation 
valves.

Our Analysis

    In the case of an unplanned outage, the power plant control system 
would open the crest gates automatically to maintain tailwater 
elevation at the powerhouse to within the proposed ramping rate 
described above (table 13). This would ensure an uninterrupted flow of 
water downstream of the project tailrace. A small, short-term 
fluctuation in downstream flows could occur as flow through the 
powerhouse is reduced and flow over the spillway crest gates increases. 
The estimated travel time from the spillway to the pool below the falls 
depends on flow, but is estimated to be about 1 minute. Thus, any 
fluctuation in river flow downstream of the project would be of short 
duration and would be attenuated by water storage in the large pool 
below the falls and in the river channel further downstream. Therefore, 
the proposed crest gate operations, as described, would protect and 
maintain aquatic habitat downstream of the project, and there would be 
no need for a specific flow continuation plan as recommended by 
Interior. Flow continuation would occur as part of normal project 
operations, so downstream aquatic habitat, including UCR steelhead 
designated critical habitat and Chinook salmon EFH below Similkameen 
Falls, would be protected in the event of operating emergencies or 
planned outages.

Anadromous Fish Passage at Enloe Dam

    Under the current proposed action, fish passage would not be 
provided at the dam, and the 370-foot long bypassed channel would be 
reduced to a minimum flow of 10 or 30 cfs during the low flow months 
when most of the river flow would be diverted through the powerhouse 
and returned to the river below the falls.
    American Rivers et al., BIA, and CRITFC commented that the issue of 
fish passage was not resolved in a previous license proceeding for this 
site; there is suitable anadromous habitat above the dam; and this 
issue needs to be resolved prior to issuance of a new license. CRITFC 
recommends that the applicant work with CRITFC's member tribes, the BIA 
and other parties to resolve the issue of historical anadromy by 
employing the best available scientific methods including 
paleolimnological, genetic and archeological studies. CRITFC and BIA 
also requested production potential estimates for salmon and UCR 
steelhead be included as part of a fish passage alternative in the 
current licensing proceeding. The BIA commented that cost estimates for 
designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining upstream and 
downstream fish passage facilities for the term of the license need to 
be developed in case such an action is required in the future.
    The Colville, Okanogan Nation Fisheries Commission, Canadian Parks 
and Wildlife Society British Columbia Chapter, and the Ministry of 
Environment oppose introduction of anadromous fish passage above the 
falls based on the belief that historical anadromy never occurred above 
the falls, and introduction of anadromy would have negative impacts on 
resident fishes and other aquatic life due to disease transfer and 
competition for food and habitat; would provide a limited contribution 
to a recreational fishery in the upper river; and would violate 
traditional laws, the Coyote mythology that prohibits fish passage at 
the falls, and sacred principles of the Tribes (Vedan, 2002).
    FWS has determined that it does not have sufficient information to 
support filing a Section 18 prescription for fishways for the Enloe 
Project at this time, because of the uncertainty of historical anadromy 
above the falls. Both FWS and NMFS recommend that upstream anadromous 
fish passage facilities not be required now, and have reserved their 
authority to require fish passage under Section 18 in the future.

Our Analysis

    There are no documented accounts of Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, 
UCR steelhead, or Pacific lamprey anadromy above Similkameen Falls. 
Aboriginal traditional beliefs suggest that Similkameen Falls 
historically blocked anadromy (Vedan, 2002). In an Annual Report of the 
Department of Indian Affairs for the Year Ended December 31st, 1890, 
the Indian agent reported that ``at the mouth of the Similkameen River, 
in the United States Territory, are falls which prevent the ascent of 
salmon up the Similkameen...I have several times urged Indians to 
construct a fish ladder and thus provide themselves with a supply of 
salmon...'' (Department of Indian Affairs, 1890, in Vedan, 2002).
    More recently, conservation planners with knowledge of the affected 
area and fish populations have weighed in on the issue. The Okanogan 
Sub-basin Plan, which was prepared for the Northwest Power and 
Conservation Council, concluded that Similkameen Falls was an 
impassable historic barrier to upstream salmon migration (KWA Sciences 
et al., 2004). The Similkameen watershed above Enloe dam was not 
included in their sub-basin salmon ecosystem analysis for this reason.
    In 2007, the Upper Columbia Salmon Recovery Board issued the Upper 
Columbia Spring Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Plan. The Upper 
Columbia Salmon Recovery Board is composed of representatives from 
Chelan, Douglas, and Okanogan counties, the Colville, and the Yakama 
Nation. Their recovery plan does not identify upstream and downstream 
passage of fish at Enloe dam as being a short-term or long-term action 
that would contribute to the restoration of these fish stocks, based on 
the uncertainty of fish being able to ascend Similkameen Falls before 
the construction of Enloe dam (Chapman et al., 1994).
    Several entities including, Washington DFW, American Rivers et al., 
and CRITFC believe that steelhead, Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, and 
Pacific lamprey may be able to ascend

[[Page 28547]]

the falls and access the bypassed reach above Similkameen Falls under 
some flow conditions. No data, provided in this proceeding, however, 
have shown this to occur, or to be a likely possibility. Washington DFW 
has stated that it has anecdotal information that places anadromous 
fish above the falls, that UCR steelhead penetrated farther upstream of 
the falls before construction of Enloe dam, and that rainbow trout 
above the dam probably retain genetic similarity to UCR steelhead; 
however, Washington DFW did not provide such information confirming 
these assertions.
    In an effort to understand the historical range of anadromous 
fishes in the Similkameen River, CRITFC commissioned Ford (2010a) to 
analyze sediment core samples collected in Palmer and Blue lakes 
upstream of Enloe dam. Sediment core samples were collected and 
analyzed for isotopic content. The core samples appear to contain 
isotopic signatures characteristic of marine-derived nitrogen, possibly 
indicating anadromy; however, the preliminary analyses were 
inconclusive and additional analysis is under way (Ford, 2010a, b; 
Myers, 2010). CRITFC recommends that additional studies similar to Ford 
(2010a) be required to attempt to resolve the issue of whether anadromy 
occurred upstream of the falls. While such studies may provide some 
indication of the former presence of anadromous fish upstream of the 
falls, Ford (2010b) states that such results by themselves would not 
provide ``compelling evidence'' that anadromous species once occurred 
above the falls.
    CRITFC and BIA requested that production potential estimates for 
salmon and UCR steelhead be included as part of a fish passage 
alternative in the current licensing proceeding. The CRITFC letter 
included estimates that the habitat upstream of Enloe dam could support 
approximately 55,000 Chinook salmon and 98,000 steelhead spawners. 
Although undoubtedly there may be some suitable habitat for salmon and 
steelhead upstream of Enloe dam, based on available information in the 
literature, it appears that anadromous fish likely did not pass the 
Similkameen Falls in substantial numbers prior to the construction of 
Enloe dam. An occasional account of a sighting of an anadromous fish 
above the falls does not outweigh the lack of historic record 
describing a salmon and UCR steelhead fishery or population above the 
falls. Native American and First Nation belief that salmon were blocked 
from the upper reaches of the Similkameen River above the falls is 
additional support that salmon and UCR steelhead did not ascend the 
falls and enter the upper reaches of the river to spawn prior to the 
construction of Enloe dam.
    Regardless of whether anadromous fish historically migrated to 
areas upstream of Similkameen Falls, if Okanogan PUD were to provide 
for fish passage at the project, anadromous fishes that have been known 
to occupy the plunge pool would be able to access habitat in the 
Similkameen River upstream of Enloe dam for spawning and rearing. 
Benefits to anadromous species could include an increase in the 
populations of these fish stocks, as they gain additional spawning and 
nursery habitat in the upper Columbia River basin. Other benefits to 
upstream aquatic habitat would be the influx of marine nutrients 
through the decay of salmon carcasses, which would benefit primary 
production and the entire food chain, potentially enhancing resident 
fish populations. Passing adult anadromous species upstream would also 
have the potential to enhance the sport fishery in the river, depending 
on regulations that would likely be put in place to protect stocks 
introduced to the upper Similkameen River.
    The extent that these potential benefits might occur is not known, 
and the introduction of anadromy to the upper Similkameen River could 
also have negative impacts on both the anadromous and resident fishes 
in the river. Anadromous fishes reaching the upper river may or may not 
access suitable spawning and nursery habitat, as the reach immediately 
upstream of Enloe dam (the reservoir) is not high-quality salmonid 
habitat. While there may be suitable habitat upstream of the reservoir, 
juveniles of anadromous species that are successfully spawned and rear 
upstream of Enloe dam would also face an additional impediment to 
downstream migration, the Enloe Project, which fish in the lower 
Similkameen River would not face. Although the project may be required 
to provide downstream fish passage facilities if anadromous species are 
introduced upstream, such facilities are seldom 100 percent effective, 
so fish from the upper river would be exposed to potential delay, 
injury, and mortality. Resident species could be adversely affected by 
the introduction of anadromous species by the potential for disease 
transfer and competition for food and habitat between resident and 
anadromous species.

Location of the Tailrace (FISH-09)

    UCR steelhead, Chinook salmon, and sockeye salmon enter the cooler 
Similkameen River and migrate as far upstream as Similkameen Falls 
during the summer months. The large, deep plunge pool below Similkameen 
Falls is used as holding habitat until temperatures in the Similkameen 
and Okanogan rivers decrease and these species can begin their spawning 
activities (figure 4). Chinook salmon arrive in the plunge pool in July 
and August, and hold prior to spawning in the lower river. Sockeye 
salmon use the pool in August and September while also holding prior to 
spawning in the fall. Sockeye and Chinook salmon generally leave the 
pool by the end of September. Juvenile sockeye and Chinook salmon are 
not known to utilize the pool area. Adult UCR steelhead occur in the 
plunge pool below Similkameen Falls from September through March. 
Juvenile UCR steelhead can be found in the pool year-round.
    Currently all flow provided to the plunge pool flows over the falls 
and provides well oxygenated habitat for fish species. Bypassing flow 
around the falls could result in reduced DO concentrations in the 
plunge pool. To remedy this, Okanogan PUD proposes to locate the 
tailrace so that it discharges into the plunge pool in a manner that 
allows the flow to circulate to maintain water quality (TDG and DO) for 
fish holding in the pool. Okanogan PUD also proposes to install turbine 
venting to enhance DO levels in project discharges.

Our Analysis

    When the tailrace is operational under Okanogan PUD's proposal, 
flow would enter the pool approximately 90 feet downstream from the 
falls at an angle and create clockwise circulation in the pool upstream 
of the tailrace exit. Orienting the tailrace to discharge flow into the 
plunge pool in this manner would provide circulation within the pool to 
prevent stagnation and water quality degradation. The potential TDG and 
DO effects of the tailrace discharge are addressed in section 3.3.2.2, 
Water Quantity and Quality, Environmental Effects.
    Water circulation in the plunge pool, along with turbine venting, 
would benefit all anadromous and resident fishes found in the pool by 
ensuring adequate DO levels, while reducing TDG levels. These water 
quality measures that reduce TDG, while maintaining adequate DO (see 
section 3.3.2.2), would have the greatest potential to benefit juvenile 
UCR steelhead, as they are known to occupy the plunge pool year-round. 
The proposed tailrace location would maintain the UCR steelhead 
designated critical habitat and Chinook salmon EFH below Similkameen 
Falls.

[[Page 28548]]

Side Channel Enhancement (FISH-10)

    Low velocity, high complexity side channels provide important 
habitat for juvenile fishes. Elevated summer stream temperature and 
limited rearing habitat are the most significant limiting factors for 
salmonids in the lower Similkameen and Okanogan Rivers.\30\ The purpose 
of the side channel enhancement measure is to create cooler water, side 
channel habitat in the lower river to benefit anadromous fish, and 
mitigate any impacts such as entrainment mortality and any decreased 
production in the Similkameen River.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See license application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Okanogan PUD proposes the side-channel enhancement project in reach 
1 (RM 0-4.7). The project would include the enhancement of one to three 
side channel areas in the Similkameen River located downstream of Enloe 
dam. The candidate side channel would be approximately 800 feet in 
length with an average gradient of 0.15 percent. The channel(s) would 
be entrenched in the floodplain; the cross section would be 
approximately trapezoidal with some undulation and woody debris in the 
channel bottom. Riparian vegetation would provide cover and shade over 
the majority of the open channel(s). The side-channel enhancement 
proposal would provide cool water in these candidate side channels that 
would enhance habitat for juvenile fishes.
    Cool water would be provided by a well to sustain flow in the side 
channel. The well is expected to be about 12 inches in diameter with a 
minimum depth of 40 feet. Total depth would depend upon site specific 
sub-surface conditions. It is anticipated that a 25 to 30-horsepower 
pump would be adequate to provide the desired flow rate of 2 cfs. Based 
on water samples from adjacent wells, the temperature of water from the 
well is expected to be near 14 [deg]C. Constructed riffles would 
contain buried manifold systems capable of delivering 2-cfs low 
pressure flow from the well.
    The cool water pumped from the well to the side channel(s) would 
discharge water into a lateral channel of the mainstem Similkameen 
River that is disconnected from the main flow during the summer low 
flow period. The cool water discharged into the lateral channel would 
extend downstream for at least 200 to 300 feet. The water in this side 
channel would be backwatered by the mainstem flow, thus providing 
additional ponding of cool water, and the discharge into the channel 
would be approximately 4 acre-feet per day (2 cfs).
    Most of the construction activity would occur in a dry channel. 
Sediment, erosion control, and water quality protection would be 
implemented using procedures outlined in Washington DOE's Stormwater 
Management Manual for Eastern Washington, as needed. BMPs would be used 
to protect water quality and prevent streambank erosion. 
Postconstruction monitoring would be conducted annually for the first 3 
years after side channel construction, then every 5 years thereafter. 
Monitoring would likely be accomplished through a snorkel survey and 
the use of other fish observation techniques for shallow water, given 
that UCR steelhead are listed as threatened and there is risk of 
mortality or stress associated with electrofishing or seining. Sampling 
would occur in the low flow August to mid-September time frame.
    The river stage at which flow would begin to naturally enter the 
upper end of the side channel and the relationship between river flow 
and side channel flow above this threshold value has not been 
determined. This information would be collected during a second 
planning and evaluation phase and would determine the timing of start-
up and duration of well operation. It would also provide insight 
regarding the need to protect the side channel from flood flow; because 
the river gradient is flat, flood stage may backwater the downstream 
end of the side channel preventing higher water velocity from 
developing. If a downstream backwater is present, large floods would 
maintain natural processes within the side channel without destroying 
the investment in rearing habitat.
    Washington DFW, Interior,\31\ and NMFS recommend the proposed side-
channel enhancement project. NMFS also recommends development of a fish 
habitat enhancement plan in consultation with NMFS, FWS, Washington 
DFW, the Colville, and the Yakama Nation. This recommended plan would 
consist of provisions for side channel enhancement, as well as 
Okanogan's proposed gravel supplementation plan (FISH-11) which is 
discussed below. NMFS recommends the final plan be filed with NMFS at 
least 180 days prior to the start of any land-clearing activities and 
include a schedule for completion in 3 years, performance criteria, 
monitoring provisions, contingency plans, and provisions for periodic 
review of the plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ As part of Washington DFW and Interior's recommended 
Fisheries Enhancement Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our Analysis

    The effect of the side channel improvements is not expected to have 
a significant effect on water temperatures in the Similkameen River. 
The side channel improvement would include the development of a small 
area (~1,000 square feet) of cool water at the confluence of the side 
channel and the mainstem river. It is expected that the outflow of 2 
cfs (4 acre feet/day) of cool water from the side channel would 
maintain cool water habitat in the lateral channel. Lower temperatures 
would also be expected in the mainstem Similkameen River where the 
lateral channel connects to the river; however the downstream extent of 
the cool water influence is unknown at this time, but expected to be 
200 to 500 feet.
    The purpose of the proposed side channel enhancement is to provide 
coolwater rearing habitat for juvenile salmonids during the summer to 
decrease mortality, improve fish condition, and mitigate the loss of 
fisheries resources that could occur as a result of the construction 
and operation of the project. The proposed side channel and lateral 
channel enhancements would benefit juvenile UCR steelhead/rainbow 
trout, Chinook salmon, and sockeye salmon in the lower river during the 
low flow summer months by providing thermal refugia. Cutthroat trout 
and brook trout are also present in very low densities and could 
benefit. The proposed side channel habitat would be best suited to age 
0+ steelhead/rainbow trout, and to a lesser degree age 1+ steelhead/
rainbow trout. The relatively shallow water depths in the side channel 
would likely preclude significant occupancy by older age cohorts of 
trout and salmon. Monitoring the side channel via snorkel surveys after 
construction would determine if the newly created habitat was being 
utilized by the target species.
    Installation of the structures, channel excavation, and other 
instream work related to the proposed side-channel enhancement project 
could cause short-term turbidity plumes and sedimentation when water is 
turned back into the dry channel following construction. In-water 
construction to connect the side channel with the river may cause 
mortality of eggs, fry, and juvenile fish due to crushing or abrasion 
during construction. It would be beneficial for Okanogan PUD to consult 
with NMFS, FWS, Washington DFW, the Colville, and the Yakama Nation, 
and file the side-channel enhancement plan with the Commission, as well 
as providing copies to the agencies, at least

[[Page 28549]]

180 days prior to implementation, as recommended by NMFS.

Spawning Gravel Enhancement (FISH-11)

    The Similkameen River is a gravel-poor system and Enloe dam 
prevents the transport of gravel from the upper watershed, which 
results in limited spawning habitat for Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, 
and UCR steelhead in the lower 5 miles of the Similkameen River. 
Spawning salmonids use gravel deposits near and downstream of RM 4, and 
limited spawning occurs along the left riverbank (looking upstream) 
near RM 5.2. Okanogan PUD proposes a gravel supplementation program in 
reach 1 (RM 0-4.7). Okanogan PUD would supplement up to a maximum of 
15,000 cubic yards of 1- to 3-inch diameter gravel on a schedule of 
3,000 cubic yards 5 times at 5-year intervals. Each 3,000-cubic yards 
of gravel deposited would have the potential of providing approximately 
2 acres of additional spawning area.
    The preferred site for introduction of the gravel at RM 5.8 is near 
an abandoned orchard that would not require any site grading to create 
a pad for the conveyor belt and truck turn-around, and has a low river 
bank (12 feet high), which would allow a shorter conveyance system to 
reach the active channel of the river. The ground cover in this 
location is predominately riprap with a small number of willow shrubs 
and small cottonwoods growing in the riprap. Approximately eight willow 
shrubs on the riverbank would be cut back and allowed to resprout 
following the first supplementation.
    The gravel would be placed adjacent to or in the wetted channel 
where it could be naturally redistributed at high flows. To reduce 
disturbance of the riverbanks and associated riparian habitat, a rock 
conveyor would be used to transport the gravel from an upland staging 
area to the river channel. The in-channel gravel pile is anticipated to 
be about 30 feet tall, 40 to 50 feet wide, and 150 feet long, and would 
extend 35 to 40 feet into the wetted channel.
    Gravel supplementation is recommended by Interior, NMFS, and 
Washington DFW.\32\ The Colville comments that the proposed gravel 
supplementation program would reinitiate gravel recruitment processes 
that have been disrupted by the presence of Enloe dam; would greatly 
increase the quality and quantity of spawning habitat in the lower 
Similkameen River, and would have minimal impacts on existing habitat. 
The Colville also comments that the benefits of the proposed activities 
would vastly outweigh any incidental impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ As part of Interior's Resident Fish Habitat Management 
Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our Analysis

    Enloe reservoir would continue to interrupt gravel transport from 
upstream sources after the proposed project is constructed. The 
proposed gravel supplementation program would provide long-term 
benefits for spawning Chinook salmon and UCR steelhead/rainbow trout in 
the lower river as the gravel is redistributed. The proposed 3,000 
cubic yards of gravel, however, may need to be distributed over more 
than one river location to allow efficient distribution under normal 
flow conditions and prevent unwanted channel alteration.
    Deposition of the gravel into the wetted channel would likely cause 
short-term turbidity plumes, sedimentation, and mortality of juvenile 
fish due to crushing or abrasion. It would be beneficial for Okanogan 
PUD to consult with NMFS, FWS, Washington DFW, the Colville, and the 
Yakama Nation to develop and file a gravel enhancement plan with the 
Commission, as well as providing copies to the agencies, at least 180 
days prior to implementation, as recommended by NMFS.

Biological Review and Fisheries Monitoring Database (FISH-12 and FISH-
13)

    Okanogan PUD proposes a TRG to monitor the success of proposed 
mitigation and enhancement measures. The TRG would: (1) Consult in the 
design of management and monitoring plans; (2) review and evaluate 
data; and (3) develop resource management proposals or other 
recommendations to further improve the measures, if appropriate. The 
group's meetings would be open to the public, and Okanogan PUD would 
maintain records of the meetings and any recommendations made. Data and 
information from the monitoring programs would be used to examine long-
term trends and make decisions regarding adapting measures to further 
protect aquatic resources. As part of the biological review process, 
Okanogan PUD would develop a central database for organization and 
storage of the monitoring data related to aquatic resources. Database 
format and development would be consistent with other aquatic data 
gathered in the Okanogan River Basin. The monitoring programs that 
would be included in the biological review process are:
     An entrainment study, including reservoir sampling;
     Tailrace barrier monitoring;
     Monitoring the use of boulder clusters upstream of the 
reservoir; and
     A side-channel habitat monitoring program.
    Washington DFW recommends that Okanogan PUD develop an adaptive 
management plan within 1 year of license issuance that includes goals, 
monitoring protocols, decision criteria, and actions to be completed in 
response to monitoring results.
    Interior recommends development of a Resident Fish Habitat 
Management Plan within 1 year of license issuance that includes a 
comprehensive study of resident fish species, populations, numbers, and 
habitat conditions in the river from Nighthawk down to the reservoir to 
complement the studies already completed in the reservoir and 
downstream of the dam, and development of a fish habitat monitoring 
plan for the river upstream of the reservoir. The plan also includes 
provisions for temperature monitoring, riparian plantings in the 
reservoir, the stocking of triploid rainbow trout in the reservoir, and 
a fish habitat monitoring plan.

Our Analysis

    Development and implementation of the fish monitoring database and 
study plans; interpretation of monitoring results; and development of 
adaptive management strategies based on monitoring results would best 
be accomplished through consultation among the proposed TRG and 
Okanogan PUD to ensure integration between license measures and other 
resource management plans, such as regional salmon recovery efforts. 
Creation of a TRG and a database with the results of the proposed 
monitoring programs would allow Okanogan PUD to manage project related 
mitigation and enhancement measures, to determine the success of these 
measures, and to modify these measures, if appropriate, to improve 
their effectiveness. This TRG and its functions would satisfy the 
Washington DFW recommendation for an adaptive management program.
    Interior's recommendation for a Resident Fish Habitat Management 
Plan upstream of the project contains recommendations that are not 
directly related to project operations or effects, and thus do not have 
a direct nexus to the project. These recommendations include a 
comprehensive study of resident fish species, populations, numbers, and 
habitat conditions in the river from Nighthawk down to the reservoir; 
and development of a fish

[[Page 28550]]

habitat monitoring plan for the river upstream of the reservoir The 
proposed run-of-river operation of the reservoir would likely have no 
effect on reservoir species, and would have little effect on the 
riverine habitat upstream of the reservoir. Some of the recommended 
provisions including temperature monitoring and riparian monitoring are 
duplicative of Okanogan PUD proposals discussed elsewhere in the 
document. The recommendation for stocking triploid rainbow trout has 
also been recommended by other agencies and is discussed in detail 
previously in this section.

Minimum Flow Proposal

    As we've said, Okanogan PUD proposes continuous minimum flows for 
the 370-foot-long bypassed reach. Proposed minimum flows would be 30 
cfs from mid-July to mid-September, and 10 cfs the rest of the year.
    Okanogan PUD also proposes to evaluate critical flow thresholds for 
bypassed reach downramping requirements that may be implemented during 
emergency situations after observation of in situ conditions during 
provision of minimum flows.
    American Rivers et al. recommend a minimum flow release to the 
bypassed reach equal to the requirements of Washington state law, to 
prevent degradation of existing instream water uses (WAC 173-201A-310). 
These releases would vary from 400 cfs to 3,400 cfs depending on the 
month. CRITFC recommends maintenance of minimum flows in the bypassed 
reach to provide biotic production and protect designated critical 
habitat in the reach. Washington DFW also recommends establishment of 
instream flows in consultation with Okanogan PUD as a condition for 
licensing and operation of the project, to protect fish in the bypassed 
reach and in the plunge pool below the falls. Neither CRITFC nor 
Washington DFW recommendations contained specific volumes for their 
recommended flow releases. In their preliminary recommendations, 
Washington DFW notes that new information is likely to be developed 
during the Washington DOE WQC process, and because fish and wildlife 
resources are greatly affected by water quantity and quality, 
Washington DFW will not be able to finalize its recommendations until 
the certification process is completed.

Our Analysis

    Proposed flow diversions for project operations would cause flow in 
the 370-foot-long bypassed reach to be reduced by up to 1,600 cfs when 
the powerhouse is in operation. When river flow is greater than 1,600 
cfs, the amount of water provided to the bypassed reach would be any 
flow in excess of 1,600 cfs. When river flow is less than 1,600 cfs and 
both generating units are operational, the only flow provided into the 
bypassed reach would be either 10 or 30 cfs depending on the time of 
year.
    Table 14 shows mean flows in the bypassed reach under current 
conditions and under Okanogan PUD's minimum flow proposal. As shown in 
Table 14, under Okanogan PUD's proposal, flows in the bypassed reach 
would be greatly reduced for much of the year. The large majority of 
the wetted area in the 370-foot reach would be dewatered and the 
majority of aquatic habitat in this reach would be lost. While this 
reduction of flow in the bypassed reach may seem extreme, the aquatic 
habitat in this reach is not heavily utilized and is not accessible to 
most fish in the project area.
    Similkameen Falls at the downstream end of the bypassed reach is a 
natural barrier to upstream fish passage; therefore, the only fish that 
could occupy the bypassed reach are individuals from resident 
populations above Enloe dam that pass over the spillway. Washington DFW 
states that rainbow trout could be washed over the dam into the 
bypassed reach and could contribute to the rainbow trout/UCR steelhead 
population in the river below the dam if sufficient flow and depth is 
maintained to avoid injury. Rainbow trout have not been found in the 
reservoir above the dam in previous sampling (Table 9), but in recent 
(September 2010) snorkeling and hook and line surveys in the plunge 
pool and bypassed reach immediately downstream of Enloe dam, rainbow 
trout were observed. Smallmouth bass, northern pikeminnow, sculpin, and 
unidentified suckers were also observed or collected.\33\ Flow 
conditions did not allow a complete survey of the plunge pool, so 
additional fish may have been observed if a complete survey had been 
conducted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Data were included in Okanogan PUD's November 10, 2010 
filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the recent survey, several species of fish are able to 
utilize the habitat in the plunge pool at least during lower-flow 
periods (river flow during the survey was about 600 cfs). Under 
Okanogan PUD's proposed minimum flows, most of the habitat in the 
plunge pool would disappear except during the summer months when 
natural flows are higher than 1,600 cfs. This would be the same 
timeframe when we would expect that fish would be washed over Enloe dam 
due to high flows. Therefore, the plunge pool habitat would be 
available during high flow months when resident fish may need it to 
survive when they are washed over Enloe dam. The plunge pool habitat 
would then largely disappear from August to March annually, as it would 
only contain minimum flows of 10 or 30 cfs. This would probably be of 
little consequence to resident fish populations, as no fish would be 
washed over Enloe dam during this timeframe. The survival chances of 
fish who would be occupying the plunge pool when it was dewatered 
annually are not known; however, recent surveys have shown that their 
numbers are quite small. Regardless of the numbers of fish in the 
plunge pool after high flow events, those fish would benefit from the 
minimum flows proposed by Okanogan PUD.

  Table 14--Comparison of Average Monthly Flows in Bypassed Reach With
               Okanogan PUD'S Proposed Minimum Flow Regime
                             [Source: Staff]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Mean flows in   Mean flows in
                                          bypassed reach  bypassed reach
                  Month                    under current   under minimum
                                            conditions     flow proposal
                                             (cfs) \1\         (cfs)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January.................................             659              10
February................................             682              10

[[Page 28551]]

 
March...................................             746              10
April...................................           2,086             486
May.....................................           2,086             486
June....................................           8,597           6,997
July....................................           2,965           1,365
August..................................             916              30
September...............................             596              30
October.................................             697              10
November................................             938              10
December................................             798              10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Data from USGS Nighthawk gage no. 12442500 (1929-2005).

    Any fishes that would be occupying the plunge pool could be 
negatively affected by the reduction in minimum flow provision in the 
case of emergency operations, such as project shutdown. Okanogan PUD's 
proposal to determine appropriate downramping rates through monitoring 
and field observation would allow them to decide upon an appropriate 
downramping rate that would be utilized during these situations. This 
would be protective of any fishes utilizing the plunge pool.
    The minimum flow now proposed by Okanogan PUD and agreed to by 
Washington DOE and Washington DFW would be only a small fraction of the 
flow recommended by American Rivers et al. (400 to 3,400 cfs). Although 
American Rivers et al. states that their recommended flow is based on 
Washington regulations to ensure that state water quality standards are 
met, neither of the Washington agencies has recommended this flow, nor 
has American Rivers et al. provided a technical justification, based on 
site specific data, for the higher flows that it recommends. American 
Rivers et al. only states that its recommended flow would provide 
adequate depth, substrate, cover and velocity, and does not provide any 
analysis of alternative flows.
    Another issue associated with minimum flows in the bypassed reach 
is the design of the minimum flow release structure, which we 
previously discussed in section 3.2.2.2. We concluded that a flow 
release structure consisting of a gate and pipe using one of the former 
penstock intakes would be the best option, because it would minimize 
any potential water temperature increases, would allow placement of the 
flow discharge at a point below the dam that would provide the greatest 
environmental benefit, and would provide the best control of the flows 
to be released. For the flow discharge point, a point closest to the 
center of the dam would likely be best, to ensure good flow circulation 
to most of the pool area. We also concluded that the final design of 
this structure should be developed in consultation with the resource 
agencies (Washington DOE, Washington DFW, FWS, NMFS, BLM, and the 
Colville), prior to filing the design with the Commission for approval.
3.3.3.3 Cumulative Effects
    We consider the geographic scope of cumulative effects on aquatic 
resources to be the Similkameen River basin. Non-power development and 
other activities contributing to cumulative effects on water quality 
include historic and present land use as described in section 3.3.2.3. 
Hydropower development at the Similkameen Falls began in the early 
1900s with Enloe Dam being constructed in 1920. The powerhouse operated 
until 1958, when it was decommissioned and the flashboards removed from 
the dam. The proposed Enloe Project would replace the flashboards with 
crest gates, increasing the normal operating level of the reservoir by 
4 feet, equal to its original operating level.
    Cumulative effects on aquatic resources would occur on both 
resident and anadromous species in the Similkameen and Okanogan rivers, 
with potential effects on anadromous species extending to the Columbia 
River. For resident species, primary effects would be associated with 
construction-related effects downstream of Similkameen Falls (increased 
sedimentation and turbidity), and downstream passage through the 
turbines. The Similkameen River already experiences degraded water 
quality conditions associated with past mining activities, and high 
water temperatures during the summer months. Construction-related 
effects could add additional stress to both resident and anadromous 
species downstream of the falls, although Okanogan PUD has proposed 
measures to reduce construction-related effects, as described above. 
These effects would also be of relatively short duration, would subside 
after completion of construction, and overall would not contribute 
significantly to cumulative effects on the fishery resources of the 
basin.
    Fish entrainment through the turbines would result in the mortality 
of some resident species that attempt to move downstream past Enloe 
dam, and could have some effect on resident populations in the lower 
Similkameen River, if those populations rely on recruitment from 
upstream river reaches to maintain their populations. Okanogan PUD's 
proposed intake design would include narrow-spaced trashracks that 
would act to exclude larger fishes from passing through the turbines, 
but would allow smaller individuals to pass. These smaller individuals, 
however, would have higher survival rates than larger fish, and any 
mortality may not significantly affect the downstream population. 
Smaller/younger cohorts of fish populations typically have higher 
natural mortality than older cohorts, so any turbine-related mortality 
may not be detectable in the downstream population. Okanogan PUD is 
also proposing to monitor fish entrainment at the project, to determine 
the effectiveness of the proposed intake

[[Page 28552]]

design, so overall, any turbine-related mortality would not contribute 
significantly to cumulative effects on the resident fishery resources 
of the basin.
    Anadromous species occurring in the Similkameen River immediately 
downstream of the project include the UCR steelhead (listed species), 
Chinook salmon, and sockeye salmon. These species enter the Columbia 
River from the Pacific Ocean and migrate over nine downstream 
hydropower dams on the Columbia River, before reaching the Okanogan 
River and tributary Similkameen River. These species use the plunge 
pool at the base of Similkameen Falls as summer holding habitat prior 
to spawning, but the falls blocks any further upstream migration. 
Spawning for these species occurs in the lower Similkameen River or in 
the Okanogan River. The proposed tailrace would discharge into the 
plunge pool, but should have no negative effect on the holding habitat 
in the pool, and would result in water quality improvements associated 
with the reduction in TDG, and the maintenance of adequate DO levels as 
a result of air injection in the turbine draft tubes. The turbine draft 
tubes would also be equipped with barrier nets to prevent adult 
steelhead from swimming into the draft tubes and contacting the turbine 
blades. The project would operate in a run-of-river mode and would 
implement specific ramping rates when operations are changed, so 
proposed project operations would not result in excessive water level 
fluctuation in the lower Similkameen River. Other enhancements proposed 
by Okanogan PUD include construction of enhanced side channel habitat 
for juvenile salmonids, and spawning gravel supplementation in the 
lower river. In all, proposed project operations and enhancement 
measures would result in a positive cumulative effect on the anadromous 
salmonids occurring in the Similkameen River. Any beneficial effects on 
Similkameen River salmonids resulting in increased production could 
also be observed in the Okanogan and Columbia Rivers, as any increased 
production could result in increased adult returns to those rivers.
3.3.4 Terrestrial Resources
3.3.4.1 Affected Environment

Vegetation

    The Enloe Project area is located in the Similkameen River Valley, 
within the Okanogan Highlands Province (Franklin and Dyrness, 1973). 
This valley is a transitional zone between the Cascade Mountains to the 
west and the Okanogan Highlands to the east. Columbia Basin steppe 
vegetation reaches its northernmost extension in this valley. 
Vegetation is a complex mosaic of three steppe vegetation units, 
including the big sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass association, the 
bitterbrush/Idaho fescue community, and the threetip sagebrush/Idaho 
fescue community. Soil, slope, aspect, topography, and grazing 
practices influence the distribution of these communities within the 
valley.
    Previous botanical studies conducted in the vicinity of the project 
include a vegetation mapping study conducted along the Similkameen 
River in 1984 by FWS for the Corps and vegetation studies conducted for 
the 1991 license application by the Okanogan PUD. Additional vegetation 
and habitat mapping and riparian vegetation studies were conducted by 
Okanogan PUD in 2006. The 2006 studies were completed in consultation 
with state and federal agencies responsible for the management of 
terrestrial biological resources of the Similkameen River.
    Five major vegetation communities were identified within the 
project area: Shrub-steppe; upland meadow; riparian forest; riparian 
shrub; and herbaceous wetland. Other minor communities included areas 
of rock, unconsolidated shore, developed land and open water.
    The shrub-steppe community primarily occurs throughout the project 
area on hillsides above the dam along the eastern side of the 
reservoir. Smaller communities are located immediately downstream of 
the dam along both sides of the Similkameen River. It is the most 
extensive community, covering approximately 27 acres. Native shrub-
steppe communities have been diminished in both extent and condition as 
a result of overgrazing by livestock, invasion of non-native plants, 
agricultural conversion, and wildfire suppression. Most extant shrub-
steppe may appear to be in a natural condition, but it is actually a 
considerably altered ecosystem, compositionally and functionally 
different than pre-European settlement conditions (Altman and Holmes, 
2000).
    Dominant species in this community include big sagebrush, threetip 
sagebrush, bitterbrush, grey rabbitbrush, bluebunch wheatgrass, and 
Idaho fescue. Other common grass and forb species include Sandberg's 
bluegrass, cheatgrass, arrowleaf balsamroot, and prickly pear. Within 
the shrub-steppe community, the bitterbrush/Idaho fescue community is 
found on steeper slopes with coarse soils, while the big sagebrush/
bluebunch wheatgrass is found on gentler slopes. Invasive exotic 
species, including knapweeds, thistles, and tumble mustard, are also 
common, particularly in disturbed sites.
    A deciduous component of the shrub-steppe community occurs in draws 
and the steepest slopes of the hillsides on both sides of the river. 
Common shrub species in these areas are smooth sumac, serviceberry, and 
Wood's rose. Rocky Mountain maple occurs in some stands of this 
community. Scattered ponderosa pine trees occur within the shrub-steppe 
community, particularly with the deciduous component.
    The upland meadow community occurs where shrub-steppe vegetation 
has been cleared and replaced by grasses and forbs. Cheatgrass usually 
dominates in these areas. Common grass and forb species include Idaho 
fescue, knapweeds, and tumble mustard. This community occupies 
approximately 4.3 acres of the project area and occurs primarily at two 
locations. Both of these locations are old homestead sites, with the 
larger situated near Enloe dam on the east bank of the river. These 
areas are also used for grazing livestock.
    Riparian forest in the project area consists of stands of woody 
vegetation from 12 to 80 feet tall. This community occupies 
approximately 2.9 acres in the project area and is found primarily 
along the reservoir. The largest stand is on the east bank of the river 
at Enloe dam. The dominant tree in this community is black cottonwood, 
but quaking aspen and water birch contribute to overstory canopy in 
some areas. Common understory trees and shrubs include willow, red-
osier dogwood, chokecherry, black hawthorn, Rocky Mountain maple, and 
mountain alder. Common herbaceous species include clematis, rushes, 
sedges, and horsetail. Introduced species such as maple, juniper, 
yucca, and lilac are found at the former homestead site near Enloe dam.
    Stands of riparian forest on the east side of the river burned in 
1991. Many of the larger black cottonwoods are at least partly dead, 
although resprouting is occurring. These stands are important as they 
provide crucial habitat, especially to species that are not well 
adapted to living in the arid grasslands and forests that dominate this 
part of the region. Cottonwoods grow quickly and die relatively young. 
They often provide cavities and snags, which are important to a variety 
of wildlife species. These snags may eventually fall into the stream, 
where they help create cover and pool habitat for fish and other 
aquatic creatures. In this capacity, fallen or dead trees help to 
stabilize stream banks and prevent erosion and siltation of streambeds.

[[Page 28553]]

    The riparian shrub community consists of woody vegetation that is 
less than 12 feet tall. This community occupies approximately 7.4 acres 
in the project area and is found primarily along the east bank of the 
reservoir where the slope is gentle. It also occurs as a narrow fringe 
elsewhere along the reservoir and the Similkameen River, including the 
proposed side-channel enhancement site about 5 miles downstream from 
Enloe dam. Willow stands, varying in size from bands of seedlings or 
small shrubs to large dense thickets, provide over 75 percent of the 
total shrub canopy cover. The dominant willow species are Bebb willow 
and yellow willow. Other species in this community include red-osier 
dogwood, chokecherry, clematis, smooth sumac, and young black 
cottonwoods.
    The herbaceous wetland community is found on wet or seasonally 
flooded areas. This community occupies approximately 3.5 acres in the 
project area and occurs in scattered patches on low-elevation terraces 
immediately adjacent to the reservoir. Dominant species are perennial 
grasses, including reed canary grass and bluegrass. Other species 
include cattail, horsetail, milkweed, and knapweed. Woody species found 
in these areas include Wood's rose, red-osier dogwood, black hawthorn, 
and willow, but they provide less than 5 percent of the cover in this 
community.
    Several types of unvegetated areas are found in small portions of 
the project area. These areas include rock outcrops along the hillside 
slopes, bare soil, and sand and gravel bars (unconsolidated shore) 
along the reservoir shoreline. Unconsolidated shore areas were mapped 
as 5.0 acres in the project area. An unconsolidated sand and gravel bar 
area exists at the outfall of the proposed side-channel enhancement 
location where it connects to the mainstem Similkameen River. Some 
sandbars support a sparse herbaceous cover and overlap with the 
herbaceous meadow community. The open water of the reservoir and the 
Similkameen River downstream of Enloe dam occupy much of the project 
area (76.8 acres and 4.2 acres, respectively).
    Developed areas exist within the project area. These areas include 
the dam itself, the old powerhouse, and various roads. These areas are 
also unvegetated and represent 0.5 acre in the project area.

Noxious Weeds

    Noxious weeds and other exotic and invasive plant species are 
defined as those plants listed by the Washington State Noxious Weed 
Control Board under Washington Administrative Code 16-750 and adopted 
by local county boards. They are classified as A-, B-, or C-rated 
plants according to their current distribution and degree of threat, 
with A-rated being of highest concern.
    Weed species have already infested the Enloe dam area and are 
currently targeted for eradication/reduction. These include three Class 
B weeds (houndstongue, diffuse knapweed, and sulfur cinquefoil), as 
well as one Class C weed (babysbreath).
    Other weeds, such as thistles and tumble mustard, are common in the 
shrub-steppe and upland meadow communities, particularly along 
roadsides and disturbed sites. Invasive and noxious plants do not 
appear to be spreading into forested lands or other less-disturbed 
habitats.

Sensitive Species

    In July 2006, Okanogan PUD conducted floristic surveys for 
sensitive species on all undeveloped land comprising the Enloe dam 
project area. The entire project area from the upstream end above 
Shanker's Bend to the downstream end below the existing powerhouse was 
surveyed. In most areas, the project boundary does not extend much 
above the ordinary high water line. Okanogan PUD conducted additional 
vegetation surveys along the proposed new access road in 2007 and the 
proposed side channel enhancement site in 2009.
    Habitat for two sensitive plant species, Ute ladies'-tresses, which 
is state-listed as endangered and federally listed as threatened (see 
section 3.3.5, Threatened and Endangered Species), and Snake River 
cryptantha, which is state-listed as sensitive, occurs in the project 
area. No sensitive plants were observed.

Wildlife

    The Okanogan Basin and Similkameen Subbasin are important 
ecological corridors for migratory megafauna. Species such as mule deer 
use the north-south corridor that connects the dry landscapes of 
Canada's interior with the grasslands to the south. In addition to 
megafauna, this corridor is a crucial part of the flight path for many 
species of birds during annual migrations in the Pacific Flyway between 
summer and winter ranges.
    The Enloe Project vicinity supports a variety of waterfowl, aquatic 
furbearers, and amphibians. Prominent among the waterfowl are mallards, 
common mergansers, and greater and lesser scaup. Canada geese are 
resident in the project vicinity and small numbers may nest along the 
water in the project area.
    Beaver is the most prevalent aquatic furbearer, feeding primarily 
on willow found in the riparian shrub and tree habitats bordering the 
reservoir. Amphibian observations are infrequent in the project area 
due to limited habitat suitability. Amphibian species that may be 
present in the project vicinity include Pacific tree frog, Columbia 
spotted frog, western toad, long-toed salamander, tiger salamander, and 
spadefoot toad. No amphibians were observed during reconnaissance 
surveys carried out in August 2006.
    Riparian habitat, generally recognized as having a high diversity 
of wildlife species, supports a number of song birds best represented 
by the western flycatcher, eastern king bird, American robin, Bullock's 
oriole, cedar waxwing, and various species of warblers, sparrows, and 
woodpeckers. The upland area contains habitats dominated by sagebrush, 
bitterbrush, serviceberry, and rock outcrops, which support mule deer, 
yellow-bellied marmot, black-billed magpie, and ground-nesting species 
such as the introduced chukar partridge and the native California 
quail. Reptiles are also common in these habitats including western 
rattlesnakes, racers, and gopher snakes.
    Wildlife species that use a wider variety of habitat types in the 
project area include swallows, vultures, raptors, and coyotes. Common 
swallow species in the project vicinity are barn swallows, bank 
swallows, and violet-green swallows. Vultures and raptors are primarily 
represented by turkey vultures. American kestrels, red-tailed hawks, 
sharp-shinned hawks, golden eagles, and bald eagles are also present 
but in smaller numbers. Except for swallows, these species may occur in 
the project year-round. Swallows only occur in the summer months.
    Project area use by most of these species, as well as other less 
common species, is greatest in the spring and summer and lowest in the 
winter, when many species migrate, move upslope away from the river, or 
hibernate. Prominent exceptions are mule deer and bald eagles, which 
winter in the project area and remain active in this season.

Sensitive Species

    Townsend's big-eared bat, which is a federal species of concern and 
a candidate for the State of Washington's threatened and endangered 
species list, uses irrigation tunnels adjacent to the proposed access 
roads immediately adjacent to or inside the proposed project boundary 
as night roosts. During BLM surveys conducted in 2000 in the Enloe dam 
area, one male Townsend's bat was observed. Washington DFW

[[Page 28554]]

states that the abandoned powerhouse and penstocks on the west side of 
the river (figure 1) may provide suitable habitat for this species.
    State-listed wildlife species that may occur within the project 
area include the state threatened bald eagle, state endangered sage 
grouse, and state endangered Northern leopard frog. The bald eagle was 
removed from the federal threatened and endangered species list, 
effective August 8, 2007 (72 FR 37,346 [July 9, 2007]); thus, it is not 
subject to ESA protection. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act is 
now the primary federal law protecting the species. This eagle is still 
state-listed as threatened in Washington, although it has been 
recommended for down listing to sensitive by Washington DFW.
    Bald eagles occur along the Similkameen River during most of the 
year, but they are most abundant from approximately October to April. 
Very small numbers may occur during summer, but no nests have been 
located along the river, below Palmer Lake, since 1989. It appears that 
most bald eagles observed in the Enloe Project area are recorded as 
they cross the area and fly up- or downriver. When present, eagles 
range widely within the area depending on water conditions, prey 
availability, perch site locations, and human disturbance. 
Consequently, although bald eagles may be observed in the Enloe Project 
area throughout much of the year, they neither nest nor appear to have 
communal roosts there.
    The project area is within the historical range of the state-listed 
sage grouse, but the nearest existing population of this species is 
more than 60 miles to the south.
    Potential habitat may be present within the project vicinity for 
the state-listed Northern leopard frog. The species typically occupies 
waterbodies situated in grassland, scrubland, or forests. Although most 
historical occurrences of this species were in the shrub-steppe 
community, the project area is well outside the current range of the 
species. Additionally, Washington DFW states that the Northern leopard 
frog has not been found in Okanogan County for many years and may be 
extirpated (ENTRIX, 2009).
3.3.4.2 Environmental Effects
    Activities that would be authorized under a license that could 
affect terrestrial species and habitats include: effects of proposed 
project actions on wetlands, riparian and littoral habitats; 
disturbance of vegetation, wildlife, and their respective habitats 
resulting from construction, road grading, and grounds maintenance; 
effects of water elevation changes on riparian and wetland vegetation; 
grazing access; introduction and spread of noxious weeds; and effects 
of proposed project actions on wildlife species. As discussed below, 
Okanogan PUD proposes measures to reduce adverse effects on terrestrial 
resources.

Effects of Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Project 
Facilities on Wetlands, Riparian and Littoral Habitats (BOTA-01 Through 
BOTA-09)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to mitigate the modification of existing 
riparian and wetland vegetation by facilitating the rapid development 
of riparian vegetation to replace any losses when the low-flow 
elevation for the reservoir is increased by 4 feet. This would be 
accomplished through the implementation of its Vegetation Plan, 
included in the additional information filed on March 2, 2009.
    The overall objectives of the Vegetation Plan are to ensure that 
Okanogan PUD's proposed measures and agency recommendations are 
successfully planned and executed. The Vegetation Plan would establish 
the following measures:
     Planting riparian vegetation at previously identified 
sites along the west and east banks of the reservoir to mitigate for 
the temporary loss of habitat while fringe riparian vegetation 
establishes along the new low water line;
     Abandoning and restoring the existing unimproved shoreline 
road along Enloe reservoir to mitigate the effects of project 
construction noise and habitat fragmentation;
     Planting riparian vegetation along the corridor to 
mitigate the effects of the abandoned shoreline road;
     Planting riparian species on east and west banks 
downstream from Shanker's Bend;
     Installing grazing control measures, including fencing, to 
protect riparian plantings and other sensitive areas from cattle 
grazing;
     Monitoring restored areas and replanting if necessary in 
accordance with the performance criteria in the Vegetation Plan; and
     Employing BMPs to protect riparian and wetland vegetation 
to reduce or avoid effects associated with construction activities.
    Okanogan PUD's Vegetation Plan would provide for appropriate 
protective measures, if monitoring results show project-related 
effects, and also would include employee training and monitoring to 
determine whether the measures are effective. The Vegetation Plan would 
provide for adaptive management, based on monitoring results and would 
outline consultation with the agencies and provision of annual reports 
on plan activities, with the opportunity to update the plan, as needed. 
Okanogan PUD's proposed BMPs for resource protection, cutting and 
planting methods for riparian trees and grasses, grazing controls, 
noxious weed maintenance, vegetation monitoring, and training would be 
included as part of the plan to ensure that riparian areas are 
developed and become more valuable areas for wildlife.
    Okanogan PUD prepared the Vegetation Plan after consultation with 
FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW to address the measures that would be 
taken to facilitate the development and protection of riparian 
vegetation that is otherwise expected to occur naturally. As such, 
Okanogan PUD's Vegetation Plan would incorporate all the measures that 
BLM and Washington DFW recommend, except a BLM recommendation for 
additional sensitive plant species surveying above and below the dam.
    FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW recommend that Okanogan PUD prepare a 
vegetation resources management plan that would include the measures 
contained in the Vegetation Plan, but would also include measures 
specifically addressing the restoration of riparian habitat lost, 
degraded, or disturbed by project construction, operation, and 
maintenance using a 3:1 ratio. Okanogan PUD replied that its Vegetation 
Plan would provide the appropriate replacement ratio with a net 
increase in riparian habitat over what currently exists.
    BLM, FWS, and Washington DFW further recommend that Okanogan PUD 
monitor restored areas (upland sites, riparian and wetland sites) every 
year for 5 years and continue monitoring every 5 years thereafter and 
replant sites as necessary. Okanogan PUD's Vegetation Plan includes 
provisions for monitoring of restored areas of sites that may convert 
from upland meadow to herbaceous wetland.

Our Analysis

    Development and implementation of Okanogan PUD's environmental 
measures contained in its Vegetation Plan for shoreline vegetation 
would mitigate or reduce the effects of project construction, 
operation, and maintenance on associated wetlands and riparian habitats 
and would provide a benefit to wildlife species that use the riparian 
habitats within the project area.
    Overall, implementation of Okanogan PUD's Vegetation Plan would 
represent

[[Page 28555]]

a reasonable level of effort to mitigate the effects of increasing 
reservoir surface water elevation that would inundate 0.4 mile of 
riverine and wetlands habitat at Shanker's Bend. Okanogan PUD's 
Vegetation Plan includes provisions for monitoring of restored areas of 
sites that may convert from upland meadow to herbaceous wetland. 
Restoration of these habitats under this plan would provide a net 
increase in riparian habitat over what currently exists. Monitoring 
restored areas every year for 5 years after license issuance for 
success, with replanting if necessary, would be an appropriate measure 
to ensure effectiveness of habitat restoration.

Disturbance of Vegetation and Wildlife Resulting From Construction, 
Road Grading, and Grounds Maintenance (BOTA-03, BOTA-04, BOTA-08 
Through BOTA-10, and WILD-02)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to abandon and restore a 2,000-foot-long 
segment of the existing unimproved shoreline road traversing riparian 
habitat along the east bank of Enloe reservoir. This area would be 
restored to natural condition through the implementation of Okanogan 
PUD's proposed Vegetation Plan. Abandoning and restoring this segment 
of the road is intended to help mitigate the effects of project 
construction by eliminating the current disturbance of wildlife by 
vehicular traffic and associated noise and removing the current 
interruption between upland and riparian habitat posed by the road. 
Aquatic/riparian species, such as beaver, waterfowl, and other riparian 
birds, and upland species, such as coyotes, deer, snakes, and birds 
that forage in both upland and riparian areas, would be expected to 
benefit.
    Okanogan PUD proposes in its Vegetation Plan to plant woody 
riparian vegetation along the abandoned shoreline road. BMPs to protect 
riparian and wetland vegetation would also be employed. Measures such 
as flagging and temporarily fencing any wetland and riparian vegetation 
in the vicinity of the project would reduce or avoid accidental 
impacts. Okanogan PUD proposes to provide a biological monitor to check 
construction sites on a weekly schedule to ensure that protected areas 
are not disturbed and that fencing is intact. It further proposes to 
limit construction and maintenance-related disturbance of sensitive 
habitats by concentrating construction activities with the loudest 
noise to occur in summer and early fall. This measure would minimize 
potential effects on noise-sensitive species, such as over wintering 
birds and bald eagles as much as possible.
    BLM recommends, in addition to the measures contained in the 
Vegetation Plan, that Okanogan PUD develop a wildlife management plan 
that would include a measure to plant fast-growing native shade 
producing trees along the reservoir, such as native willows, alders, 
and/or cottonwoods. While a formal wildlife management plan was not 
developed, Okanogan PUD addresses facilitating the rapid development of 
riparian vegetation in its Vegetation Plan. Several other related 
recommendations made pertaining to wildlife were adopted (see table 
23).

Our Analysis

    Construction effects on vegetation would be limited to vegetation 
removal and possible noxious weed encroachment near the powerhouse and 
access road and recreational access areas. Project operation would not 
be expected to result in significant effects on the upland vegetation 
communities near the powerhouse.
    Relocating the existing unimproved access road bordering the east 
side of the reservoir approximately 200 feet to the east (up slope) 
would not significantly affect wildlife; it would allow riparian 
habitat along low-lying sections of the current road corridor to 
naturally reestablish, resulting in a net benefit for wildlife and 
their habitat. The proposed route would follow an abandoned irrigation 
ditch through highly disturbed terrain largely consisting of low 
quality rocky habitat and debris.
    Effects on wildlife would be minor, consisting primarily of 
temporary disturbance or displacement of wildlife during construction. 
Most wildlife may temporarily occupy other, nearby similar habitats 
during construction. Once the project is complete, the minor and 
constant noise associated with the project that could affect wildlife 
would be masked by the sound of water flow. Minor impacts would be 
associated with installation of crest gates, connection to Okanogan 
PUD's nearby power distribution line, and relocation of a portion of 
the unimproved access road along the reservoir.

Effects of Water Elevation Changes on Riparian and Wetland Vegetation 
(BOTA-01 Through BOTA-05 and BOTA-07)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to install crest gates at the dam, increasing 
reservoir water level elevations by 4 feet, which would result in the 
inundation of approximately 0.4 mile of riverine and wetlands habitat 
at Shanker's Bend. BLM comments that the larger reservoir would reduce 
vegetation and wetlands along the shore of the current impoundment. 
Okanogan PUD maintains that increasing the minimum pool elevation would 
shift mesic conditions upslope, but would not necessarily result in a 
reduction in suitable habitat.
    In response to BLM, FWS, and Washington DFW's recommendations for a 
vegetation resources management plan, Okanogan PUD proposes to plant 
riparian vegetation at previously identified sites along the west and 
east banks of the reservoir to mitigate for the temporary loss of 
habitat while fringe riparian vegetation establishes along the new low 
water line. It also proposes to plant riparian vegetation on east and 
west banks downstream from Shanker's Bend and along the corridor to 
enhance the effects of abandoning the shoreline road. Okanogan PUD 
would monitor restored areas and replant if necessary in accordance 
with the performance criteria in its Vegetation Plan.

Our Analysis

    Habitat lost, degraded, or disturbed by project construction, 
operations, and maintenance would be restored or replaced along the 
Similkameen River. Habitat that is expected to be affected includes the 
0.4 acre of riparian and wetland habitat that would be inundated by the 
rise in water level elevation. Currently, the herbaceous wetland 
community occupies approximately 3.5 acres in the project area and 
occurs in scattered patches on low-elevation terraces immediately 
adjacent to the reservoir. Although long-term inundation would affect 
approximately 12 acres of habitat along the shore of the reservoir, 
Okanogan PUD maintains that this does not suggest that all 12 acres of 
habitat would be lost. The total acres of vegetated habitat in that 
zone, including sparsely vegetated to barren rocky cliff habitat, is 7 
acres. The remaining 5 acres of unconsolidated shore and water would 
remain. It is anticipated that while some of the habitat may become 
unvegetated; some habitat may merely undergo conversion to another 
wetland cover type, resulting in a minor long-term impact.
    The restoration and subsequent operation of crest gates would 
increase the minimum pool elevation and inundate narrow strips of 
riparian and wetland habitat along the reservoir for longer periods 
than now occurs. Some habitat loss would be short-term and naturally 
mitigated as the inundated area would be replaced by the establishment 
of new riparian habitat upslope within a few years. Fringe riparian 
strips would eventually

[[Page 28556]]

reestablish along the new water line, in response to the higher water 
levels. Permanent alteration of about 5.1 acres of wetlands and 
riparian vegetation currently occupying seasonally exposed flats or 
benches along the reservoir would likely occur.
    Under a run-of-river mode of operation, all project outflows would 
approximate all project inflows at any point in time. In this operation 
mode, a stable water level of the reservoir and stable flow in the 
downstream tailrace would be maintained. As such, effects of modified 
flows on vegetation and wildlife downstream of the dam would be 
negligible.
    Implementation of Okanogan PUD's proposed riparian restoration as a 
component of its Vegetation Plan would provide a reasonable level of 
effort to restore and maintain these affected areas under altered 
conditions. The measures proposed to protect, mitigate, and enhance the 
affected riparian, wetland, and low-elevation upland habitats would 
benefit wildlife in the project vicinity by helping to preserve and 
enhance habitats surrounding the sub-basin that are important to 
maintaining wildlife populations, including small game species, 
migratory birds, and other wildlife.

Effects of Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Project 
Facilities on Grazing Access (BOTA-06)

    The lands within and adjacent to the proposed project boundary are 
currently not fenced. Cattle have free access to the river wherever the 
topography allows. Livestock grazing practices have led to trampled 
streambanks, increased bank erosion and sedimentation, and changes in 
vegetation, including loss of native grasses, effects on woody 
vegetation, and establishment of noxious weeds (PNRBC, 1977). 
Currently, grazing pressures occur mostly along the eastern side of the 
project area.
    To protect riparian/wetland mitigation sites for the project from 
grazing and trampling damage while mitigation plantings are 
establishing, Okanogan PUD proposes livestock fencing for most of the 
eastern side of the project area along the Similkameen River between 
Enloe dam and Shanker's Bend. An additional security/safety fence 
section is proposed for the landward side of the new powerhouse, its 
intake at the dam, and the area between the intake and the powerhouse. 
Protective enclosures for individual plants would be used to protect 
young plantings from consumption by cattle and wildlife, such as beaver 
or deer.
    FWS and Washington DFW recommend that Okanogan PUD install grazing 
control measures, including fencing, to protect sensitive riparian 
areas and restored sites. Okanogan PUD's Vegetation Plan includes a 
provision for installing a stock watering tank approximately 300 feet 
upslope from the river, just inside the project boundary and north of 
the proposed recreation site, as an alternative source of drinking 
water for grazing cattle (Okanogan PUD, 2009b). BLM recommends that any 
new livestock water development associated with the project include a 
wildlife escape ramp.

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD's proposal to install fencing would protect riparian/
wetland areas while accommodating livestock grazing. Okanogan PUD would 
need to consult with BLM, however, regarding finalizing its proposal to 
address grazing permittees' access to and use of water, including the 
provision of a wildlife escape ramp as part of its Fence Plan 
consultation (see section 3.3.6, Recreation and Land Use).

Effects of Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Project 
Facilities on the Introduction and Spread of Noxious Weeds Within the 
Project Boundary (BOTA-11 Through BOTA-13)

    Noxious weeds and other invasive plant species can negatively 
affect native plant communities and wildlife, as well as recreation, 
aesthetics, cultural values, and economic resources. Several federal, 
state, and county policies and regulations have been developed to 
address concerns about the spread of weeds, and to guide management of 
weeds on private and public lands. Landowners in the state of 
Washington are required by state law and various county ordinances to 
take steps to control the spread of certain specified noxious weeds on 
their property.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to include a noxious weed control program as 
a component of its Vegetation Plan. This program would include noxious 
weed control measures for the proposed construction and management 
activities. Monitoring provisions in the vegetation resources 
management plan would include monitoring of sites that may convert from 
upland meadow to herbaceous wetland.
    Okanogan PUD also proposes to include soil disposal and 
revegetation measures BOTA-12 and 13, as a component of the Vegetation 
Plan to further limit introduction and potential spread of noxious 
weeds within the project area. Prior to excavation and placement of 
spoil, existing vegetation in construction areas would be cleared and 
grubbed and buried in spoil disposal areas.
    The spoil disposal areas would be surveyed for the noxious weeds 
addressed in the Vegetation Plan and control measures would be 
implemented to control any infestations of those species prior to spoil 
disposal. Following completion of spoil disposal, the spoil disposal 
areas would be hydroseeded with appropriate seed mixes to encourage 
revegetation with native upland species and reduce the potential for 
noxious weed introduction. These areas would be included in subsequent 
weed survey and treatment efforts.
    FWS and Washington DFW recommend that Okanogan PUD implement a 
noxious weed control program to increase wildlife forage. BLM 
recommends the measures proposed in Okanogan PUD's proposed noxious 
weed control program be incorporated as a component of its recommended 
vegetation resources management plan. This plan would allow inclusion 
of additional provisions that, at a minimum, would identify and limit 
introduction and potential spread of noxious weeds. Specifically, BLM 
further recommends expanding Okanogan PUD's proposed Vegetation Plan to 
include surveying; documentation of species occurrences; treatment 
method and type of application; post treatment and site rehabilitation; 
and long-term prevention and control of noxious and invasive weeds; and 
mapping and digital database development.
    BLM, FWS, and Washington DFW further recommend Okanogan PUD monitor 
restored areas (upland sites, riparian and wetland sites) every year 
for 5 years and continue monitoring every 5 years thereafter and 
replant sites as necessary. Okanogan PUD's Vegetation Plan includes 
provisions for monitoring of restored areas of sites that may convert 
from upland meadow to herbaceous wetland and maintains monitoring 
should be discontinued once success criteria have been met.

Our Analysis

    Noxious weeds and invasive non-native plants are a growing threat 
throughout the west. Diffuse knapweed, in particular, is an invader 
species and a serious water quality threat in the Similkameen 
watershed. The introduced species crowd out the native vegetation and 
create instability along the riverbanks. There are multiple small areas 
of noxious weed infestations within the project boundary that would be 
controlled, reduced, or eradicated

[[Page 28557]]

through the implementation of a noxious weed management program.
    While concentrated along access roads and disturbed areas, weeds 
and invasive species are widespread throughout the project area. 
Prevention of introduction and spread of weeds relies on early 
detection, effective treatment, on-going education of land managers and 
the public about weed issues, and proper planning and management of 
ground disturbing activities. Monitoring existing weed populations and 
patrols to identify new infestations are essential to evaluate the 
success of the steps being taken to control and prevent the spread of 
weeds.
    Without management, weeds would likely continue to spread because 
of their tolerance for a variety of soil and moisture conditions, and 
their ability to out-compete native plants. Project construction and 
maintenance activities and increased human activity, in addition to 
wind, water, and animal transport, would continue to serve as vectors 
for weed dispersal.
    Implementation of Okanogan PUD's noxious weed control program as a 
component of its Vegetation Plan would represent a reasonable level of 
effort to control existing weed populations and prevent the 
introduction and further spread of weeds in the project area. 
Implementation of the program would also encourage the growth of native 
plant species by preventing encroachment of non-native weeds on 
existing plant populations. The adaptive nature of the program would 
enable the plan to be responsive to changing conditions such as changes 
in weed status, occurrence, or distribution.

Effects of Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Project 
Facilities on Wildlife Species (WILD-01 and WILD-02)

    Okanogan PUD proposes several measures to protect and reduce 
effects on wildlife at the project. Construction activity (WILD-02) 
would be timed to minimize effects on over-nesting and over-wintering 
birds and bald eagles, as much as possible. Okanogan PUD also proposes 
a new 13.2-kV, approximately 100-foot-long primary transmission line 
(WILD-01). It would be constructed and connected to the Okanogan PUD's 
existing distribution system at an existing pole immediately to the 
east of the proposed project location. The existing pole would be 
relocated or modified to prevent raptor electrocutions.
    FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW recommends that, in addition to the 
measures contained in the Vegetation Plan, Okanogan PUD develop a 
wildlife management plan that would include a measure to plant fast-
growing native shade producing trees along the reservoir, such as 
native willows, alders, and/or cottonwoods. The agencies also recommend 
that all dead trees along the reservoir be retained as perch trees 
until the planted trees are large enough for raptor use and that the 
project transmission line crossing the Similkameen River be visually 
marked to prevent avian collision. They further recommend the 
installation of 10 artificial perch poles along the reservoir shoreline 
and in places where perch trees are sparse or lacking, and an 
unspecified number of nest boxes for small birds in areas that lack 
snags or natural tree cavities. They also recommend that to avoid 
disturbance of Townsend's big-eared bats using project lands, Okanogan 
PUD install barriers on irrigation canal tunnels to prevent human entry 
while allowing use by bats, and exclude project activities during the 
winter bat hibernation period. BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD 
institute seasonal restrictions on human activity near active nest 
sites of bald eagles, golden eagles, ospreys, peregrine falcons, and 
other raptors on BLM-administered lands within the project boundary. 
Washington DFW recommends that the wildlife management plan also 
provide a 200-foot-wide buffer around wetlands/riparian habitat.
    While a formal wildlife management plan was not developed, several 
of the agency recommendations made pertaining to wildlife were adopted 
(see table 23). As a component of its Vegetation Plan, Okanogan PUD 
would employ BMPs to limit vegetation maintenance in sensitive habitats 
to the extent possible. This would include the retention of snags and 
dead trees, with the exception of trees that pose a hazard to human and 
facility safety. Okanogan PUD states that a previous fire resulted in 
the loss of large shoreline cottonwoods and other trees that could 
provide perching or cavity-nesting habitat. Okanogan PUD maintains that 
the project would not affect perching or cavity-nesting habitat in 
areas that lack such habitat and that perch poles and nest box 
installation should not be required.

Our Analysis

    The construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed 
project is expected to have minimal effects on wildlife because the 
footprint for the hydroelectric facility would be small and effects on 
flows would be minimal. Primary effects would be associated with human 
activity and noise associated with project construction and 
restoration.
    Implementation of Okanogan PUD's WILD-01 and WILD-02 measures would 
reduce the effects of project construction and operation on bald eagles 
and other wildlife that use the project area. Bald eagle use of the 
area is incidental and transient and is not expected to be affected by 
the project. Modification to the transmission line pole would protect 
wildlife that use the eastern side of the reservoir and reduce the 
adverse effects of the power line on raptors and other birds. The 
transmission line would not cross the Similkameen River, further 
reducing the potential for avian contact (see figure 1).
    Okanogan PUD does not propose to remove any non-hazard trees along 
the reservoir, including potential perching trees, therefore, no 
effects to existing perching habitat are anticipated. Likewise, any 
reduction in potential nesting habitat for cavity nesters would be 
slight and temporary, as shifts in riparian habitat occur in response 
to the new minimum pool elevation and new riparian vegetation 
establishes. This would not be a substantial adverse effect and does 
not require mitigation. Effects on bald eagles and other sensitive 
species would be limited and would be mitigated by measures addressing 
shoreline vegetation management, construction timing, and transmission 
pole modification. The proposed project would not affect these 
habitats. The Vegetation Plan, which includes the abandonment and 
natural restoration of the 2,000-foot-long segment of the existing 
unimproved shoreline road, would provide the same protection for 
riparian and wetland habitats as the 200-foot-wide buffer.
    Construction, demolition, and blasting may disturb wildlife in the 
immediate vicinity of these activities. Okanogan PUD proposes to time 
construction activity to minimize effects on wildlife including nesting 
and over-wintering birds and bald eagles, as much as possible. Bald 
eagles and other wildlife may be temporarily displaced from the 
immediate project area and may avoid perching or feeding near the 
project. Because most perch trees are located considerably upriver from 
the dam, the disturbance effect should be minimal.
    Most habitats in the project area are already affected by some 
level of human disturbance, due to existing informal recreational 
access. Development of a proposed public access site near the dam would 
not substantially increase the level of human disturbance on water-
dependent wildlife within the

[[Page 28558]]

project area. It is likely that some vegetation would be removed or 
disturbed for site access and improvement. Much of this disturbance 
would occur in previously altered areas or in areas adjacent to 
existing facilities. As a result of this disturbance, some wildlife 
species that use riparian areas could be temporarily displaced. 
Okanogan PUD proposes to provide a biological monitor during 
construction to further assist with resource protection.
    Once the project is complete, minor noise would be associated with 
the operation and maintenance of the hydroelectric facility, but 
generally would be masked by the sound of water flowing over the dam or 
the falls, or through the tailrace immediately below the dam (water 
would not flow over the dam or falls for 10 months of the year, thus it 
would not mask noise from operations). Noise levels at the facility 
would be fairly constant at all times. Wildlife commonly habituate to 
constant noise and human disturbance levels, provided they are not 
harassed by people working at the facility. Most wildlife would be 
expected to return once construction activities diminish and work is 
completed.
    Activities related to the construction, maintenance, and increased 
recreational use associated with the project may disturb Townsend's 
bats, which are highly sensitive to human disturbance. Although not 
proposed by Okanogan PUD, Washington DFW recommends installation of 
barriers on the project's defunct irrigation tunnels. A recent 
inspection in March 2010 noted that the tunnel entrance nearest to 
Enloe dam had been blocked by a landslide, and, therefore, would not be 
suitable habitat for bats. Tunnel sites near Shanker's Bend and further 
upstream probably have more potential for good bat habitat than the 
tunnels closer to Enloe dam. These sites are far enough from the 
project site that recreational or construction noise would be unlikely 
to affect bats.
    Under measure WILD-02, Okanogan PUD's proposes to concentrate 
construction activities with the loudest noise to occur in summer and 
early fall to minimize effects to over wintering birds and bald eagles 
as much as possible. This mitigation measure would also serve to reduce 
noise impacts to any bats potentially using the area close to the site 
of construction.
3.3.5 Threatened and Endangered Species
3.3.5.1 Affected Environment

Aquatic Species

    Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) are listed as threatened by the 
FWS and have been reported to occur in the Okanogan River, but are not 
found in the Similkameen River. We conclude that bull trout are not 
present in the area that is subject to project effects. Therefore, the 
proposed Enloe Project would have no effect on the federally listed 
Columbia River bull trout.
    UCR steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) is listed as threatened and the 
Similkameen River from its confluence with the Okanogan River to the 
Similkameen Falls is designated as critical habitat. UCR steelhead 
spawn in the Similkameen River downstream from the falls. In its 
February 26, 2010, letter, NMFS stated that UCR steelhead enter the 
river from mid-September through April; spawning usually occurs in 
March through July. Adults hold in the river from the mouth to the 
plunge pool below the falls until spawning takes place. Most of the UCR 
steelhead redds are found below Oroville Bridge at RM 5, and above the 
cross channel with the Okanogan River. There are no known UCR steelhead 
spawning areas within the project boundary. During Okanogan Basin 
Monitoring and Evaluation Project surveys of the lower section of the 
Similkameen in 2005, 106 UCR steelhead redds were counted; their 
density was 18.8 redds per square mile. In 2006, 98 redds were counted, 
and their density was 17.4 redds per square mile. Fry emerge from the 
gravel between July and September, and move downstream in search of 
overwintering habitat in the fall. Juveniles generally rear in 
freshwater for 2-3 years before migrating to the ocean.

Terrestrial Species

Vegetation

    As previously mentioned, the Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes 
diluvialis) could occur within the project area. FWS lists Ute ladies'-
tresses as federally threatened and therefore protected under the ESA 
(FWS, 2010). FWS initiated a status review in 2004 for this species, 
but no determination has been issued to date regarding a change in 
status. No other federally-listed plant species have been found within 
the project boundaries. Ute ladies'-tresses is a perennial terrestrial 
orchid that flowers from mid-July through August in Washington. It is 
found in early to mid-seral vegetation in wet meadows, stream or river 
banks, irrigated hay meadows, and wetlands associated with wet meadows, 
springs, streams, lakes, irrigation ditches, and reclaimed gravel and 
peat mines.
    Although this orchid was reported as historically found in riparian 
areas in Colorado, Utah, and Nevada when it was listed, existing 
populations were known only in Colorado and Utah at that time. Since 
1992, populations have been found in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Nebraska, 
and at four locations in Washington. One Washington location is in a 
periodically flooded alkaline flat. The other three are on stabilized 
gravel bars along the Columbia River. Washington populations are at 
elevations ranging from 720 to 1,500 feet. No critical habitat has been 
designated for this species.
    The nearest known population to the Enloe Project is at Wannacut 
Lake, approximately 5 air-miles to the southwest. Wannacut Lake is in 
the Whitestone Creek watershed, and the Whitestone Creek confluence 
with the Okanogan River is approximately 9.8 miles downstream of the 
Similkameen River confluence with the Okanogan River. No individuals of 
Ute ladies'-tresses or any other species of Spiranthes were observed 
during Okanogan PUD's botanical surveys of the project area in 2006, 
2007, or 2009. However, the surveys identified two areas of suitable 
habitat. An approximately 9-square-foot area at the edge of the 
reservoir (Okanogan PUD, 2009d) and a sparsely vegetated area at the 
downstream end of the proposed side channel enhancement location, 
immediately adjacent to the active Similkameen River channel 
approximately 5 miles downstream from Enloe dam, could provide 
potential habitat for these species, although Ute ladies'-tresses were 
not observed during an October 2009 survey.

Wildlife

    FWS lists three wildlife species potentially occurring in Okanogan 
County that are federally designated as threatened and therefore 
protected under the ESA (FWS, 2010). These species are the Canada lynx 
(Lynx canadensis), grizzly bear (Ursus arctos), and northern spotted 
owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). Designated critical habitat for two 
of these species--Canada lynx and northern spotted owl--is also present 
in Okanogan County. Based on literature review and agency 
consultations, these species are not likely to occur within the project 
area due to the lack of suitable habitat. Effects on these species are 
not likely to occur due to their absence within the project area.

[[Page 28559]]

    Canada Lynx--The Canada lynx is a medium-sized cat that is highly 
mobile and has a large home range. Its population and distribution is 
closely tied to its main prey, the snowshoe hare. Populations in 
northern boreal regions fluctuate in response to snowshoe hare 
population level cycles; however, this cycling has not been found to 
occur in Washington (Stinson, 2001).
    Canada lynx inhabit moist coniferous forests with cold, snowy 
winters. In Washington, the majority of lynx records and evidence of 
reproduction are from older lodgepole, subalpine fir, and spruce 
forests at elevations higher than 4,000 feet (Stinson, 2001). Based on 
Washington surveys, the nearest designated critical habitat for the 
Canada lynx is located in existing Lynx Management Zones of the 
Okanogan National Forest. The Okanogan Lynx Management Zone contains 
extensive stands of lodgepole pine and supports one of the largest lynx 
subpopulation in Washington. The project area, however, is not located 
within this designated critical habitat.
    Furthermore, forests around the project area include shrub-steppe 
and riparian species that are located well below elevations typically 
occupied by Canada lynx, and are not characterized as forest habitat 
that would be considered suitable for this species. Prey opportunities 
are also not available at or near roadways, proposed facilities, and 
other project features close to the Similkameen River.
    For these reasons, the Canada lynx is unlikely to occur in the 
project area. No studies were requested or performed by Okanogan PUD to 
investigate the presence or status of the Canada lynx in the project 
area. We conclude the Canada lynx is not likely to occur in the project 
area. The project would have no effect on the Canada lynx, and for this 
reason, we do not discuss this species further in this EA.
    Grizzly Bear--Preferred habitats of grizzly bears include sub-
alpine meadows and open or semi-open forests, but individuals are very 
wide-ranging and can be found in diverse habitats. Dens are typically 
located far away from human activity on steep slopes where snow 
accumulation is deep and persistent. Seasonal movements often occur 
associated with patterns of newly sprouted vegetation, ripening 
berries, spawning salmon runs, and the availability of other prey, such 
as marmots.
    FWS established several recovery zones throughout the western 
United States in 1993; the North Cascades Ecosystem Recovery Zone is 
the only zone in north central Washington. Current population levels in 
this zone are unknown, but are believed to be very low, possibly fewer 
than 20 animals (FWS, 2004). Without augmentation, FWS concludes there 
is a low likelihood of recovery in the north Cascades (FWS, 2004).
    Grizzly bears are unlikely to occur in the project vicinity other 
than as a rare transient. Okanogan PUD did not perform and the agencies 
did not request any studies to investigate the presence or status of 
the grizzly bear in the project area. The grizzly bear is unlikely to 
occur in the project area. The project would have no effect on the 
grizzly bear, and we do not discuss this species further in this EA.
    Northern Spotted Owl--Northern spotted owls inhabit temperate 
forests of the Pacific Coast region from southwestern British Columbia, 
through the Olympic and Cascade ranges in Washington and Oregon to 
north central California. The northern spotted owl is commonly 
associated with old-growth or mature conifer forest stands, especially 
during nesting, although younger stands that have late-successional 
stand remnant structures are also sometimes used, especially during 
times of dispersal (Thomas et al., 1990).
    Nest sites are generally located in previously excavated cavities 
or on platforms in large trees, and northern spotted owls may use nests 
built by other species (FWS, 2008). Established pairs normally remain 
in the same territories from year to year and foraging areas may reach 
nearly 2,500 acres (FWS, 2008). Breeding behavior is generally 
initiated in March and continues into June, depending on elevation. 
Parental care continues into September and sometimes October, as 
fledglings learn to fly and hunt on their own. FWS considers the period 
between March 1 and July 15 to be the early breeding season, when birds 
are most vulnerable to disturbance. Birds may be less sensitive during 
the late breeding season (July 16 and September 30).
    The northern spotted owl was listed as federally threatened on June 
26, 1990. FWS issued a final recovery plan in May 2008 (FWS, 2008). 
Based on Recovery Action 4 of the plan, FWS revised the designation of 
critical habitat to provide for a network of managed owl conservation 
areas that are of sufficient size and spacing to achieve long-term 
recovery of spotted owls. The designation includes only federal lands. 
FWS designated managed owl conservation areas in north central 
Washington, which includes Critical Habitat Unit 3. It consists of 
approximately 115,600 acres in Whatcom, Okanogan, and Chelan counties 
and is composed of lands managed by the Okanogan and Wenatchee National 
Forests.
    The project area is not located within Unit 3; the project area 
does not meet the size requirement of small habitat blocks and is not 
within the Okanogan National Forest. The forested areas around Enloe 
dam and along the access roads and project facilities do not provide 
suitable habitat for nesting, roosting, and foraging. No studies were 
requested by FWS or other agencies participating in the licensing, and 
none were performed by Okanogan PUD to investigate the presence or 
status of northern spotted owls in the project area. The northern 
spotted owl is unlikely to occur in the Project area. The project would 
have no effect on the northern spotted owl, and we do not discuss this 
species further in this EA.
3.3.5.2 Environmental Effects

Aquatic Species

UCR Steelhead

    We evaluated the effects of Okanogan PUD's proposed measures on 
aquatic resources, including UCR steelhead, the only listed fish 
species known to occur in project affected waters, in section 3.3.3.2, 
Aquatic Resources. As we previously noted, the Similkameen River below 
Similkameen Falls is designated critical habitat for the threatened UCR 
steelhead, and UCR steelhead use the Similkameen River for spawning, 
rearing, and thermal refugia.

Our Analysis

    Under the proposed action, fish passage would not be provided at 
the dam, and the 370-foot long bypassed reach would only receive a 
minimum flow of 10 to 30 cfs during the low flow months,\34\ when most 
of the river flow would be diverted through the powerhouse and returned 
to the river below the falls. As discussed in section 3.3.3.2, we have 
concluded that the Similkameen Falls is a natural barrier to fish 
passage preventing fish migration further upstream, so the project 
would have no effect on the upstream migration of the UCR steelhead. 
Similarly, because steelhead are unable to use the bypassed reach as 
habitat, and the reach is not considered critical habitat, there would 
be no effect on UCR steelhead by only providing a relatively low 
minimum flow in the reach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ This is Okanogan PUD's alternative minimum flow proposal 
based on agreements reached in WQC negotiations with Washington DOE 
and Washington DFW, as reported in its filing of October 28, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other recent Okanogan PUD proposals related to the WQC

[[Page 28560]]

negotiations would also have no effect on the UCR steelhead, or would 
act to enhance habitat quality for this species. The proposed 
temperature and DO monitoring and associated adaptive management 
program would ensure that water quality downstream of the project 
continues to meet state standards, and adequate quality for the UCR 
steelhead. Other measures related to developing appropriate ramping 
rates for spillage flow over Enloe dam, and determining a point of 
release for the minimum flow from Enloe dam, would have no effect on 
UCR steelhead because this species does not occur upstream of 
Similkameen Falls.
    Overall, Okanogan PUD's proposed environmental measures would be 
consistent with the Upper Columbia Spring Chinook Salmon and Steelhead 
Recovery Plan developed by the Upper Columbia Salmon Recovery Board to 
restore viable and sustainable populations of salmon, steelhead, and 
other at-risk species through collaborative, economically sensitive 
efforts, combined resources, and wise resource management of the Upper 
Columbia region. This plan is an outgrowth and culmination of several 
conservation efforts in the Upper Columbia River Basin, including 
current efforts related to the ESA, state and tribal-sponsored recovery 
efforts, subbasin planning, and watershed planning. In regard to Enloe 
dam, the plan does not identify upstream and downstream passage of fish 
as being a short-term or long-term action that would contribute to the 
restoration of these fish stocks. This conclusion was based on the 
uncertainty of fish being able to ascend the falls before the 
construction of Enloe dam at that site.
    Although Okanogan PUD's overall plans for development of the Enloe 
Project would generally enhance aquatic habitat in the Similkameen 
River, construction of the project would have the potential to 
adversely affect UCR steelhead and UCR steelhead designated critical 
habitat. These effects would be associated with: (1) The direct or 
indirect effects of blasting activities that may cause mortality or 
injury to steelhead adults and juveniles in the plunge pool immediately 
below Similkameen Falls; and (2) turbidity plumes and sedimentation, 
including potential contaminated sediment, within steelhead habitat, 
which could cause injury or mortality of eggs, fry, and juvenile fish 
due to smothering or abrasion. Okanogan PUD has proposed several 
measures to minimize the effects of construction on downstream aquatic 
habitat (the fish salvage plan for blasting, the Spill Response Plan, 
the CSMP, the ESCP, employing BMPs, and the Storm Water Pollution 
Prevention Plan). The proposed measures would minimize potential take 
of UCR steelhead during blasting activities; however, some take due to 
physiological stress, injury, predation, or mortality could still 
occur. Development of a fish salvage plan that includes seasonal work 
windows, in consultation with NMFS, FWS, and Washington DFW, would 
reduce the potential for injury or mortality of steelhead during 
capture and relocation activities. Measures to control erosion and 
sedimentation would also reduce the potential for effects on steelhead, 
but some physiological stress could still occur during unanticipated 
releases of turbidity or sedimentation.
    Project operations could affect the UCR steelhead, as a result of 
some flow fluctuations downstream of the project, and the potential for 
adult steelhead to swim into the project draft tubes and impact the 
runner blades. The project would be operated run-of-river so that 
outflow equals inflow to the reservoir, but there could be some 
fluctuations in flow releases as unit operations change or as spill 
gates are opened or closed, possibly resulting in the stranding of 
redds, fry, and juveniles. Okanogan PUD, however, is proposing a 
ramping rate below the project ranging from 1 to 2 inches per hour 
depending on the season and time of day. These proposed rates would 
minimize any effects related to stranding of UCR steelhead downstream 
of the project. Okanogan PUD is also proposing to install draft tube 
net barriers to prevent adult steelhead from entering the draft tubes 
during operational periods when lower outlet velocities may prevail. 
Successful deployment of these barriers would prevent steelhead from 
entering the draft tubes and experiencing injury or death by contacting 
the runner blades.
    Okanogan PUD also proposes habitat enhancement measures in the 
Similkameen River downstream of the project, including supplementing 
spawning gravel, transporting large woody debris to enhance habitat 
diversity, and providing side channel enhancements that would provide 
coldwater side channel habitat for steelhead juveniles. Although the 
measures would likely enhance aquatic habitat for listed UCR steelhead 
downstream of the falls, the risk of incidental adverse effects on 
individual fish cannot be entirely eliminated. Some short-term habitat 
degradation would occur during construction and implementation of the 
gravel supplementation program and side-channel enhancement projects. 
All of these proposed measures would entail instream work, which has 
the potential to result in injury or mortality of eggs, fry, or 
juvenile trout that may be in the direct path of instream equipment, or 
during placement of structures and/or gravel in the stream channel, or 
create turbidity and sedimentation. In the long term, these measures 
would provide benefits to steelhead, such as improved spawning and 
rearing habitat in the river downstream of the dam and increased 
productivity. Okanogan PUD's proposed biological review process, 
fisheries monitoring, and adaptive management program would also 
provide long-term benefits for UCR steelhead and UCR steelhead 
designated critical habitat, because those programs would ensure that 
the proposed mitigation and enhancement measures are being successfully 
implemented.
    Although long-term benefits would occur as a result of measures 
proposed by Okanogan PUD, we conclude that licensing the project would 
adversely affect the federally listed UCR steelhead because proposed 
project construction and habitat enhancement projects could result in 
short-term increases in turbidity and sedimentation and the risk of 
injury or mortality to eggs, fry, juveniles, or adults as a result of 
runoff from construction and instream use of equipment. Construction of 
the tailrace could result in injury or mortality to eggs, fry, 
juveniles, or adults caused by capture and transport, relocation, and 
blasting. We conclude that the proposed project would not appreciably 
diminish the value of designated UCR steelhead critical habitat for 
both survival and recovery of this species, but because of potential 
impacts on steelhead during the construction period, we will request 
formal consultation with NMFS pursuant to section 7 of the ESA.

Terrestrial Species

    The following sections summarize our analyses for Ute ladies'-
tresses, which may be affected by project operation or project-related 
activities.

Effects of Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Project 
Facilities on Federally Listed Species and Their Habitats (BOTA-14 and 
WILD-03)

    Habitat for the threatened Ute ladies'-tresses has been identified 
within the project area. Okanogan PUD did not observe this species in 
surveys of the project area it conducted in 2006, 2007, and 2009. The 
survey of the proposed side-channel enhancement site was conducted in 
October 2009, outside the typical mid-July through August flowering 
period when Ute ladies'-tresses can be distinguished from other

[[Page 28561]]

plants; Okanogan PUD states, however, that the species may still be 
flowering or fruiting as late as October.\35\ BLM states that Okanogan 
PUD's plant surveys were not adequate to determine the presence or 
absence of Ute ladies'-tresses. In response to agency concerns about 
its plant surveys, Okanogan PUD proposes to conduct an additional 3 
years of surveys for Ute ladies'-tresses prior to construction (BOTA-
14). Surveys for this species would be conducted in the summer/fall and 
would be timed to correlate with the flowering period for the Ute 
ladies'-tresses. Okanogan PUD would also take the following measures 
that would protect the Ute ladies'-tresses: employ BMPs to limit 
vegetation disturbance in sensitive riparian and wetland habitats to 
the extent possible, control noxious weeds, conduct an environmental 
training program for its employees, and provide a biological monitor 
during construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ The 2006 survey was conducted in July and the 2007 survey 
was conducted in July-August.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FWS, Washington DFW, and BLM recommend additional surveys, using 
FWS and BLM's protocols, for Ute ladies'-tresses and other threatened 
and endangered plant species as a component of their recommended 
vegetation resources management plan. BLM further recommends that the 
section of the vegetation resources management plan, which expands on 
Okanogan PUD's proposed Vegetation Plan include surveying, 
documentation of species occurrences, evaluation of impacts, and 
mapping and digital database development.
    FWS and Washington DFW recommend that Okanogan PUD survey and 
document threatened and endangered plants within 1 year of any license 
issuance and every 5 years thereafter for the duration of the license 
term. The agencies further recommend that Okanogan PUD monitor known 
threatened and endangered plant habitat at 5-year intervals and 
evaluating the effects of any new ground-disturbing activities or 
substantive changes in project operation on listed plants and their 
habitats prior to implementation of the activities or changes in 
operation. Okanogan PUD would be required to evaluate the adequacy of 
the vegetation resources management plan and update the plan as needed.

Our Analysis

    Habitat for Ute ladies'-tresses has been identified within the 
project area along the reservoir and near the proposed side-channel 
enhancement area. According to Fertig et al. (2005), perennial stream 
and riverine habitats occupied by this species typically have short 
vegetative cover maintained by grazing, periodic flooding, or mowing. 
In the absence of disturbance or as sites become drier, streamside wet 
meadow habitats may become encroached by riparian shrub or woodland 
vegetation. Ute ladies'-tresses populations may persist for a short 
time in the grassy understory of woody riparian shrublands, but do not 
appear to thrive under these conditions.
    An approximately 9-square-foot area at the edge of the reservoir 
could support Ute ladies'-tresses, although no plants were found in 
Okanogan PUD's 2006 and 2007 surveys. Okanogan PUD states that any Ute 
ladies'-tresses present along the reservoir would be adversely affected 
if they occur in the area that would be permanently inundated by the 
proposed crest gate operation and if they are unable to establish at 
the new water line (Okanogan PUD, 2009d).
    Suitable Ute ladies'-tresses habitat has also been identified at 
the proposed side-channel enhancement site. Okanogan PUD's October 2009 
survey of the site did not identify this species. Okanogan PUD 
anticipates temporary disturbance of vegetation at the side-channel 
enhancement site to install the well pad, buried pipeline, and one 
power pole for a distribution line to the well, and proposes to 
minimize disturbance to the extent practicable. The disturbed area 
would not exceed 40 feet in width within the lower 400 feet of the 
channel. Along the pipeline route, the disturbance area is assumed to 
be a 10-foot-wide by 300-foot-long corridor. Operation and maintenance 
activities at the side-channel enhancement site would likely be limited 
to activities at the well. The footprint of the proposed construction 
and subsequent operation and maintenance activities could be adjusted, 
if necessary, to avoid adversely affecting any Ute ladies'-tresses 
identified in additional surveys.
    Okanogan PUD's 2006 and 2007 surveys of the Enloe dam and reservoir 
area were adequate to identify suitable Ute ladies'-tresses habitat and 
were likely adequate to determine the presence of the species, although 
it is unclear whether Okanogan PUD's were conducted using protocols 
acceptable to FWS and BLM. Therefore, there would likely be no adverse 
effects on Ute ladies'-tresses as a result of inundation of the 9-
square-foot-area of suitable habitat at the edge of the reservoir. 
However, Okanogan PUD's surveys of the suitable habitat at the proposed 
side-channel enhancement site were not conducted at the optimum time to 
identify the species.
    In order to ensure the protection of threatened and endangered 
plant species, we agree with Okanogan PUD, FWS, and BLM that additional 
surveys should be conducted before land-clearing or land-disturbing 
activities, both in the Enloe dam and reservoir area and the side-
channel enhancement site.
    Monitoring of known threatened and endangered plant habitat and 
evaluating the effects of any new ground-disturbing activities or 
substantive changes in project operation would reduce any potential 
effects on threatened and endangered species such as the Ute ladies'-
tresses and their habitat. Preparing and implementing a monitoring plan 
after consultation with FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW would ensure that 
the 3 years of additional surveys are adequate to determine the 
presence or absence of Ute ladies'-tresses and other listed species. If 
the surveys identify a listed species in areas that would be affected 
by the proposed project, developing a plan, after consultation with the 
agencies, to avoid or minimize adverse impacts would be appropriate. We 
conclude that licensing the project, with staff's recommended measures, 
would be not likely to adversely affect the Ute ladies'-tresses.
3.3.6 Recreation and Land Use
3.3.6.1 Affected Environment
    The proposed project boundary includes about 2.75 miles of the 
Similkameen River. The proposed upstream project boundary extends 
upstream from the dam (RM 8.80) approximately 2.50 miles (RM 11.30); 
the downstream extends 0.25 mile to encompass a short reach of the 
tailwater (RM 8.55).

Recreation

Regional Recreation Opportunities
    As we've said, the Enloe Project is located in north-central 
Washington about 2 miles south of the Canadian border and 3.5 miles 
northwest of the city of Oroville on the Similkameen River in Okanogan 
County (figure 5). BLM manages the recreation resources that provide 
recreational opportunities within the Enloe Project area. The BLM's 
Spokane District, Wenatchee Field Office, manages the informal Miner's 
Flat area located about 3 miles upstream of Enloe dam and 0.25 mile 
upstream of the project boundary. Dispersed camping occurs on the Flat, 
which includes several informal fire rings created by recreational 
users, and there are several trails and a rough road

[[Page 28562]]

that provides access to the river. Similkameen Camp, another primitive 
campground maintained by the BLM, is located approximately 2.25 miles 
upstream from the project boundary.
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

[[Page 28563]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.004

BILLING CODE 6717-01-C

[[Page 28564]]

    No formal or developed recreation facilities are located within the 
Enloe Project area. The nearest developed campground is about 4 miles 
east of Enloe dam, in Osoyoos Lake State Veteran's Memorial Park. 
Osoyoos Lake State Veteran's Memorial Park is a 47-acre camping park on 
a 14-mile-long lake that stretches several miles north into British 
Columbia.
    The park has 86 standard camping sites, one dump station, two 
restrooms (one accessible) and two showers, a park office, small store 
and entrance kiosk. Recreational activities include camping, 
picnicking, boating, swimming, fishing, wildlife viewing, bird 
watching, and horseshoe pits. Winter activities in the park include ice 
skating, snow playing, and ice fishing.
    Washington DFW owns two river access sites on the Similkameen River 
upstream of the Enloe Project area. The site known as Cutchie 
4 is located about 7 miles west of Oroville on the Loomis-
Oroville Road. The site is surrounded by private land and is accessible 
only from the river; it has no developed facilities. Another site known 
as Cutchie 3 is located about 1.5 miles south of Nighthawk on 
the Loomis-Oroville Road.
    The Loomis-Oroville Road in the vicinity of the Enloe Project area 
is designated as a segment of the Pacific Northwest National Scenic 
Trail (Scenic Trail). The Scenic Trail is a 1,200-mile-long multi-use 
recreation trail that runs from the Continental Divide in the Rocky 
Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. The Pacific Northwest Trail Association 
constructed and maintains the Scenic Trail. A new Okanogan County 
Nighthawk Scenic Trail (non-motorized trail) is currently under 
construction and follows the abandoned railroad bed and Similkameen 
River between Oroville and Nighthawk for a total of 12.5 miles. The 
portion of the trail that has been completed can be accessed from the 
City of Oroville and travels 3.5 miles to a scenic view of Similkameen 
Falls at about RM 8.5 and just outside of the lower end of the proposed 
project boundary (Okanogan County, 2010). The corridor of the old 
railroad bed for the Great Northern Railroad runs through the 
Similkameen River Valley, roughly following the west bank of the 
Similkameen River from the railroad trestle bridge located about 2 
miles below Enloe dam. The old railroad bed passes through the proposed 
project boundary and goes through a tunnel near the upstream end of the 
Enloe Project area. BLM owns and manages most of the Great Northern 
Railroad corridor within the proposed project boundary.
    The Water Trail Committee is developing a work plan for a water 
trail catering to canoes and kayaks in the Columbia River Basin. The 
route of the proposed trail would include the Similkameen River from 
the Canadian border to the confluence with the Okanogan River at 
Oroville. The Water Trail Committee, working with federal, State, and 
local partners, proposes to develop infrastructure, including launch 
sites, directional signs, educational signs, sanitary sites, and 
campsites.
    Extreme Adventures and Alpine Fishing Guides, a commercial 
outfitter, provides raft floating and fishing trips on the Similkameen 
River. This outfitter provides three experiences, including: (1) A 
scenic flat water float that starts at the Canadian border and ends 
near Nighthawk or at Washington DFW's Cutchie 3 site 
(mentioned above); (2) an introduction to whitewater experience that 
starts at Miner's Flat and ends at Shanker's Bend; and (3) a trip that 
runs through Enloe Dam Canyon, which starts below Enloe dam and the 
falls and provides some whitewater experiences depending on the season.

Regional Comprehensive Plans

    In terms of regional recreational management goals, Washington 
State Recreation and Conservation Office (2008) identified the 
following policy statements in its Defining and Measuring Success: The 
Role of State Government in Outdoor Recreation, A State Comprehensive 
Outdoor Recreation Planning Document:
     Recognize outdoor recreation sites and facilities as vital 
elements of the public infrastructure, essential to the health and 
well-being of Washington citizens, and important to visitors;
     Assist local and state agencies in providing recreation 
sites and facilities that benefit our citizens' health and well-being;
     Provide adequate and continuing funding for operation and 
maintenance needs of state-owned fish and wildlife habitat, natural 
areas, parks, and other recreation lands to protect the state's 
investment in such lands;
     Work in partnership with federal agencies to ensure the 
availability of a variety of opportunities and settings for outdoor 
recreation;
     Encourage the private sector to contribute needed public 
recreation opportunities; and
     Encourage all agencies to establish a variety of financial 
resources that can be used to significantly reduce the backlog of 
needed outdoor recreation, habitat, and open space projects.

Recreation Opportunities Within the Enloe Project Area

    There are no formal, developed recreation sites within the project 
boundary. Public use of undeveloped dispersed recreation sites consists 
primarily of individuals who access the shoreline for fishing, hunting, 
swimming, paddle sports (i.e., canoeing, kayaking, and river rafting), 
picnicking, camping, hiking, biking (road touring and mountain biking), 
ATV riding, horseback riding, gold prospecting, bird and wildlife 
watching, photography, and scenic driving. Winter activities include 
fishing, snowshoeing, snowmobiling, and cross-country skiing when 
weather allows.
    On the east side of the river, two access roads to project lands 
spur off of Loomis-Oroville Road. These access roads are not maintained 
for passenger vehicles. The Enloe Dam Road or downstream access road is 
a steep, one-lane road that contains exposed embankments, heavy ruts, 
and active erosion areas. This county road is unsafe for passenger 
vehicles and lies partially within the Enloe Project boundary. The 
upstream access road or OTID Road provides informal access to the river 
corridor and the reservoir shore for public use . Heavy brush impedes 
clearance, and the road is heavily rutted and steep in places. The 
upstream access road is impassable during the spring and early summer 
due to the spring runoff and remains muddy for some time after the peak 
flow period.
    Informal/unimproved reservoir access ramps are located just 
upstream from the safety barrier. The old powerhouse eastbank access 
road now provides pedestrian access only to the shoreline area below 
the dam for boaters, miners, anglers, and hikers. An informal/
unimproved parking area is located near the top of the dam from which 
emerge informal user-created trails providing access to the reservoir 
above the dam and some dispersed camping areas on the east bank of the 
reservoir.
    The steep terrain limits access to the shoreline on the west bank 
of the Enloe reservoir and downstream of the dam. Below the dam and the 
falls, the Similkameen River is confined between nearly sheer rock 
walls until the canyon opens just below the railroad trestle about 2 
miles downstream from Enloe dam. This downstream canyon area is 
accessible only on foot from the east bank, via informal user trails. 
Access to the west bank is limited because the old rail bed crosses 
private land and is gated. From the west bank, access crosses private 
land and occurs via game trails and existing hiking trails

[[Page 28565]]

leading to the river from the rail grade, which sits nearly 100 feet in 
places, above the river. The only other means of access is by boat.

Recreation Use Within the Enloe Project Area

    Shore fishing and boating are the most popular activities inside of 
the Enloe Project area. In the past, fishing for steelhead and Chinook 
salmon has been popular downstream of the falls, and some trout and 
bass fishing has also taken place there.
    During high water periods, the river attracts a limited number of 
whitewater enthusiasts who run the river above Shanker's Bend and below 
the dam. As water levels drop and the temperatures warm, the river sees 
more relaxed water-based recreation. Rafting, kayaking, and inner-
tubing have been observed both above and below Enloe dam in the Project 
area. Swimming near Shanker's Bend and floating in the canyon below the 
dam are popular activities during these periods. Boaters and floaters 
use a number of informal, user-developed access points in the Project 
area. Some users walk down the old access road on the east bank of the 
river to launch rafts, kayaks, and inner tubes just below the waterfall 
downstream of the dam.
    Okanogan PUD conducted one visitor intercept survey between June 1 
and October 15, 2006, to coincide with the peak recreational use, 
particularly to encompass the recreational gold mining season, to 
gather information to estimate visitor use of the Enloe Project area. 
Because the survey was conducted during only one recreational use 
season (2006), Okanogan PUD assumed that 2006 was an ``average'' 
recreational use year. Recreational use estimates were based on 59 
survey records completed with respondents in the field on 21 days from 
June 1 through October 15, 2006. Surveys were conducted on weekdays, 
weekend days, and ``peak'' days (selected holiday weekends).
    Survey results indicate that use of the Enloe Project area is 
estimated at 1,378 user days during the June 1-October 15 peak 
recreation season. Table 14 provides Okanogan PUD's estimate of monthly 
user-days during the June-October recreation season. Use peaks quickly 
in July and remains at a fairly constant level from August through 
October. Outside of the Enloe Project area the most popular 
recreational activity is gold prospecting followed by boating, shore 
fishing, and sightseeing. Most of the mining and camping activities 
occur outside of the Enloe Project area.

      Table 14--Estimate of User Days by Month for the Project Area
                      [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Estimate of user
                                                             days
                        Month                        -------------------
                                                       Number    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June................................................       190      13.8
July................................................       346      25.1
August..............................................       267      19.4
September...........................................       278      20.2
October.............................................       297      21.6
                                                     -------------------
  Total.............................................     1,378     100.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 15 indicates estimated user days by type of day. In this 
area, weekend and weekday use levels are similar, but peak days show a 
marked increase in use.
    Fishing occurs mainly in the lower reaches of the Similkameen River 
near Oroville; however, many anglers walk down the old access road on 
the east bank of the river to fish just below the dam. Okanogan PUD 
reported that as many as 30 people have been seen at one time fishing 
below the falls. In response to surveys, visitors expressed the 
importance of the river corridor below the dam and falls for fishing, 
gold prospecting, and sightseeing; a desire for safety features or 
assigned a high priority to the provision of additional facilities; and 
a need for picnic facilities, vault toilets, garbage collection, and 
improved river access.

                       Table 15--Estimate of User Days by Type of Day for the Project Area
                                          [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                             Per
                                           Type of day                                              Number   day
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peak days\a\.....................................................................................       540  14
Weekend days.....................................................................................       190   6
Weekdays.........................................................................................       648   6
                                                                                                  --------------
  Total..........................................................................................     1,378
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Days coinciding with holidays or recreational events, including Fourth of July (4 days), Northwest Miner's
  Rally (3 days), Labor Day/Blues Festival (3 days), and first weekend of deer hunting season (2 days).

    Although thirty-three respondents (60 percent) reported staying 
longer than one day at the project area, only two of the parties 
surveyed actually camped within the Enloe Project area due to the 
absence of developed facilities.

Land Use

    The proposed Enloe Project boundary is generally defined by the 
1,055-foot elevation contour. The boundary extends 0.25 mile downstream 
from Enloe dam, following the 1,055-foot elevation contour to include 
the falls and the site of the proposed powerhouse, tailrace, and 
associated facilities. The Enloe Project boundary deviates from the 
1,055-foot elevation contour to accommodate rehabilitation of the OTID 
Ditch Road. In that area, the Enloe Project boundary has been set 100 
feet landward of the OTID Ditch Road's upper leg; it does not maintain 
a specific elevation.
    Agriculture, grazing, and recreation are the primary land uses in 
the Enloe Project vicinity. A number of orchards, vineyards, and a 
public golf course are located along the Loomis-Oroville Road. The 
Enloe Project area is unfenced open range, and the BLM lands in the 
immediate vicinity of the Enloe Project are generally leased for 
grazing (figure 6). The bulk of the private land in the Enloe Project 
area is owned by a livestock company. There are a few residences in the 
Enloe Project vicinity, mainly along the Loomis-Oroville Road. Most 
active land uses are some distance from the Enloe Project area, with 
the nearest located about 1 mile downstream. There are no lands 
designated as prime or unique farmlands within the FERC boundary.
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

[[Page 28566]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.005

BILLING CODE 6717-01-C

[[Page 28567]]

    Mining was once a dominant land use in the region; however, 
commercial mining activity in the Similkameen Valley in Washington has 
been very limited during the past 25 to 35 years. Several small 
individual mining claims exist on BLM lands in vicinity of the Enloe 
Project. Recreational gold prospecting (small-scale placer mining; 
conducted primarily with motorized suction dredges) is popular within 
the river corridor.
    One of the largest commercial mines in the area was the Kaaba-Texas 
Mine, located several miles upstream of the project area, near the 
community of Nighthawk. The mine operated from the late 1890s until 
1951, and discharged tailings directly into the Similkameen River until 
1946. In 1999, the EPA removed and disposed of approximately 81,000 
cubic yards of contaminated mine tailings from the mine site.

Land Ownership

    The Enloe Project boundary encompasses approximately 136.4 acres, 
including the proposed raised Enloe reservoir, river corridor extending 
downstream from the dam 0.25 mile, and shoreline generally to the 
1,055-foot elevation contour. The project boundary deviates from the 
1,055-foot elevation contour to accommodate work that the Okanogan PUD 
proposes to build a new access road.
    Table 17 shows land ownership within the Enloe Project boundary. 
Public agencies own and manage the majority of the land, with the 
exception of a portion of a single parcel (comprising about 0.15 
percent of the area) held privately.

   Table 17--Land Ownership Within the Proposed Enloe Project Boundary
                      [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Land owner                         Acres    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLM.................................................     35.47     26.00
Washington DNR......................................    100.76     73.85
Private.............................................      0.20      0.15
                                                     -------------------
  Total.............................................    136.43    100.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hydropower generation was the primary land use in the Enloe Project 
area from 1906 until 1958. A hydropower facility was first constructed 
in 1906 at the falls on the east bank of the Similkameen River, across 
from the present powerhouse. That facility was replaced by the existing 
dam and power plant, which began construction in 1916 and was completed 
in 1923. The facility ceased operations in 1958 for economic reasons. 
Most of the project structures, including the dam, the powerhouse, one 
of two penstocks, and the power line, still exist. Portions of the 
foundation of the original power house are still extant, as well.
    At one time, the OTID transported irrigation water through the 
Enloe Project area via a system of canals and flumes, and some of the 
structures remain in place. That system has been replaced by a 
pressurized distribution system, and the point of withdrawal has been 
transferred from the Similkameen River, 7 river miles upstream of the 
dam, to Lake Osoyoos, 3.5 miles southeast of the Enloe Project. The 
Oroville Golf Club maintains a pumping station and pipeline within the 
project area to provide irrigation water for its course. With the 
exception of the golf course facilities, no irrigation facilities in 
the Enloe Project area are currently in use, and there are no other 
water rights on the Similkameen River.
    In accordance with the Washington's Shoreline Management Act of 
1971 (WSMA), Washington State has designated the Similkameen River and 
associated shoreline areas as shorelines of the state, which are 
subject to the provisions of Okanogan County's Shoreline Master Program 
(Okanogan Shoreline Program). In Okanogan County, shorelines of the 
state include water areas and shorelands extending 200 feet landward, 
on a horizontal plane, from the ordinary high water mark, or the 100-
year floodplain, whichever is greater. The WSMA and the Okanogan 
Shoreline Program provide for protection of shoreline functions and 
values, including physical and visual access to the shoreline.
    The Okanogan Shoreline Program designates all of the shoreline area 
within the proposed Enloe Project boundary as ``Conservancy.'' 
According to the Okanogan Shoreline Program, the Conservancy areas 
contain a resource capable of sustained yield. Forest products, 
hunting, fishing, agriculture, and many types of recreation are 
examples of uses compatible with this environment. The intent of this 
environment is to maintain the existing character of the shoreline.

Access

    Highway access to the Enloe dam area is via the Loomis-Oroville 
Road. Located in a remote rural area, the road carries little traffic. 
Traffic counts for Loomis-Oroville Road range between 112 and 166 
average daily trips according to 2005 traffic counts by Okanogan 
County.\36\ Two access roads (the Enloe Dam Road and the OTID Road), 
connect the Loomis-Oroville Road to the dam site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ An average daily trip is the average number of vehicles 
that cross a given surface during a specified 24-hour period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3.6.2 Environmental Effects

Recreation

Recreation Management Plan (REC-13)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to implement a Recreation Management Plan to 
address recreational issues associated with the project. The plan 
includes 12 measures for recreation and three measures for safety and 
access to the project areas. This Recreation Management Plan was 
developed in coordination with the BLM, NPS, Washington DNR, the 
Washington RCO, and tribal agencies that use lands within the project 
area. Lessees that use project lands for grazing were also invited to 
participate in the preparation of the RMP. The various measures within 
the plan are discussed below.
    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD complete a final Enloe Recreation 
Management Plan after consultation with BLM and the Park Service.

Abandon Portion of Existing Road Along the Shoreline and Restore 
Existing OTID Road To Provide Access (BOTA-03)

[[Page 28568]]

    Okanogan PUD proposes to restore the OTID Road by smoothing out 
bumps, filling potholes, and adding vehicle turnouts to allow vehicles 
traveling in opposite directions to safely pass one another. A 2,000-
foot-long segment of the existing access road (Shoreline Road) located 
along the east bank of the impoundment would be abandoned and closed to 
vehicle traffic (figure 7). The roadway would be relocated 
approximately 200 feet to the east (up slope) to protect wetlands, 
reduce effects on cultural resources (for effects of project proposals 
on cultural resources see section 3.3.8.2, Cultural Resources, 
Environmental Effects), and make the road more accessible during 
spring, summer and fall months for all users. The new roadway segment 
would follow the alignment of an old irrigation canal road.
    Large rocks would be placed at both ends of the abandoned roadway 
segment to prevent vehicle access. Pedestrian use of the abandoned road 
would be discouraged until riparian vegetation planted in that area has 
become established. Other existing unimproved spur roads in the project 
area would also be closed to vehicles by blocking entry points with 
large rocks. All parties have agreed that additional design details on 
the access road and any proposed crossing structures would require 
consultation.

[[Page 28569]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.006

    Although the access road would not be plowed on a regular basis 
during the winter, Okanogan PUD may clear the road periodically to 
access project facilities for maintenance and operations purposes.

[[Page 28570]]

    Consistent with Okanogan PUD's proposal, BLM recommends improving 
an existing access road for public access into the Enloe dam area and 
abandoning and relocating a segment of the existing road that would be 
subjected to seasonal flooding under the proposed project operations. 
BLM also comments that the Commission should develop and analyze an 
alternative access road configuration that does not affect the OTID 
right-of-way.

Our Analysis

    The realignment of a 2,000-foot-long segment of the existing access 
road located along the east bank of the impoundment would improve 
recreation at the project by providing enhanced access to project lands 
and waters. However, it is unclear in Okanogan PUD's application 
whether the entire public access road (OTID Road) between the Loomis-
Oroville Road and the proposed project boundary (approximately 4,000 
feet) would also be maintained to the same standard. Although, Okanogan 
PUD proposes to make improvements to the entire access road from the 
Loomis-Oroville Road to the dam, it does not intend to bring the entire 
access road into the proposed project boundary. Brining the entire 
length of the access road from the Loomis-Oroville Road to the dam 
would ensure that the entire access road is maintained by the licensee 
for project operation as well as recreational access. Incorporating the 
4,000-foot stretch of this road including a 50-foot-wide corridor and 
turnouts would add approximately 5.0 acres of land to the proposed 
project boundary.
    Okanogan PUD's proposal to construct an access road is in a portion 
of the OTID right-of-way. Okanogan PUD has consulted with OTID, and 
OTID has agreed that the proposed access road would not conflict with 
the OTID's interest or affect any facilities in current use. The two 
parties have come to an agreement that would allow Okanogan PUD to 
construct an acceptable access road to the project dam. A final 
agreement would be negotiated after the licensing decision. Therefore, 
we do not see a demonstrated need for Commission staff to develop and 
analyze an alternative access road configuration at this time.
    During the winter season, Okanogan PUD would not regularly plow or 
maintain the access road for visitors but states it may clear the road 
periodically to access project facilities for maintenance and 
operations purposes. Access to project waters was evident during the 
site visit in January 2009, when Commission staff noted that there was 
a fisherman downstream of the dam. Therefore, there is a need for more 
periodic maintenance of the roadway in the winter to allow visitors to 
project lands and water. Development of an established plowing schedule 
with signs posted at the beginning of the access road would have a 
direct beneficial effect on winter recreation users by providing 
enhanced access to project lands and waters.

Fence Plan (REC-01)

    Safety/Security Fence--Okanogan PUD proposes to remove the existing 
chest-high chain-link fence, approximately 100-foot-long, that 
separates visitors on the east bank of the river from the dam and the 
lower reaches of the impoundment and install a new fence (at least 6 
feet high) along the upland perimeter of the power generating 
facilities and tailrace (figure 8). The fence would be constructed of 
small mesh chain-link material finished in traditional galvanized zinc 
or coated in brown vinyl. A top rail would be installed to keep the 
fence from sagging. Authorized personnel would have keys to access 
selected locked gates. Signs warning the public about high voltage and 
other hazards would be posted on appropriate fence locations.
    Cattle Fencing--Okanogan PUD proposes to install an 8,000-foot-long 
cattle fence along the eastern boundary of the project boundary from 
Shanker's Bend to Enloe dam. At its northern end, the cattle fence 
would tie in to a rock outcrop just south of the apex of Shanker's Bend 
and an access point through the fence would be provided for 
pedestrians. Cattle would have access to the river just upstream from 
the rock outcrop. At its southern end, the fence would tie in to 
another rock outcrop just east of the proposed powerhouse. The 
configuration of the cattle fence would be consistent with BLM 
guidelines for livestock fencing installed in areas inhabited by common 
ungulate species. The fence would consist of no more than four, well-
stretched horizontal wires with the top wire no more than 42 inches 
above the ground. The other wires would be spaced evenly no less than 
8-, 16-, and 24-inches below the top wire.
    The grazing lessee has an existing water right to withdraw water 
from the river for stock watering purposes. Okanogan PUD proposes to 
install a stock watering tank approximately 300 upslope from the river, 
just inside the project boundary and north of the proposed recreation 
site, as an alternative source of drinking water for all grazing cattle 
with rights to this area. The tank would be supplied with water from an 
existing pump and waterline located on the east bank of the river. The 
pump and waterline are owned by one of the grazing lessee Okanogan PUD 
would monitor the need to install a security fence around the pump and 
electrical power system to discourage vandalism and theft if they 
become problems.
    A cattle guard would also be installed where the cattle fence 
crosses the main access road to the dam. The cattle guard grid would be 
designed to bear the maximum expected vehicle load (which may include 
construction equipment). A gate (accessible only by authorized 
personnel) would be installed where the cattle fence crosses Enloe Dam 
Road.
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

[[Page 28571]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.007

BILLING CODE 6717-01-C

[[Page 28572]]

    BLM recommends non-barbed wire be used near the recreation area or 
the addition of crossings as needed for safe access to project lands 
and waters. In addition, BLM recommends prior to building the proposed 
Enloe Project fence, Okanogan PUD develop and implement a plan to 
provide water outside the fenced area for the use of livestock that are 
authorized to graze on BLM-administered public lands within and 
adjacent to the Enloe Project.

Our Analysis

    Three ranchers have rights to graze cattle on BLM land within the 
proposed project boundary. Because there are no fences to limit or 
control livestock access, cattle freely roam the entire site. The 
grazing lessee has an existing water right to withdraw water from the 
river for stock watering purposes. Cattle access the river for drinking 
water wherever the topography allows. Okanogan PUD's Fence Plan 
implemented in coordination with its vegetation resources management 
plan would be consistent with BLM's recommendations. The proposed fence 
configuration would protect wildlife and vegetation within the project 
area while still allowing access to recreation users. Injury to fawns 
and yearling deer who often try to move between lower fence wires would 
be reduced and adult deer could easily jump a fence with a top wire 42 
inches above the ground. However, continued consultation with BLM and 
lessees who have the water rights would ensure the fence meets BLM 
standards and cattle are still able to access water within the project 
area. In addition, Okanogan PUD's proposal to install a stock watering 
tank north of the proposed recreation area would provide an alternative 
source of drinking water for all grazing cattle with rights to this 
area. A written agreement to provide water for all three lessees' 
cattle at this proposed watering site would also ensure all three 
ranchers' cattle would have an alternative source of water.
    Barriers to Restricted Areas--Okanogan PUD proposes to install 
locked gates and rock barricades to limit vehicle access by 
recreational users. The proposed barriers and access restrictions are 
described below:
     Locked metal gates would be installed at the upper end of 
Enloe Dam Road to prevent unauthorized vehicles from using the road. 
The road is very steep and is not maintained for passenger vehicles. 
Visitor access to the project area would be via OTID Road. Because 
Enloe Dam Road is a county road, Okanogan PUD would work closely with 
Okanogan County on plans to close the road to public vehicle access. 
Pedestrians would be able to walk along the road; however, they would 
need to use the pedestrian access at the north end of the recreation 
area to access the new recreation site and areas below the dam.
     Okanogan PUD staff and other authorized personnel would 
have keys to the locked gates. Okanogan PUD does not propose to install 
a gate at the entrance to the main access road off Loomis-Oroville 
Road.
     A locked metal gate would also be installed at the 
intersection of the one-way loop road within the proposed recreation 
site and the new access road to the area below the dam. Only Okanogan 
PUD staff and authorized personnel would have keys to open the gate. 
Large rocks spaced approximately 3 feet apart would be used to prevent 
visitors from attempting to drive around the gate. Visitors (including 
those portaging rafts, canoes, kayaks and mining equipment) would be 
able to access the area below the dam by using a trail to be located 
near the west end of the gate.
    Consistent with Okanogan PUD's proposal, BLM also recommends 
installing barricades and fencing to prevent unauthorized access to 
closed areas.

Our Analysis

    Finalizing and implementing the Fence Plan after consultation with 
BLM and stakeholders as part of the proposed Recreation Management Plan 
would improve prevent damage to wetlands and proposed riparian/wetland 
mitigation sites by preventing cattle from entering the proposed 
recreation site and keeping recreation users out of sensitive 
vegetative areas. A key schedule developed by Okanogan PUD in 
consultation with stakeholders would also ensure the appropriate 
entities had keys to access project facilities.

Recreation Access Below Enloe Dam (REC-02)

    The construction of the new power generation facilities would 
require upgrading or replacing portions of the abandoned road, which 
currently provides foot access to areas below Enloe dam, including the 
rocky area above the falls and the lower reaches of the Similkameen 
River.
    The area downstream of the dam contains dispersed trails made by 
visitors who access different areas below the dam depending on the 
activity they are taking part in (fishing, hiking, photography, mining, 
and kayaking/rafting/canoeing). Okanogan PUD proposes to designate and 
improve a single trail for public recreation access to the river below 
Enloe dam. Okanogan PUD would allow hikers and visitors portaging 
watercraft or recreational mining equipment (on foot) to use the 
improved access road between the recreation site and the powerhouse. 
Okanogan PUD also proposes to improve approximately 350 feet of the 
existing trail located between the access road to the powerhouse and 
the southernmost interpretive display. The trail would be widened to 
approximately 6 feet, leveled, smoothed, and surfaced with gravel to 
provide barrier-free access to all users.
    In addition, Okanogan PUD proposes to make limited improvements to 
an existing footpath that extends between the trail described above and 
the edge of the river. Large obstacles would be moved or avoided, and 
the path would be widened and smoothed where possible. The path would 
also be marked to increase its visibility and enhance public safety. 
Other existing footpaths leading from the upper trail to the river's 
edge would be closed by placing rocks at the existing entry points to 
discourage use.
    BLM recommends providing recreation access below Enloe dam and 
rebuilding the footbridge.

Our Analysis

    Options for providing access to the river corridor below Enloe dam 
(including portage options) are limited by site factors (including 
steep, rocky terrain on both sides of the access corridor and the 
confined river channel). Generation facility design and security 
requirements also limit options for improving access to areas below the 
dam. Okanogan PUD proposes to designate and improve a single trail 
within the proposed project boundary for public recreation access to 
the river below Enloe dam. The improved path would provide easier 
access to those carrying kayaks or prospecting equipment and provide 
overall enhanced access. Anglers would also be able to access the 
popular fishing areas below the falls using the improved footpath. The 
proposed improvements would enhance access to lands and waters 
downstream of the dam and provide for the effective launching of boats 
below the falls.
    At this time, Okanogan PUD does not propose to provide public 
access to the west bank of the river as a part of the Recreation 
Management Plan. Okanogan PUD states it would be receptive to proposals 
to restore the footbridge across the river if a proponent and source of 
funding were to come forward. Okanogan PUD would continue to

[[Page 28573]]

coordinate with federal and state agencies and local historical 
societies to explore funding sources for restoring the footbridge (see 
Land Use ``Non-motorized Trails and West Side River Access'' for a full 
analysis).

Transfer Ownership of Trestle Bridge (REC-03)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to continue collaboration with the County 
towards development of the County's proposed 12.5-mile non-motorized 
public access trail on the railroad bed along the west side of the 
Similkameen River between Oroville and Nighthawk. This trail is 
currently under construction with the first 3.5 miles having been 
completed, running from the City of Oroville to a scenic view of 
Similkameen Falls at around RM 8.5, which lies just outside of the 
lower end of the proposed project boundary. Okanogan PUD has provided 
easements through its property to the County with the following 
conditions: (1) The first phase of the trail would terminate prior to 
reaching the downstream end of the project boundary--that is, the first 
phase of the trail would not run adjacent to the project boundary; and 
(2) Okanogan PUD retains the right to use the bridge and the railroad 
bed to reach the dam site for project maintenance and operations.
    Okanogan PUD also plans to coordinate with the Department of Public 
Works regarding road approaches and signage.

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD transferred ownership of the trestle bridge to 
Okanogan County for the development of a future public, non-motorized, 
recreational use trail. The rail would provide a beneficial effect to 
users who would be able access to the west side of the Similkameen 
River and Enloe Project area for possible informal, dispersed 
recreational activities.

Improvements to Existing Informal Boat Ramp (REC-04)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to install a new formal boat launch in 
approximately the same location as the primitive put-in/take-out area 
now used by recreational boaters on the reservoir. The boat launch 
access road would be accessed from the loop road at the new recreation 
site. The road to the boat ramp would be approximately 14 feet wide and 
surfaced with gravel. The road would be accessible to both vehicles 
with trailers and people carrying watercraft on foot. The boat ramp 
would be constructed of gravel geoweb materials or concrete planks. 
Changing water levels would be accounted for in the design of the ramp. 
If necessary, a trash deflector would be installed to protect the boat 
ramp from floating debris. A vehicle and trailer parking area would 
also be located in the new recreation site.
    Rock barricades would be installed along both sides of the access 
road to the boat ramp to prevent vehicles from entering the adjacent 
woodland area. The rock barricade would consist of three-man rocks \37\ 
placed approximately 3 feet apart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ A three-man rock is defined as a rock weighing 750-3,500 
pounds and measuring approximately 24 to 36 inches on each side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BLM recommends improving the existing informal boat ramp at Enloe 
dam, consistent with Okanogan PUD's proposal.

Our Analysis

    These improvements would facilitate access for current and future 
recreation use at the project. By implementing the proposed 
enhancements in areas where recreational use is most concentrated, 
within 1.5 miles of the dam, recreation access at the project would be 
increased and areas for the effective launching and retrieving of boats 
would be improved.

Clean Up and Restore Wooded Area on East Bank (REC-05) and Remove 
Existing Trash and Conduct Annual Cleanup (REC-07)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to remove existing trash from the following 
areas: (1) the wooded area on the east bank of the reservoir, just 
above Enloe dam; (2) the OTID Road access leading from the Loomis-
Oroville Road to the dam site; and (3) unimproved beaches within the 
project area, including Shanker's Bend and area below the dam.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to clean up and restore the wooded area on 
the east bank of the impoundment, just upstream of the dam on BLM land, 
to enhance visitor experience. Clean up would include removing trash, 
auto bodies, and other debris from within the wooded area. Restoration 
would include planting native vegetation appropriate to the site in 
areas that have been degraded by vehicle use and informal camping.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to coordinate with user groups and area civic 
organizations to arrange an annual clean-up to remove trash and dumped 
materials that accumulate within the project boundary. Signs stating 
Okanogan PUD's ``Pack it In/Pack it Out'' policy would be installed at 
the entrance to the OTID Road off Loomis-Oroville Road and at a 
conspicuous location within the new recreation site upstream of the 
dam.
    Okanogan PUD personnel would visit the site several times each 
month, and if trash or illegal dumping exist, they would be removed as 
soon as practical.
    BLM recommends cleaning up and restoring the wooded area on the 
east bank as well as removing existing trash and conducting annual 
cleanup events consistent with Okanogan PUD's proposal.

Our Analysis

    The proposed clean-up plan for the wooded area on the east bank of 
the river and removal of existing trash and an annual clean up plan 
would address the litter and sanitation concerns expressed by the 
visitors in response to Okanogan PUD's recreational surveys. The 
proposed plan would have a direct beneficial effect on the recreational 
experiences of visitors by providing annual litter pickups, site checks 
on a regular basis, and signage to encourage users to carry-in/carry-
out.

Develop an Interpretive Publication (REC-06)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to develop an interpretive publication that 
would include a map of the project area in consultation with Okanogan 
County, the Greater Columbia Water Trail Steering Committee, and other 
interested parties. The interpretive publication would identify the 
locations of developed recreational facilities and inform visitors of 
appropriate locations to park, load and unload recreational equipment, 
portage, and camping areas. The map would include recreation sites and 
access areas and be suitable for printing as a stand-alone piece that 
could be posted on an information board.
    The design of the publication would follow the style guidelines 
that would be developed in the Aesthetic Resources Plan (see section 
3.3.7 Aesthetic Resources) and be consistent with other interpretive 
signs (REC-11) and information boards (REC-12) at the project.
    Okanogan PUD's proposal is consistent with BLM's recommendation to 
develop an interpretive publication.

Our Analysis

    Finalizing and distributing an interpretive publication after 
consultation with stakeholders as part of the proposed Recreation 
Management Plan would establish a consistent method to provide visitors 
with information about the project and recreation sites within the 
project area. Development of such a publication

[[Page 28574]]

would increase public safety and awareness at the project.

Develop Parking Area, Including Vault Toilet and Access Road (REC-08), 
Install Picnic Tables (REC-09), and Develop Primitive Campsites (REC-
10)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to develop a one-acre recreation site located 
in a relatively flat area next to the riparian woodland just upstream 
from the dam. Okanogan PUD chose this site because it is heavily 
disturbed and would not affect known cultural resources in the area. 
The design concept for the recreation site is a one-way access road 
that would circulate traffic in a counter clock-wise direction. The 
access road would be approximately 14 feet wide and would be surfaced 
with gravel. A gravel surfaced parking area able to accommodate up to 
five standard vehicles and two vehicles with trailers would be located 
on the southern half of the site. Large rocks would be used as needed 
to direct traffic, protect facilities, and designate the parking areas. 
Due to space and topographical limitations, vehicles with boat trailers 
would be required to pull in and back out of the parking area. One 
vault toilet would be constructed for recreational users at the south 
end of the parking area.
    Okanogan PUD also proposes to install picnic tables in two areas on 
the east side of the new recreation site near the parking area. The 
areas would be designated for day-use picnicking, although overnight 
campers would be able to use the picnic facilities as well.
    The first site (Picnic Area I) would be located in the southeast 
corner of the recreation site outside of the loop road (figure 9). This 
area is slightly wooded providing natural shade and views toward the 
dam. Two tables would be spaced approximately 25 to 50 feet from each 
other to provide privacy. The second picnic area (Picnic Area II) would 
be located in the northeast corner on the outside of the loop road. 
This site provides overlooking views of the placid water of the 
reservoir. Two picnic tables would be clustered together to accommodate 
larger groups. Parking for both picnic areas would be provided in the 
parking area located at the south end of the recreation site inside the 
loop road (Figure 9).
    Okanogan PUD would develop four primitive campsites near the 
parking and picnic areas described above. Each campsite would be 
approximately 25 feet wide and 50 feet long. The campsites would 
provide for pull-in parking and include ample space to accommodate a 
tent site. Rock barriers would be installed to serve as curbstops and 
define the boundaries of individual campsites. A picnic table and steel 
fire ring would be provided at each campsite and be surrounded by 3 
feet of gravel in all directions to reduce fire danger. Campsites would 
be available on a first-come, first-served basis and overnight stays 
would be limited to a maximum number of 14 consecutive stays. Okanogan 
PUD's overnight stay policy would be clearly posted on an information 
board at the recreation site and at each campsite. Campsites would be 
designed to provide barrier free access to all users.

[[Page 28575]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.008

[[Page 28576]]

    Okanogan PUD proposes it would, either directly or indirectly 
through a formal partnership, be responsible for maintaining 
recreational assets in an acceptable condition through routine 
maintenance, repair and replacement.
    Recreation features would be inspected during normal maintenance 
visits and any recreation features that are identified as broken or in 
need of repair would be repaired or replaced. The repair of recreation 
features, which could include the replacement of certain items, would 
be conducted on an as-needed basis as soon as practical after being 
identified through regular facility inspections.
    BLM recommends developing a parking area, installing a vault 
toilet, installing picnic tables, and developing primitive camp sites 
at the recreation site consistent with Okanogan PUD's proposal. BLM 
also recommends that Okanogan PUD provide recreation site grounds 
maintenance and consult with BLM to develop a schedule for site 
maintenance, facility replacement, modifications, or upgrades to the 
administered recreation sites at Enloe dam and Miner's Flat. In 
addition, BLM recommends Okanogan PUD clear and keep clear to an 
adequate width all lands along roads and trails and dispose of all 
temporary structures, unused timber, brush, refuse, or other material 
unnecessary for the purposes of the Enloe Project that result from 
maintenance, operations, or alteration of the Enloe Project facilities. 
Trees that have died or had portions die should be removed or pruned to 
minimize hazards to the public. Prior to removal, trees would be 
evaluated for wildlife value and a determination made of the 
appropriate action. Trees that have been removed should be replaced by 
planted seedlings of species native to the area.

Our Analysis

    The development of this small recreation area is consistent with 
the low level of current and anticipated use. Survey results indicate 
that use of the Enloe Project Area is estimated at 1,378 user days 
during the June 1 to October 15 survey period.
    Okanogan PUD developed a Recreation Needs Assessment, dated April 
2009. The Recreation Needs Assessment projected the needs and capacity 
data for the project area through the year 2050 using peak use 
estimates.
    The peak day-use projection for campers visiting the survey area in 
2030 under Okanogan PUD's high growth scenario is 15, which would be in 
balance with the capacity available at the project site once the 
campsites are developed. The 2050 peak day demand is anticipated to be 
38 percent of the total survey area capacity, including the primitive 
campsites available 3 miles upriver at Miner's Flat. This suggests that 
peak day demand for camping facilities at the project would be exceeded 
in 20 to 30 years. Thus, it appears there would be sufficient capacity 
to accommodate anticipated future demand for camping in the area of the 
project.
    The proposed sites would be appropriate given current recreational 
use at the project. Recreation access would be improved at the project 
by providing formal campsites and picnic areas in the areas where 
recreational use is concentrated. The addition of a vault toilet would 
ensure that human waste is handled in a manner that would protect 
environmental and aesthetic resources. The addition of picnic tables 
and primitive campsites would assist in defining areas for recreational 
activity and would concentrate recreational use in these intended 
areas. This would reduce the current adverse effects on surrounding 
natural and cultural resources from recreational activities that could 
cause ground compaction, vegetation loss, and erosion. Similarly, the 
designation of parking spaces for recreational users would reduce 
impacts on natural and cultural resources. Although grounds maintenance 
is already included in Okanogan PUD's day-to-day operation and 
maintenance activities finalizing the Recreation Management Plan after 
consultation with stakeholders and filing the plan with the Commission 
for approval would establish a maintenance protocol to provide visitors 
with clean and safe recreation facilities.

Interpretive Signs and Information Board (REC-11 and REC-12)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to place at least three interpretive signs 
(display panels) in areas accessible to visitors at the project. The 
purpose of these panels would be to develop visitor understanding of 
the cultural, historical, and biological resources in the project area 
and enhance visitor experience. Sign designs and locations would be 
consistent with those specified in the HPMP and would be finalized in 
consultation with BLM and the CRWG during the design phase.
    The preliminary list of proposed sign locations and topics are as 
follows: (1) One display panel at or near the old bridge tower, below 
the falls, the focus of which would be the history of power generation 
at the site; (2) one display panel at or near the 1906 powerhouse 
foundation at the end of the new access road, the focus of which would 
be native legend about the falls and fish; and (3) one display panel 
near the parking and picnic area, which would have smaller versions of 
the two other panels and interpretive information about the environment 
(e.g., wetland, riparian, and shrub-steppe functions and values) around 
the project area.
    The exact locations of the signs may change slightly to ensure that 
they do not obstruct views of other project features and are placed in 
appropriate locations relative to the features being interpreted.
    Okanogan PUD also proposes to develop an information board in 
addition to the interpretive signs. At a minimum, the information board 
would include a map showing recreational features in the project area, 
visitor rules, and safety information.
    BLM recommends the development of the interpretive signs and an 
information boards consistent with Okanogan PUD's proposal.

Our Analysis

    Finalizing and implementing the plan for interpretive signage and 
information board after consultation with BLM and the CRWG, as part of 
the proposed Recreation Management Plan, would enhance the recreational 
experience by providing visitors with information about the project as 
well as important safety messages. In its proposed Recreation 
Management Plan, Okanogan PUD identified likely locations, themes, 
stories, objectives, and options for structures and sign displays 
within the project boundary. Because Okanogan PUD states that specific 
displays would be subject to alteration based on the outcome of 
consultation, a final Recreation Management Plan filed with the 
Commission for approval would ensure that the proper consultation has 
occurred and that the final site-specific information could be assessed 
properly.

Additional Measures To Improve Public Safety

    In the interest of promoting public safety for all those who 
participate in recreational activities within the project area, 
Okanogan PUD proposes following additional safety measures.

Maintain Warning Signs, Safety Cable and Grab Ropes (SAFETY-01)

    In consultation with BLM, Park Service, FWS, Washington RCO, 
Washington PC, Washington DNR, CRWG, Washington DFW, Washington DOE, 
Okanogan County Planning and Development Office, the Colville, Greater 
Columbia Water Trail Coalition, Pacific Northwest Trail Association,

[[Page 28577]]

Washington Water Trails Association, Wenatchee Valley Museum and 
Cultural Center, and grazing lessees, Okanogan PUD proposes to install 
a 1,500-foot long canoe/kayak portage trail. Paddlers would be able to 
identify the portage trail by signs informing boaters and paddlers 
where take-outs are located. Portage signs would be large enough to 
direct canoeists and kayakers to safe take-out locations.
    Okanogan PUD also proposes to continue to maintain the existing 
signs and system of safety cables and grab ropes above the dam. The 
existing system of safety cables and grab ropes is located more than 
300 feet upstream of Enloe dam and the proposed intake channel at a 
narrow point in the reservoir. The cables and grab ropes serve as a 
means of restraint and escape for people who are approaching the 
spillway and are not able to exit the water at the boat launch as 
directed by instructional signs and warnings.
    Finally, a log boom would be placed at the entrance to the intake 
channel to serve as a restraining barrier for any boaters or swimmers 
approaching the intake channel.

Allow Limited Public Access to the Project Area During Construction 
(SAFETY-02)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to allow limited public access to the project 
area during the 2.5-year construction period. Public access would be 
limited to areas upstream of the dam, outside of the construction and 
staging areas. Access to the primitive put-in/take-out area in the 
riparian wooded area would be available during most of the construction 
period. During periods when the put-in/take-out area would not be 
available for use, a sign would be placed upstream to alert boaters to 
use an alternate take-out location.
    Because of safety and liability concerns, the area along the east 
bank of the river (extending approximately 250 feet above the dam and 
550 feet below the dam), including all areas of active construction and 
materials stockpiling, would be off-limits to the public until major 
construction activities are completed. The off-limits area would be 
completely enclosed by a temporary chain link security fence. Signs 
would be erected at the entrance to main access road, alerting visitors 
that construction activities are taking place and that portions of the 
site may be closed to public use. Okanogan PUD would continue regular 
site inspections during periods of active construction.

Identify Options for Preventing Public Access to the Old Powerhouse 
(SAFETY-03)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to coordinate with BLM, the state of 
Washington, and private land owners, as appropriate, to identify 
options for preventing public access to the old powerhouse. Options 
include installing fencing and/or gates at key access locations on the 
west bank of the river between the powerhouse and the old railroad. 
Warning signs with the words ``Danger'' and ``No Entry'' could also be 
installed at key locations. The fencing and signage could remain in 
place until another party has assumed ownership and management of the 
powerhouse or until the powerhouse and penstock are demolished and 
removed. Okanogan PUD would allow 5 years before the powerhouse is 
demolished to identify potential partners to restore the old powerhouse 
for interpretive opportunities (see section 3.3.8, Cultural Resources, 
for more discussion of this issue).
    BLM recommends improving public safety by maintaining warning 
signs, safety cables, and grab ropes, allowing limited or controlled 
public access to the Enloe Project area during construction, and 
preventing or appropriately managing public access to the old 
powerhouse.

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD has a responsibility for public safety and ensuring 
public access under parts 12 and 2.7 of the Commission's regulations. 
The proposed measures listed above to improve public safety are 
reasonable and appropriate to ensure public safety at the project. 
Public safety at the proposed new recreation site and other areas 
within the project area is also under the jurisdiction of law 
enforcement agencies, including the Okanogan County Sheriff's Office. 
It would be appropriate for Okanogan PUD to also coordinate with the 
local county sheriff's office and other emergency response entities to 
ensure that an appropriate level of public safety exists within the 
project area.

Recreation Management Plan (REC-13) and Monitoring

    Okanogan PUD proposes to review, update, and/or revise the RMP if 
the FERC Form 80 monitoring indicates significant changes in recreation 
use and or conditions or substantial differences in uses versus 
capacity of recreation facilities. Changes would also be implemented if 
monitoring results indicate resource objectives are not being met. Any 
updates to the RMP would be made after consultation with BLM and filed 
for final Commission approval.
    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD conduct annual and periodic 
recreation plan monitoring. Within 90 days of license issuance, BLM 
recommends Okanogan PUD develop an Annual Visitor Use and Monitoring 
Form, in consultation with BLM. This form would be used to record 
visitor use; maintenance, both performed and needed; and report on the 
recreation facilities and recreation use within the Enloe Project area. 
The report would be submitted to BLM by December 1 each year for review 
and approval.
    Every 6 years, starting with the issuance of an Enloe Project 
license, Okanogan PUD should review and evaluate information regarding 
recreation needs and report recreation use levels. Use levels would be 
documented by means of site visits and staff observations. Okanogan PUD 
would also conduct monitoring, using the Commission's FERC Form 80.
    BLM recommends that every 5 years, Okanogan PUD review, and if 
necessary, update the final Recreation Management Plan. If the Form 80 
monitoring, the Annual Visitor Use and Monitoring Form, or other 
sources identify issues, problems, or significant changes to 
recreational use levels, types, or other issues, Okanogan PUD would 
update or revise the final Recreation Management Plan to contain 
information on managing and providing adequate facilities to meet the 
needs of the current and projected recreation use. Significant change 
would include exceeding the project's recreation facility capacity as 
defined by the Commission's FERC Form 80 updates.

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD's proposed recreational use monitoring and assessment 
of recreation-related effects on lands within the project boundary as a 
component of the proposed Recreation Management Plan would allow 
Okanogan PUD and stakeholders to consider measures to address 
recreational use, including dispersed use, over the term of a license. 
It would be beneficial for Okanogan PUD, in coordination with filing of 
the FERC Form 80, to file every 6 years a Recreation Monitoring Report 
summarizing the recreation monitoring results and any recommendations 
for future recreation management at the project. The monitoring would 
provide a mechanism for which recreation facilities could be maintained 
and improved over the term of a license.

[[Page 28578]]

Although monitoring recreation on an annual basis, as proposed by BLM, 
would also be beneficial, this amount of monitoring seems excessive due 
to the low amount of current recreational use at the project.
    Coordination with other stakeholders, such as the Washington SHPO, 
BLM, NPS, Washington DNR, and Washington ROC would ensure that other 
environmental resources are appropriately considered when implementing 
any changes or new recreation measures into the Recreation Management 
Plan.

River Access Point at Miner's Flat

    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD place the Miner's Flat area within 
the Enloe Project boundary. Currently some visitors use Shanker's Bend 
as a boat take out to avoid paddling the flat water above the dam. BLM 
states that river visitors who take out at Shanker's Bend to avoid the 
flat water would now take out at Miner's Flat due to the increase in 
reservoir area as proposed. BLM recommends Okanogan PUD make recreation 
improvements to the Miners Flat area to accommodate future increases in 
recreation needs at this location. BLM proposes that recreational 
development at Miner's Flat incorporate the following: (1) Improve the 
existing entrance road, road through the site, and parking areas; (2) 
improve water access for launching and landing boats; (3) install an 
information kiosk with a map; (4) establish primitive campsites, 
including picnic tables and steel fire rings; (5) install a vault 
toilet; and (6) develop drawings showing the location of site 
improvements and consult with them on this plan.

Our Analysis

    Currently, there is no suitable area for the development of a take-
out within Okanogan PUD's proposed project boundary. It is likely that 
the raised reservoir level would result in more paddlers taking out at 
Miner's Flat to pass up the increased flatwater area.
    Since an informal access already exists at Miner's Flat and the 
area is flat enough to accommodate a take-out area, it would be 
reasonable to develop a take-out within this location with minor 
upgrades made to the access road to the take-out. However, because 
Okanogan PUD has proposed to develop formalized campsites within the 
project boundary and two campgrounds already exists within two to five 
miles of the project, developing campsites at Miner's Flat would not be 
justified.

Land Use

Project Boundary

    The Enloe Project boundary encompasses approximately 136.4 acres 
and includes Enloe reservoir, the corridor for the new access road 
proposed by Okanogan PUD, the location identified for the placement of 
boulder clusters in the riverbed (about 2.5 miles upstream of the dam) 
and the river corridor extending downstream from the dam 0.25 mile. 
Okanogan PUD does not propose to place additional lands associated with 
the proposed side-channel enhancement site, the restoration of the 
existing OITD road, and Miner's Flat within the project boundary.

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD's proposal to enhance existing side channel to improve 
spawning, rearing, and summer thermal refugia would be a mitigation 
measure for the protection of environmental resources. This proposed 
facility would add approximately 0.75 acres of project lands 
approximately 5 miles downstream of the dam necessary for project 
operation. These enhancements would need to be maintained over the 
license term and, therefore, it would be appropriate to include these 
lands within the project boundary for the purpose of operation and 
maintenance of the proposed Enloe Project.
    In addition, all but about 4,000 feet of the existing access road 
is currently proposed to be located within the project boundary. 
Because of the proposed modifications of the existing access road and 
the fact that the road is the only access route to the project, it is 
appropriate to include the entire access road within the project 
boundary. This would add approximately 5 acres of land to the project 
area.
    Finally, the provision of an upgraded take-out area at Miner's Flat 
is justified due to the potential increase in recreational use as a 
result of the raising of the impoundment from current levels and 
anticipated increases in recreational use of the area over time. The 
inclusion of the recommended Miner's Flat take-out area, would be 
necessary for project purposes, such as recreation, shoreline control, 
or protection of environmental resources. This would add approximately 
one acre of land into the project boundary.

Law Enforcement, Emergency Services, and Fire Prevention

    BLM recommends Okanogan PUD develop and implement, after 
consultation with BLM, a Law Enforcement, Fire, and Emergency Services 
Plan. The plan would include provisions for: (1) Coordination of and 
funds for law enforcement, fire, and emergency services personnel; (2) 
law enforcement presence, enhanced emergency communication and response 
procedures, public safety and security, protection measures for natural 
resources, recreation resources, and heritage resources; (3) an 
emergency telephone at the site; (4) an assessment of the need for 
additional law enforcement, including funds for additional personnel, 
to patrol BLM-administered lands; (5) a description of fire prevention 
and protection on BLM-administered lands to include: (a) An 
identification of hazard abatement procedures, (b) a notification 
process, (c) an identification of agencies to respond to fire reports, 
and (d) a process for reclaiming and/or rehabilitating burned lands; 
(6) coordination with BLM to evaluate the need for fire protection on 
BLM-administered lands, including monitoring and evaluating of man-made 
fires that affect BLM-administered lands; and (7) all costs provided by 
Okanogan PUD, if monitoring demonstrates an increased need for fire 
prevention, detection, and suppression.

Our Analysis

    BLM indicated that increased recreational use in the Enloe Project 
area can lead to adverse effects on environmental and cultural 
resources, an increased risk of fire, and an increase in vandalism that 
will require law enforcement and emergency or fire response. As 
previously discussed, Okanogan PUD proposes to remove existing trash 
from defined areas on BLM land, conduct annual clean up events, and 
conduct project facility site reviews. Further, Okanogan PUD proposes 
to implement its Recreation Management Plan that contains measures to 
minimize conflicts between recreational use and associated effects on 
environmental resources. Overall, these measures, along with additional 
staff-recommended measures, would protect the environmental, 
recreational, and cultural values at the Enloe Project.
    Providing funds for law enforcement, fire, and emergency services 
personnel is not a specific measure to protect and enhance fish and 
wildlife resources. The Commission has made clear that it is concerned 
with protecting resources and uses at the project rather than funding 
personnel.\38\ However, a fire suppression program to rehabilitate

[[Page 28579]]

lands subject to wildfire and to reduce fuel loads to prevent wildfire 
on project lands and adjoining wildlife areas could protect and enhance 
terrestrial resources affected by the construction, operation, and 
maintenance of the Enloe Project. A fire suppression program could 
include signage at recreation sites describing the hazards and costs of 
wildfire and undertaking habitat rehabilitation efforts, such as 
replanting with perennial grasses to reduce fuel loads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Settlements in Hydropower Licensing Proceedings Under 
Part I of the Federal Power Act, 116 FERC Sec.  61,270 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Building Removal

    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD remove two small, deteriorating 
buildings at the north end of the proposed Enloe Dam Recreation Area. 
BLM states these buildings are deteriorating, unsafe to enter, marked 
with graffiti, and pose an unattractive nuisance to visitors to the 
site. In response to BLM, Okanogan PUD states that one of two small 
structures on the north end of the proposed Enloe dam recreation area 
is owned by a private landowner that maintains a lease with BLM. 
Okanogan PUD states it is not in a position to remove this structure, 
however, it will take reasonable measures to secure existing structures 
from unauthorized entry.

Our Analysis

    Licensees are required to ensure that all reasonable precautions 
are taken to ensure that the construction, operation, and maintenance 
of structures or facilities on project lands occur in a manner that 
protects the scenic, recreational, and environmental values of the 
project.
    If the deteriorating pump house structure is unsafe and does not 
serve project purposes, it would be appropriate for Okanogan PUD to 
maintain the building to a point where it is safe or remove it from the 
project boundary. Currently, it does not appear that these two 
buildings are being used for project purposes.

Non-Motorized Trails

    BLM recommends Okanogan PUD support the development of the 
Similkameen Rail Trail, a cooperative, non-motorized public access 
trail along the old railroad grade from Oroville to Nighthawk, as a 
segment of the Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trail. BLM also 
recommends that Okanogan PUD support the development of the Similkameen 
portion of the Greater Columbia Water Trail. BLM recommends that 
Okanogan PUD consult with BLM, FWS, Park Service, Water Trail 
Committee, Pacific Northwest Trail Association, and Okanogan County to 
identify water and trail access points that are likely to become 
popular as the trails are developed in this area. BLM also recommends 
that Okanogan PUD rebuild the footbridge across the Similkameen River. 
The footbridge would provide the only foot access from the east side of 
the river (between the trestle bridge two miles downstream of the dam 
and Nighthawk six miles upstream) to the trail opportunities on the 
west side of the river.
    Okanogan PUD states its recreation development proposal was crafted 
in consultation with local stakeholders, and local stakeholders did not 
identify that the footbridge providing public access to the west bank 
of the river was needed. Okanogan PUD states this is a request for an 
enhancement that goes beyond the need to mitigate project impacts. 
However, Okanogan PUD has indicated that it is receptive to proposals 
to restore the footbridge across the river if a proponent and source of 
funding were to come forward. Okanogan PUD would continue to coordinate 
with federal and state agencies and local historical societies to 
explore funding sources for restoring the footbridge.
    Okanogan PUD states it supports the development of the Greater 
Columbia Water Trail as evidenced by the measures in the Recreation 
Management Plan that are supportive of and complementary to the goals 
and objectives of Greater Columbia Water Trail. Okanogan PUD states 
that it has demonstrated support for the Similkameen Rail Trail by 
transferring ownership of the trestle bridge to Okanogan County for use 
in developing the Similkameen Connector Trail, which has become part of 
the Similkameen Rail Trail and the Scenic Trail.

Our Analysis

    Consultation with Okanogan PUD in the development of the 
Similkameen Rail Trail and the Similkameen portion of the Greater 
Columbia Water Trail within the project vicinity would ensure both 
planned trails are implemented in a manner consistent with the project. 
Rebuilding the footbridge across the Similkameen River downstream of 
the dam would provide access to the west side of the river, no project 
recreational facilities are being proposed for that area at this time. 
Recreational access to the west side of the Similkameen River could be 
improved in the future, once the plans for the Similkameen Rail Trail 
are finalized.
3.3.7 Aesthetic Resources
3.3.7.1 Affected Environment
Project Setting
    Situated in north-central Washington (near the Canadian border) on 
the east side of the Cascade Mountains near the rural community of 
Oroville, the Enloe Project area is characterized by its remote, 
relatively undeveloped landscape. Accessed via the narrow Loomis-
Oroville Road, the Enloe Project area features moderately steep 
mountainous terrain incised by eroded canyons. Created by the 
Similkameen River, the Enloe Project area's topography is distinguished 
by gradual to steep sloping canyon walls. These walls rise to 
elevations between 700-800 feet with Kruger Mountain rising 878 feet to 
the north and a series of smaller un-named 750- to 800-foot peaks line 
the southwest side. A small intermittent stream, the Ellemeham Draw, is 
situated between Enloe dam and the falls, and visually cleaves the 
southeast canyon wall. Most of the project area is undeveloped with a 
cluster of industrial structures and abandoned buildings assembled 
immediately around and just below Enloe dam.
    The land surrounding the Enloe Project area is greatly influenced 
by its climate and geologic history. The eroded canyons that 
characterize the Enloe Project area are generally the result of 
retreating glaciers that last covered the area about 15,000 years ago. 
The eroded canyon slopes feature both gradual slopes, as well as steep, 
rocky inclines that rise to 800 feet (about 500 feet above the mean 
Enloe Project area elevation). Upstream, the Similkameen River follows 
a horseshoe-shaped turn enclosed between steeply sloped canyon walls, 
known as Shanker's Bend. The river within the Enloe Project area flows 
placidly through a shallow reservoir before spilling over Enloe dam and 
plunging down steep falls immediately downstream.
    The hills on either side of the river are a combination of rocky 
outcrops and large areas of shrub steppe vegetation spotted with 
evergreen trees. Riparian forest, dominated by black cottonwood in 
stands, is found along the reservoir shoreline. In the spring, summer, 
and fall, colors in the landscape are primarily brown hues dotted with 
dark green vegetation. Snow is common in the winter. Textures in the 
landscape include rocks, sagebrush, trees, and water.
    The overall landscape is a combination of natural and human-made 
elements. The natural elements

[[Page 28580]]

are characterized by unnamed mountains, sparse low level vegetation, 
and the Similkameen River snaking through the canyon. Several human-
made elements are included in the landscape of this region. These 
include a vineyard, golf course, and residences approximately 2 miles 
north of Oroville. Linear elements include the Loomis-Oroville Road, 
which is located on the canyon rim above the Similkameen River and 
roughly follows the river's twists and turns, the abandoned Great 
Northern Railroad grade that lines much of the south or east shoreline 
of the river at the canyon floor, power distribution lines that run 
along the canyon walls and rim, and two dirt tracks that extend south 
from Loomis-Oroville Road and lead to the dam. The access roads proceed 
along the river's eastern perimeter to the dam, which is located at a 
point where the canyon narrows. While minimally visible from upstream, 
Enloe dam rises quite prominently when viewed from downstream. The 
historic powerhouse is similarly sheltered from view, perched against a 
sharp slope on the west side of the river, nestled within a rocky eddy. 
It is accompanied by horizontal penstocks, and prominently positioned 
cylindrical surge tanks that rest on raised concrete foundations. 
Human-made elements on the east side of the river include: A bridge 
remnant (which once connected the east side of the river to the 
powerhouse); two small outbuildings; and an abandoned concrete 
irrigation ditch. The town of Nighthawk, approximately 6 miles west of 
Enloe dam, is a historic mining community comprised of wood-frame 
buildings (residences and associated agricultural buildings) along a 
two-track dirt road.
    Visitation to the Enloe Project area is largely confined to those 
persons traveling along the Loomis-Oroville Road or pursuing outdoor 
recreation activities in the canyon, as well as Native Americans and 
Canadian First Nations who attach cultural value to the natural setting 
and associated fishing areas.
Visual Resource Management
    BLM manages its lands in accordance with its Visual Resource 
Management (VRM) System. The system designates landscape units in four 
classes that indicate the overall significance of the visual 
environment and establishes objectives for the management of each class 
in order to define the level of change from a proposed project that is 
acceptable in that class. By comparing the effects from a project to 
the established visual objective for that area, the visual 
acceptability of that project and mitigation measures needed to 
decrease the visual contrast are determined. The four visual management 
classes and their objectives are described below:
     Class I--The objective of this class is to preserve the 
existing character of the landscape. This class provides for natural 
ecological changes; however, it does not preclude very limited 
management activity. The level of change to the characteristic 
(background) landscape should be very low and must not attract 
attention.
     Class II--The objective of this class is to retain the 
existing character of the landscape. The level of change to the 
characteristic landscape should be low. Management activities may be 
seen, but should not attract the attention of the casual observer. Any 
changes must repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and 
texture found in the predominant natural features of the characteristic 
landscape.
     Class III--The objective of this class is to partially 
retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to 
the characteristic landscape should be moderate. Management activities 
may attract attention but should not dominate the view of the casual 
observer. Changes should repeat the basic elements found in the 
predominant natural features of the characteristic landscape.
     Class IV--The objective of this class is to provide for 
management activities that require major modification of the existing 
character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic 
landscape can be high. These management activities may dominate the 
view and be the major focus of viewer attention. However, every attempt 
should be made to minimize the impact of these activities through 
careful location, minimal disturbance, and repeating the basic 
elements.
    In consultation with the BLM, Okanogan PUD conducted visual 
resources analysis of the Enloe Project area using the VRM methodology 
outlined above and determined that the characteristics of the area fell 
within the Class IV management class. Four key observation points 
(KOPs) in the project area were identified for analysis of the most 
critically-traveled routes or observation points in the Enloe project 
boundary (figure 10): (1) Loomis-Oroville Road; (2) overlook from 
Loomis-Oroville Road approximately 3 miles north of Oroville; (3) rocks 
below Enloe dam on the Similkameen River; and (4) overlook near Enloe 
dam (figures 11 through 14).
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

[[Page 28581]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.009

[[Page 28582]]

    On May 29, 2009, additional information was submitted by Okanogan 
PUD regarding the visual resources study. Three additional KOPs were 
evaluated to include views associated with the proposed locations for 
interpretive displays (figure 10): The overlook east of Enloe dam and 
the areas where the two interpretive panels would be placed (figures 15 
through 17). The dates that the photos were taken and the approximate 
river flows at that time were not included in the study.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.010

    Travelers on Loomis-Oroville Road view the Enloe Project area for a 
relatively short time in the foreground-middleground. Visibility of the 
Enloe Project area is generally unobstructed to travelers on Loomis-
Oroville Road; however, the canyon topography makes it difficult for 
the travelers to view.

[[Page 28583]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.011

    People stopping at the overlook on Loomis-Oroville Road have 
opportunities for extended views of the Enloe Project area. From this 
viewpoint, the dam is visible as are the abandoned penstock, surge 
tank, and the roof of the abandoned powerhouse.

[[Page 28584]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.012

    Recreators on the river have extended views of the project area. 
From this viewpoint visitors see the existing human-made features to 
include the abandoned powerhouse, former footbridge tower, and Enloe 
dam.

[[Page 28585]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.013

    From this viewpoint, the dam and abandoned penstock are clearly 
visible.

[[Page 28586]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.014

    From this viewpoint looking downstream, the abandoned penstock and 
powerhouse are visible.

[[Page 28587]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.015

    Visitors stopping at this proposed interpretive panel location 
along a proposed pedestrian trail would have opportunities for extended 
views of the project area. From this viewpoint, the dam is clearly 
visible.

[[Page 28588]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY11.016

BILLING CODE 6717-01-C
    Visitors stopping at this proposed interpretive panel along a 
proposed pedestrian trail, located approximately 300 feet south of KOP 
6 would also have opportunities for extended views of the 
project area. From this viewpoint, the dam, the abandoned penstocks, 
and Similkameen Falls are clearly visible.
Noise
    Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted from 
various sources including airplanes, factories, railroads, and highway 
vehicles. The magnitude of noise is described by its sound pressure. 
Because the range of sound pressure varies greatly, a logarithmic scale 
is used to relate sound pressures to some common reference level, the 
decibel. Therefore, a sound pressure level is equivalent to a certain 
number of decibels.
    Because sound pressure levels expressed in decibels are based on a 
logarithmic scale, they cannot be added or subtracted in the usual 
arithmetical manner. If a sound of 70 dB is added to another sound of 
70 dB, the increase is only 3 dB to 73 dB, not a doubling to 140 dB. If 
two sounds are of different levels, the lower level adds less to the 
higher level as their difference increases. For example, if the 
difference is as much as 10 dB, the lower level adds nearly nothing to 
the higher level. Adding 60 dB to a 70 dB sound increases the total 
sound pressure level less than 0.5 dB. Additionally, a decrease of 3 dB 
in sound pressure level means that the noise has been reduced to half 
of its original level.
    In 1974, EPA identified indoor and outdoor noise levels to protect 
public health and welfare against hearing loss, annoyance, and activity 
interference (EPA, 1974). A 24-hour exposure level of 70 dB was 
identified as the limit of environmental noise which will protect 
against hearing damage. Levels of 55 dB outdoors and 45 dB indoors are 
identified as desirable limits to protect from activity interference 
and annoyance. These levels of noise are considered those which will 
permit spoken conversation and other activities such as sleeping, 
working, and recreation. The levels are not single event or peak 
levels, but are 24-hour averages. Further, these levels are not 
regulatory goals or requirements; they represent levels of 
environmental noise required to protect the public health and welfare 
with an adequate margin of safety (EPA, 2007).
    The Enloe Project area is characterized by its remote, relatively 
undeveloped landscape. Accessed via the narrow Loomis-Oroville Road, 
the Enloe Project area features moderately steep mountainous terrain 
incised by eroded canyons. Natural noises which are associated with 
this site would include wildlife sounds such as animal calls and the 
sounds of wildlife moving through the environment and interacting with 
one another. Other natural sounds would include sounds of the physical 
environment such as wind, rain, thunder and the river rushing over

[[Page 28589]]

the dam or falls when flows are occurring. Human background noise would 
include the passing cars on the Loomis-Oroville Road, the sound of 
recreating visitors, and the activities Okanogan PUD employees 
occasionally checking the area of the dam.
3.3.7.2 Environmental Effects
Aesthetics Management Plan
    Okanogan PUD proposes to implement its Aesthetics Management Plan 
to manage project effects on aesthetic resources associated with the 
proposed project. Okanogan PUD proposes the following measures within 
its Aesthetics Management Plan.

Use Visually-Compatible Colors and Building Materials and Non-
Reflective Surfaces (AES-01 and AES-03)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to use visually-compatible colors and 
building material textures that harmonize with the existing landscape 
for the new east-bank construction. A range of compatible colors and 
building material textures would be used to reduce the visual presence 
of new project facilities within the larger landscape.
    The proposed east bank construction of project facilities consists 
of the (1) new crest gates at the top of the dam, (2) headworks that 
include an approach channel, river intake, and intake canal, (3) 
penstock intake, (4) two penstocks, (5) powerhouse, (6) tailrace, (7) 
recreational facilities north of the dam (picnic tables, vault toilet, 
boat launch), and (8) an improved access road.
    It would be expected that the powerhouse, penstocks, and tailrace 
would be visible from KOPs 3 through 7 with the 
powerhouse representing the most visible new feature. To further reduce 
the visual presence of the new powerhouse and have the new structure 
harmonize with its surroundings, Okanogan PUD proposes colors 
consistent with suggested guidelines within the HPMP regarding new 
construction within the Enloe Project. These guidelines state that 
``muted, natural tone materials would be used. Okanogan PUD also 
proposes matte finishes, as opposed to glossy finishes. Consistent with 
guidance within the HPMP, new building materials, such as concrete, 
steel, and galvanized metal roofing would have minimal, but some 
discernable textures. Concrete, for instance, would in general be left 
exposed, trowelled smooth so that board forms are not visible, or 
coated with natural gray-colored stucco coatings to blend with the 
original features. While galvanized materials, such as steel or iron 
roofing, are by nature smooth, they would be primed with a matte finish 
and be nonreflective.

Consultation with Colville Confederated Tribes on Traditional Cultural 
Properties (AES-02)

    The Colville attach cultural significance to the visual aesthetics 
of several natural features and their components (i.e., Traditional 
Cultural Properties) within the project area. Okanogan PUD proposes to 
consult with the Colville concerning these traditional cultural 
properties utilizing the existing Cultural Resources Working Group.

Dewatering and Construction of a New Facility That Could Block Existing 
Views (AES-04)

    Okanogan PUD proposes to make trail improvements that would create 
closer and more intimate views of the falls. This would be from 
viewpoints that are not currently easily accessible to the public. The 
trail would be linked to the recreational improvements made above the 
dam and provide visitors with a trail with closer views of the falls 
and greater accessibility to the area below the dam. Interpretive 
signage, in concert with HIST-03, would also be placed along the trail 
to highlight historical flows over the dam. This new trail would help 
to replace views partially blocked by the construction of new project 
facilities and provide closer access to the falls for recreators during 
periods of high flows and high visitation.
    The existing buildings would be removed unless a qualified third 
party entity assumes ownership and management of the old west bank 
powerhouse to maintain it for historic and recreation purposes. If a 
qualified third party entity is not identified within five years of 
licensing, then the historic Enloe powerhouse, located on the west side 
of the Similkameen River and below Enloe dam, would be demolished after 
completing mitigation measures undertaken in consultation with the 
Washington SHPO and Park Service. Such measures may include detailed 
Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) documentation.
    Okanogan PUD states that the foundation of the powerhouse and surge 
tanks, which accounts for about 50 percent of the visible portions of 
the building, would be retained, but that the powerhouse and surge tank 
superstructures would be demolished to remove any deteriorated and 
unstable structures from the site. Okanogan PUD would also ensure that 
these actions are consistent with Measures HIST-01, HIST-02, and ARCH-
01.
    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD revise and implement the 
Aesthetics Resource Management Plan to include the following: (1) 
Blending the existing and proposed Enloe Project into the existing 
landscape character; (2) revegetate, stabilize, and landscape new 
construction areas and areas immediately adjacent; (3) grading, 
planting native vegetation, repairing slopes damaged by erosion, 
preventing future erosion; (4) monitoring and maintenance; (5) 
implementation schedule; (6) periodic review and revision; and (7) 
providing river flows over Enloe dam.
    BLM also noted in its 10(a) recommendations that Okanogan PUD's 
aesthetic analysis identified the Similkameen Area as having a Scenic 
Quality of B, but then based its analysis as having a Scenic Quality of 
C. Therefore, BLM recommends that the aesthetic analysis that Okanogan 
PUD conducted be revised to reflect a Scenic Quality of B and to 
similarly adjust the sensitivity rating given the current and projected 
recreation use, the identification of sightseeing as a use in the final 
license application, the designation of a National Scenic Trail which 
passes by the Enloe Project, and the proximity of a highway.

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD's proposal to use visually-compatible colors and 
building material textures that harmonize with the existing landscape 
for the new east-bank construction and implement its Aesthetics 
Management Plan would reduce potential adverse visual effects at the 
proposed project. BLM's recommendation that Okanogan PUD include 
specific approaches concerning the blending of the existing and 
proposed Enloe Project facilities into the existing landscape 
character, revegetating and stabilizing and landscaping new 
construction areas and areas immediately adjacent, grading, planting 
native vegetation, repairing slopes damaged by erosion, preventing 
future erosion, monitoring and maintenance, implementation schedule, 
and periodic review and revisions would help ensure that project 
facilities would ensure protection of the visual resources at the 
proposed project. In addition, because the project is located on BLM 
lands, it would be beneficial if BLM were added to this consultation 
process in addition to consultation with the Colville. Revising the 
Aesthetics Management Plan to contain these elements could have a 
direct beneficial effect on aesthetic resources at the project by 
keeping BLM and the Colville informed on lay down or construction 
material storage areas that are yet to be determined. Consultation with 
BLM on

[[Page 28590]]

the revision of the aesthetic analysis to reflect a Scenic Quality of 
B, with an appropriate sensitivity rating reflecting the site 
conditions identified in BLM's 10(a) recommendation, would ensure that 
the project area has been appropriately evaluated and that appropriate 
measures are undertaken to preserve the aesthetic character of the 
area.

Aesthetic River Flows

    As we've said, Okanogan PUD proposes a year-round minimum flows of 
10 cfs in the bypassed reach. The flows would be seasonally adjusted to 
30 cfs for the period of mid-July through mid-September. This proposal 
would provide minimum flows when spillage is not occurring--about 9.5 
months of the year in low water years and 8 months in high water years. 
BLM, the Colville, Washington SHPO, and American Whitewater recommend 
an investigation into options for providing river flows over Enloe dam 
and the subsequent Similkameen Falls for aesthetic purposes, the 
incorporation of aesthetic flows into the Aesthetic Management Plan, 
and a survey of recreational users regarding aesthetic flow releases. 
Specifically, the parties request a study to assess the effects of 
dewatering the spillway and rocky area below the dam, including 
alternatives that would spill water over the dam all year long.
    Okanogan PUD states that Similkameen River fisheries managers have 
expressed serious concern that aesthetic flows could increase 
temperature below the falls. For this reason, the minimum flows would 
be monitored for both DO and temperatures. Additionally, Okanogan PUD 
proposes to address issues with the minimum flow through an adaptive 
management plan.

Our Analysis

    In consultation with BLM, Okanogan PUD conducted visual resources 
analysis of the Enloe Project area using the VRM methodology outlined 
above and determined that the characteristics of the area fell within 
the Class IV management class. In addition, Okanogan PUD provided 
aesthetic simulations showing the views of project area from various 
KOPs.
    The lowest minimum monthly average flow of 191 cfs occurred on 
September 2003. The proposed minimum flow of 10 cfs (for the last 15 
days of the month) is only 5 percent of the 79 year record (see table 
2) and is less aesthetically desirable. However, any minimum flow must 
meet the water quality standards. The 10-cfs flow (with seasonal 
adjustment to 30 cfs) would meet water quality standards based on 
Okanogan PUD's best estimate of the bypassed reach dimensions and 
modeling of the temperature gained in the bypassed reach (see section 
3.3.2.2, Minimum Flow Proposal).
    While several assumptions were made in the modeling and size 
estimate of the bypass section, this is a proposed minimum flow and is 
subject to change based on real-world results. Additionally, the method 
of delivery of the minimum flow is undetermined at this time. As such, 
it is difficult to ascertain the full effects of the minimum flow on 
water quality and the aesthetic resources, namely the falls. However, 
the measure, along with an evaluation to determine effectiveness, 
should adequately provide a means for testing the proposals' effect on 
aesthetics and water quality while still providing a framework for 
making improvements, if needed. Observing recreation use at the falls 
as a part of the recreation monitoring plan would provide more 
information on if visitors to the project are visiting the falls as 
well.

Noise

    Proposed construction activities at the Enloe project would cause 
unnatural noises. Okanogan PUD has taken steps to reduce the impacts of 
such noise, particularly with its Blasting Plan. It also proposes to 
concentrate construction activities with the loudest noise to occur in 
summer and early fall to minimize effects on overwintering birds and 
bald eagles as much as possible.
    Once the project is complete, minor noise would be associated with 
the operation and maintenance of the hydroelectric facility (typically 
54-68 decibels ten to sixty feet from the powerhouse, depending upon 
the design structure and topography), but it is not anticipated that 
routine project operations and maintenance would disturb wildlife or 
visitors in the project area.

Our Analysis

    Although proposed construction activities would cause unnatural 
noises at the project, construction-related noise is considered a 
temporary and short-term effect. Constructing the project in the summer 
and early fall would reduce the effect on overwintering birds and bald 
eagles and other wildlife. Moreover, visitors would only be allowed 
limited public access to the project during construction as proposed in 
the Safety during Construction Plan. This would increase the distance 
between the public and construction activities at the project and 
further minimize the amount of construction-related noise visitors may 
hear when visiting the project.
3.3.8 Cultural Resources

3.3.8.1 Affected Environment

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act

    Section 106 of NHPA, as amended, requires the Commission to take 
into account the effects of licensing a hydropower project on any 
historic properties and allow the Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment if any adverse effects 
on historic properties are identified within the hydropower project's 
APE.
    Historic properties are defined as any district, site, building, 
structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in 
the National Register. In this EA, we also use the term ``cultural 
resources'' to include properties that have not been evaluated for 
eligibility for listing in the National Register. In most cases, 
cultural resources less than 50 years old are not considered eligible 
for the National Register.
    Section 106 also requires that the Commission seek concurrence with 
the Washington SHPO on any finding involving effects or no effects on 
historic properties. If Native American (i.e., aboriginal) properties 
have been identified, section 106 also requires that the Commission 
consult with interested Native American tribes that might attach 
religious or cultural significance to such properties.

Area of Potential Effect (APE)

    Pursuant to section 106, the Commission must take into account 
whether any historic property could be affected by the issuance of a 
license within a project's APE. The APE is determined in consultation 
with the Washington SHPO and is defined as the geographic area or areas 
within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause 
alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such 
properties exist. In its license application, Okanogan PUD (2008a) 
defined an APE as consisting of all lands within the Enloe Project 
boundary, described as the 1,055-foot above mean sea level elevation 
line that extends from the upstream end of Shanker's Bend, to 
approximately 1,000 feet downstream from Enloe dam. The APE includes 
the dam, penstocks, powerhouse, recreational sites, access roads, and 
appurtenant facilities. The APE for historic resources (buildings and 
structures) extends beyond the

[[Page 28591]]

project boundary to include an additional 100 feet (horizontally) where 
project operations may affect the character or use of historical 
resources and/or TCPs. Okanogan PUD included in its license application 
a letter dated July 24, 2009, from the Washington SHPO office which 
concurred with the APE.
    In November 2008, Okanogan PUD requested Washington SHPO 
concurrence on an amended APE that consisted of the APE as described 
above, and also included an additional access road. Okanogan PUD's May 
2009 HPMP identifies the APE as such, but also includes a limited 
number of power transmission lines that connect to a single utility 
pole.
    On October 14, 2009, the Commission requested clarification of 
Okanogan PUD's response to additional information Item 11, side channel 
enhancement development. The Commission requested a map to clearly 
identify the proposed side channel's location in relationship to the 
project's defined APE and requested that the Okanogan PUD consult with 
the Washington SHPO regarding the side-channel enhancement site. 
Okanogan PUD filed its response on December 14, 2009. In its 
clarification response, PUD provided a copy of meeting minutes from a 
November 30, 2009, CRWG meeting. At the meeting, the possibility of two 
separate APEs was discussed: one consisting of the proposed project APE 
and another APE encompassing lands to be affected by the proposed side-
channel enhancement site (side-channel APE). The CRWG agreed that two 
separate APEs for the Enloe Project would be appropriate and should be 
identified in the PA and associated HPMP. On September 23, 2010, 
Okanogan PUD requested Washington SHPO's concurrence on the side-
channel APE. On September 28, 2010, the Washington SHPO concurred.

Prehistoric and Historic Background

    The following text is a summary of the cultural overview provided 
in the May 2009 HPMP (Okanogan PUD, 2009e).
    The Northern Columbia Plateau lies primarily within the Fraser 
Watershed, with a portion in the south draining into the Columbia River 
Watershed. It is an area that was occupied primarily by Interior Salish 
speakers who are now represented by the Colville. Colonizing groups 
were likely coastal people with a generalized Paleolithic foraging 
economy that spanned a much larger geographic area. Middle Holocene and 
later peoples followed a generally riverine subsistence economy typical 
of the large western river systems, including a collector strategy that 
was centered on ungulates and salmon and the gathering and storage of 
root crops. As a result of resource pressures, Plateau peoples tended 
to follow an annual round that led them to move to locations of stable, 
predictable resources on somewhat the same schedule every year. Changes 
to that schedule, such as moving from winter villages earlier in spring 
than usual, or leaving a common fishing location earlier, were 
generally due to variations in the productivity of the resource that 
existed that year. Several different regional cultural chronologies 
commonly employed for the region reflect prehistoric occupation to 
approximately 12,500 years before present.
    At the time of contact, the Okanogan people occupied the portion of 
the Central Plateau region that includes the study area. The political 
structure of the people of the Central Plateau region consisted of 
small autonomous bands or villages. Bands were organized in small 
groups according to language, customs, and friendly relations, with 
group leaders generally inheriting their position. The seasonal round 
that groups made was based on the availability of salmon, berries, 
roots, and large game. Winter villages typically consisted of a long 
house covered with a tule-mat roof, one or more subterranean houses, 
and a sweat lodge. Villages were located near water and firewood. Near 
the project area, the falls, the location of Enloe dam, was a likely 
fishing site throughout the Holocene. If necessary, individuals would 
hunt deer, bear, or other game to supplement their winter food 
supplies.
    In April, the members of the winter village moved to streams where 
they would catch trout and suckers, which were dried and eaten until 
the salmon runs began in June. Women gathered bitterroot and camas. 
From June to October, salmon fishing was a primary focus of subsistence 
activities with the continuation of gathering of berries and roots near 
rivers. The salmon were caught with spears, weirs, fish traps, large 
nets, and dipnets. They were dried on racks erected near the fishing 
camps.
    Early Euroamerican presence in the Okanogan Valley was driven by 
economic interest in locating fur trading posts and establishing 
relations with local tribes. In 1811, the Canadian Northwest Company 
fur trader David Thompson was the first Euroamerican to travel to the 
Okanogan County seeking new trading opportunities. In fall 1811, the 
Pacific Fur Company established Fort Okanogan 1 mile north of the 
confluence of the Okanogan and Columbia rivers. By the late 1820s, 
nearby Fort Colville became the center for inland trading. By 1860, 
plagues caused a decline in the Native American population and the 
depletion of fur resources, which led to the decline of the fur 
industry in the Okanogan region.
    Christian missionaries arrived in to the Northwest in the 1840s and 
contributed to the permanent Euroamerican settlement of the Northwest. 
The Whitman mission was established in 1841 south of the Okanogan 
region in Walla Walla, while Father Pierre Jean de Smet, who traveled 
widely, came to the Okanogan Valley in 1842. It was not until 1885 that 
missionary Etienne de Rouge established a mission for the Okanogan 
Indians at Ellisforde. Two years later, the mission was moved south to 
Lake Omak.
    On May 3, 1853, Washington Territory was created out of the Oregon 
Territory. During this period, Territorial Governor Isaac Stevens 
negotiated treaties with local tribes. The treaties defined boundaries 
of ceded territories and removed Indian tribes to reservations, thereby 
opening lands for American settlement. Between 1855 and 1856 
hostilities broke out between tribes and Euroamericans erupting into 
the Yakima War.
    Another point of conflict for local tribes was the growing mining 
activity that had an impact on salmon spawning streams, brought an 
influx of Euroamericans to the Okanogan Valley, and further altered the 
local economy and development patterns. Miners formed temporary 
settlements in places with convenient access to supplies and the gold 
fields. One such encampment near the mouth of the Similkameen River 
following a gold strike at Shanker's Bend in 1859 was called ``Okanagan 
City'' and in 1860 had a population of 3,000.
    Transportation in the area advanced from stage coaches following 
the Okanogan Trail to steamboats along the Columbia and Okanogan rivers 
during high water season. By the early 1900s, the Marcus Division 
Molson-Chopaka branch of the Great Northern Railway line was 
constructed along the Similkameen River offering improved access to the 
mineral of the area. The lead and zinc mining town of Nighthawk, just 
west of the project, was founded in the 1890s. The community once 
occupied 160 acres. Today, it is privately owned by a rancher, and 
several historical buildings remain standing, including the old post 
office and hotel dating to the mining era.
    A USGS map from 1906 and county atlas from 1934 show additional 
roads

[[Page 28592]]

and trails in the vicinity of the APE (Metzger, 1934, as cited by 
Okanogan PUD, 2009e). The 1934 map also shows an irrigation canal 
between the Similkameen River and the Oroville-Tonasket Road to the 
east.
    In 1955, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) began 
investigating the feasibility of establishing irrigation facilities for 
an Okanogan-Similkameen Division, using water from the nearby Chief 
Joseph Dam. The Oroville-Tonasket Unit of the Okanogan-Similkameen 
Division was authorized by the Act of October 9, 1962 (76 Stat. 761, 
Public Law 87-762), placed under construction in 1965, and completed in 
1969 (Reclamation, 2007, as cited by Okanogan PUD, 2009e). Remnants of 
this later partially concrete-lined canal are within the project 
boundary APE.
    The power potential of the falls site attracted the interest of 
Eugene Enloe, the owner of a store in Medicine Lake, who began buying 
small power companies in eastern Washington. In 1913, he incorporated 
the Okanogan Valley Power Company. By 1916, Okanogan Valley Power had 
also acquired the falls site including all the power generating 
equipment used at the original power plant. Use of the Great Northern 
Railway allowed for the delivery of construction materials for the 
powerhouse and dam. Designs for the new powerhouse were developed in 
1916, and construction of the concrete arch-gravity Enloe dam began in 
1919 and was completed in the summer of 1920.
    Reflective of the move toward small utilities becoming part of a 
unified system, the Washington Water Power Company bought Okanogan 
Valley Power in 1923. Washington Water Power Company added a second 
unit of 1,600 kilowatts to the Enloe plant in 1924. Washington Water 
Power Company operated the complex until 1942 when it was acquired by 
Okanogan PUD. It became economically inefficient to operate the small 
complex after 1958, when the Bonneville Power Administration brought 
its high voltage line to the Okanogan Valley. Okanogan PUD ceased 
operation of the plant's generators on July 29, 1958.
    According to a record search undertaken by Okanogan PUD, several 
cultural resources studies have been undertaken in the vicinity of the 
project boundary APE (Okanogan PUD, 2009e). The Corps conducted a 
cultural resources study between 1985 and 1987 (Salo, 1987, as cited by 
Okanogan PUD, 2009e). Within the APE in the vicinity of the project 
boundary, the Corps study identified five archaeological sites: 
45OK367, 45OK532, 45OK533, 45OK565, and 45OK566.
    Another study within the APE was conducted for a previous Enloe 
Project licensing effort (Galm, 1991, as cited by Okanogan PUD, 2009e). 
This previous effort identified the potential of adverse effects on the 
National Register-eligible Enloe dam and archaeological sites 45OK532, 
45OK533, 45OK565, and 45OK566 (Okanogan PUD, 2009e). It was noted that 
licensing the project could result in adverse effects on unidentified 
TCPs.
    A later study conducted by Archaeological and Historical Services 
(AHS) included test excavations at 45OK367, 45OK532, and 45OK566 
(Boreson, 1992, as cited by Okanogan PUD, 2009e). AHS determined that 
both 45OK532 and 45OK566 were National Register-eligible under 
Criterion D.\39\ AHS did not conduct archaeological investigations of 
sites 45OK533 and 45OK565.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Criterion D is as follows, ``that have yielded, or may be 
likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.'' 
36 CFR 60.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A record search undertaken of the side channel APE identified six 
archaeological sites documented within one mile of the side channel 
APE: 45OK355, 45OK357, 45OK358, 45OK359, 45OK369, and 45OK370 (Okanogan 
PUD, 2009f). All of the sites were recorded in 1976 by the Corps. No 
archaeological, historic, or architectural resources had been 
previously identified within the boundary of the side channel APE. A 
dike constructed in the early 1970s is located in this APE, but 
according to Okanogan PUD, this feature does not meet the 50-year age 
requirement for National Register eligibility (Okanogan PUD, 2009f).

Archaeological and Historic-Era Properties and Structures

    Between 2006 and 2007, Okanogan PUD conducted cultural resources 
inventories of lands within the project boundary APE. These results of 
these studies were presented in Enloe Dam Licensing Project, Okanogan 
County, Washington, FINAL Cultural Resources Section 106 Technical 
Report (Okanogan PUD, 2008b). These studies resulted in the 
documentation of eight archaeological sites and six historical features 
or structures within the APE. Two additional sites were identified 
directly adjacent to the project boundary APE. Table 18 provides a 
summary of all prehistoric and historic resources identified within or 
adjacent to the project boundary APE to date. A cultural resources 
study of the side channel APE conducted in October 2009 did not result 
in the documentation of any archeological or historic-era properties 
within this area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Criterion A is as follows, ``that are associated with 
events that have made a significant contribution to the broad 
patterns of our history.'' 36 CFR 60.4.

   Table 18--Archaeological and Historic Resources Within or Directly
               Adjacent to the Enloe Project Boundary APE
           [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2009e, as modified by Staff]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                National
                                                Register
       Primary No.           Description     eligibility and  Within APE
                                                rationale
------------------------------------------------------------------------
45OK367.................  Prehistoric       Not eligible due          Y
                           occupation        to lack of
                           debris.           integrity.
45OK368.................  Enloe dam.......  Listed on the             Y
                                             National
                                             Register;
                                             eligible under
                                             Criterion A.
                                             \40\.
45OK368.................  Enloe powerhouse  Listed on the             Y
                                             National
                                             Register;
                                             eligible under
                                             Criterion A.
45OK532.................  Lithic debris...  Eligible under            Y
                                             Criterion D.
45OK533H................  Historic          Not eligible;             Y
                           homestead.        does not meet
                                             National
                                             Register
                                             criteria.
45OK565.................  Prehistoric site  Unknown;                  Y
                                             consultant
                                             could not
                                             relocate site.
45OK566.................  Lithic scatter..  Eligible under            Y
                                             Criterion D.
45OK1238 (AR-1).........  Gensey homestead  Unevaluated               N
                           site.             (outside of
                                             APE).
45OK1239 (AR-4).........  Similkameen       Not eligible due          Y
                           Falls             to lack of
                           powerhouse.       integrity.
45OK1240 (AR-5).........  Railroad camp...  Unevaluated               N
                                             (outside of
                                             APE).
45OK1241 (AR-6).........  Historic roads..  Not eligible;             Y
                                             does not meet
                                             National
                                             Register
                                             criteria.
45OK1265 (AR-4).........  Historic can      Not eligible;             Y
                           dump.             does not meet
                                             National
                                             Register
                                             criteria.

[[Page 28593]]

 
HR-1....................  Great Northern    Eligible under            Y
                           Railroad Grade.   Criterion A
                                             (June 19, 2007).
HR-2....................  Access road to    Not eligible;             Y
                           operator's        does not meet
                           house.            National
                                             Register
                                             criteria.
HR-3....................  Pump house and    Not eligible;             Y
                           water tank.       does not meet
                                             National
                                             Register
                                             criteria;
                                             integrity
                                             compromised.
HR-4....................  Oroville-         Portion within            Y
                           Tonasket          the APE not
                           Irrigation        eligible; does
                           Canal.            not meet
                                             National
                                             Register
                                             criteria,
                                             integrity
                                             compromised.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In June 2007, the Washington SHPO concurred that resources 45OK368 
(Enloe dam, Enloe powerhouse and penstock), and HR-1 (Great Northern 
Railroad Grade) are eligible for or listed in the National Register and 
that resources HR-2 (access road to operator's house at Enloe dam) and 
HR-3 (pump house and water tank) are not eligible (letter from G. 
Griffith, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, Washington 
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, 
Washington, to K. Demuth, ENTRIX, Inc., Seattle, Washington, June 19, 
2007). In its letter, the Washington SHPO also concurred that the 
portion of HR-4 (Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation Canal) located within the 
APE does not contribute to the potential significance of other portions 
of the canal that were previously determined to be eligible. However, 
the Washington SHPO recommends that the system be re-evaluated for 
National Register eligibility 5 to 10 hence. The HPMP notes that both 
the historic Enloe dam and powerhouse have been documented according to 
HAER standards (Holstine and Eminger 1990, as cited by Entrix 2009).
    In September 2008, the Washington SHPO concurred that sites 45OK532 
and 45OK566 are eligible for the National Register and that sites 
45OK367, 45OK533H, 45OK1239, 45OK1241, and 45OK1265 are not eligible 
(letter from R. Whitlam, State Archaeologist, Washington Department of 
Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, Washington, to R. 
Bailey, District Archaeologist, Spokane District Office, BLM, Spokane 
Valley, Washington, September 23, 2008).
Traditional Cultural Properties
    In 2006, Okanogan PUD consulted with the Colville to identify 
potential TCPs that could be present within the project APE. A final 
TCP report was included as an appendix to the Enloe Dam Licensing 
Project, Okanogan County, Washington, Final Cultural Resources Section 
106 Technical Report (Okanogan PUD, 2008b). Within the APE, two 
potential TCPs were identified.
3.3.8.2 Environmental Effects
    In a letter filed August 6, 2009, the Washington SHPO concurred 
that the proposed Enloe Project would have an adverse effect on 
significant cultural resources listed in, or determined eligible for 
listing in, the National Register. In view of the adverse effect 
determination, the Washington SHPO recommended development of a 
Memorandum of Agreement or PA.
    In this section, we evaluate the effects of Okanogan PUD's proposed 
project construction, operation, and maintenance on the following 
cultural resources: (1) Archaeological resources; (2) TCPs; and (3) 
historic buildings and structures.

Project Construction

    In its HPMP and section 106 Technical Report, Okanogan PUD states 
that construction activities would adversely affect one archaeological 
site located within the project boundary APE: Archaeological site 
45OK532, which is eligible for the National Register under Criterion D 
(Okanogan PUD, 2009e, 2008b). The access road needed for project 
construction site would use the existing OTID Ditch Road that crosses 
site 45OK532. During construction, Okanogan PUD proposes to improve 
this road to a one-lane gravel road with turnouts. As discussed below, 
changes in chemical characteristics (including pH) of soils and 
increases in soil moisture content due to ground-disturbing activities 
can affect the preservation of site 45OK532.
    Proposed ground-disturbing construction (parking area, trails, 
fencing) would occur in the vicinity of site 45OK367. However, this 
site has been determined ineligible for the National Register due to 
disturbance of the prehistoric archaeological deposits during the 
historic period. The remaining sites are either ineligible for the 
National Register, eligible (45OK566), or unevaluated (45OK565); 
however, they are not located where ground disturbance may occur. 
Okanogan PUD also concluded that any demolition of the historic Enloe 
powerhouse is unlikely to affect historically significant 
archaeological resources (Okanogan PUD, 2009e).
    In its Section 106 Technical Report, Okanogan PUD (2008b) states 
that short-term effects on TCPs identified in the project boundary APE, 
such as noise, dust, vibrations, and access restrictions, would not be 
adverse. However, construction of the new powerhouse would have an 
adverse visual effect on one of the two TCPs identified within the 
project APE.
    National Register-eligible Great Northern Railroad Grade (HR-1) and 
National Register-listed Enloe dam (45OK368) and historic Enloe 
powerhouse (45OK368) are historically significant resources. The Enloe 
powerhouse and Great Northern Railroad Grade, both of which are 
abandoned, are located across the river from the proposed construction 
site; therefore, Okanogan PUD states that project construction would 
not result in long-term effects on the Great Northern Railroad Grade 
(Okanogan PUD, 2009e, 2008b). Long-term effects on the historic Enloe 
powerhouse are discussed under Operation and Maintenance Effects below.
    The historic Enloe dam would need to be refurbished to meet current 
dam safety requirements and to extend its service life. Okanogan PUD 
states that activities associated with refurbishment would not 
contribute to the extended life of the structure. These effects would 
therefore not be considered adverse if they are completed according to 
the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (Okanogan 
PUD, 2009e, 2008b).
    Other project-related construction would entail an approximate 2.3-
acre staging area near the proposed new powerhouse site and areas 
potentially affected by spoil disposal. At this time, effects on 
cultural resources that may be

[[Page 28594]]

associated with these areas are unknown. The HPMP, however, includes a 
provision for the discovery of previously unidentified cultural 
resources, which would ensure that the resource is addressed in 
accordance with section 106.

Project Operation and Maintenance

    In its HPMP, Okanogan PUD states that operation of the proposed 
Enloe Project would not adversely affect National Register-eligible 
archaeological site 45OK566 and that effects on site 45OK565 have not 
been assessed because the site could not be relocated during project 
surveys (Okanogan PUD, 2009e). However, because prehistoric site 
45OK532 is buried within an alluvial terrace adjacent to the 
reservoir's edge, Okanogan PUD explains that fluctuating water levels 
in the reservoir could potentially disturb archaeological deposits at 
this site. Additionally, the access road passing through this site may 
result in disturbance of archaeological deposits as a result of 
maintenance activities and increased traffic. Okanogan PUD therefore 
concludes that effects on this site are adverse.
    Prehistoric site 45OK566 is situated on a terrace outcrop above the 
river, limiting the potential of project-related erosion effects at 
this historically significant site. Okanogan PUD therefore states that 
there would be no operational adverse effects to this site (Okanogan 
PUD, 2009e).
    Okanogan PUD states that proposed recreation improvements could 
increase public use of the project area resulting in the potential of 
increased site disturbance by recreationalists (Okanogan PUD, 2009e, 
2008b). However, revegetating disturbed areas with native vegetation, 
as discussed in section 3.3.6, Recreation and Land Use, could minimize 
project-related erosion effects at the sites. Additionally, 
consultation with the CRWG, including the Washington SHPO and the 
tribe, regarding project-related recreation improvements, would protect 
the sites through placement of the facilities.
    In its HPMP, Okanogan PUD states that operational effects on the 
historic Enloe dam would not be adverse (Okanogan PUD, 2009e). Also, 
Okanogan PUD states that proposed construction of a new powerhouse on 
the east side of the river would not adversely affect the historic 
Enloe powerhouse. However, per the HPMP, the powerhouse would either 
assume new ownership with portions demolished, or it would be entirely 
demolished. In either case, any demolition of the historic Enloe 
powerhouse would result in an adverse effect on a historic property. 
Additionally, because of the powerhouse's proximity to a known TCP, 
there is a possibility intact archaeological resources could be 
uncovered during demolition activities. In its HPMP, Okanogan PUD 
proposes to monitor this area during ground disturbance.
    Further, demolition of part or all of the historic powerhouse would 
require the transportation of equipment and supplies along the existing 
National Register-eligible Great Northern Railroad Grade, which serves 
as an access road to the Enloe powerhouse. However, Okanogan PUD states 
that the use of heavy equipment and hauling of refuse along the 
railroad grade would not damage the grade, including elements to its 
existing railroad grade surface or tunnel, which are located outside 
the APE (Okanogan PUD, 2009e, 2008b). Okanogan PUD therefore concludes 
that there would be no adverse effect to the railroad grade as a result 
of the project.

Historic Properties Management Plan

    The HPMP was prepared after consultation with the CRWG, consisting 
of representatives from Okanogan PUD; BLM; Forest Service; Washington 
SHPO; the Colville; and the Commission staff. In its HPMP, Okanogan PUD 
proposes to appoint an HPMP Coordinator and implement review procedures 
that would apply to non-routine maintenance activities, structural 
modifications or additions that may be necessary in the future. 
Additionally, the HPMP includes measures and procedures for: (1) 
Monitoring during construction activities and over the license term; 
(2) addressing unanticipated discoveries and evaluating cultural 
resources for National Register-eligibility; (3) discovery of human 
remains; (4) emergency undertakings; (5) annual reporting and agency 
coordination; (6) periodic review and revision to the HPMP every 5 
years; (7) employee training; (8) records management and curation of 
any recovered archaeological materials; and (9) activities exempt from 
section 106 consultation. The HPMP includes a process for identifying 
resource-specific measures for historic properties within the APE after 
consultation with the CRWG.
    The HPMP describes standards to be applied during project 
activities that have the potential to affect the historic integrity of 
the historic Enloe dam. Okanogan PUD would apply specific standards 
adapted from the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic 
Preservation Projects to ensure preservation of the dam. Additionally, 
the HPMP includes historic resource maintenance guidelines that would 
guide future dam maintenance.
    In its license application, Okanogan PUD proposes to implement four 
measures to address project effects on significant historic structures 
(HIST-01, HIST-02, HIST-03, and HIST-04). Additionally, Okanogan PUD 
proposes five measures for archaeological resources (ARCH-01, ARCH-02, 
ARCH-03, ARCH-04, and ARCH-05). Of the nine measures, all but two of 
these measures were subsequently incorporated into the May 2009 HPMP. 
HIST-04 would entail a review of appropriate measures, and although the 
HPMP does not specifically identify measure ARCH-05 (Determine 
Potential Recreational Impacts to Archaeological Sites) by name, the 
HPMP discusses measures to address potential recreational effects on 
cultural resources. The HPMP discusses the other measures and describes 
how Okanogan PUD is seeking an outside entity to assume ownership of 
the historic Enloe powerhouse (HIST-01). If a new owner is not 
identified within 4 years, Okanogan PUD would consult with the CRWG, 
which includes the Commission, to identify appropriate mitigation 
options prior to demolishing the structure (HIST-02), which may include 
updated HAER photography, stabilization of a portion of the powerhouse 
as a ``ruin,'' development of interpretive materials for display in the 
project boundary (HIST-03), offering bricks, windows and other 
materials for salvage, providing turbines and other equipment from the 
powerhouse for use in local museums, and developing an interpretive 
facility that houses artifacts from the powerhouse and Enloe dam. If 
demolition is determined necessary, a Memorandum of Agreement between 
the Commission and the Washington SHPO would be developed that could 
identify agreed-upon mitigation measures. The powerhouse penstocks and 
surge tanks would be demolished regardless of whether a new owner would 
be identified. To mitigate adverse effects on these features, Okanogan 
PUD would photograph the powerhouse, penstocks, and surge tanks to HAER 
standards prior to their demolition.
    In its HPMP, Okanogan PUD proposes to monitor shoreline areas for 
erosion as a result of reservoir fluctuation (ARCH-01), avoid known 
historic properties during construction (ARCH-02), and monitor sites 
45OK532 and 45OK367 during construction activities (ARCH-03). If 
removal of the historic Enloe powerhouse becomes necessary,

[[Page 28595]]

Okanogan PUD proposes to mitigate potential effects on an identified 
TCP by monitoring any ground-disturbing activity in the vicinity of the 
site during demolition. Other treatment options for site 45OK532 
include capping the portions of site that would be crossed by the 
improved access road with gravel and/or dirt rather than re-grading the 
existing road and placing road turnouts and shoulders outside of the 
site boundary. However, in Appendix E of the HPMP, Okanogan PUD states 
that data recovery of site 45OK532 prior to construction may be 
necessary. Although site 45OK367 is not eligible for the National 
Register, Okanogan PUD would monitor it during construction in the 
event that intact deposits might be identified. To protect both of 
these sites from recreational use, Okanogan PUD proposes to implement a 
long-term monitoring program. If any changes to site conditions are 
identified, Okanogan PUD would implement a review procedure with the 
CRWG to determine appropriate next steps. Additionally, Okanogan PUD's 
annual report would summarize monitoring efforts and CRWG consultation. 
Other measures include implementing an inadvertent discovery program 
and training staff about protocols for such discoveries (ARCH-04) and 
determining if there would be effects on archaeological sites in the 
vicinity of recreational facilities (ARCH-05).
    Interior recommends revising the May 2009 HPMP, after consultation 
with BLM, the Washington SHPO, and the Colville, to include the 
following:
     Revise the APE to accommodate modifications to the Enloe 
Project boundary, if any, and any project-related actions that may 
affect historic properties on BLM-administered lands;
     A process for evaluating any previously unidentified 
cultural resources identified on BLM-administered lands;
     Provision for annual reports describing activities 
involving BLM-administered cultural resources;
     Periodic review of the HPMP;
     Site monitoring program for long-term cultural resource 
monitoring on BLM-administered lands;
     A process for developing site-specific treatment or 
stabilization measures for previously unidentified historic properties 
on BLM-administered lands;
     A plan for updated cultural resources inventory to be 
conducted if the project boundary is modified to include additional 
land or project operations result in newly exposed, previously un-
surveyed lands;
     Provision for consultation with regard to cultural 
interpretative and educational plans (including signage);
     Provision for making records of cultural resource data 
gathered by Okanogan PUD on BLM-administered lands available to the 
BLM; and
     Provision for inadvertent discoveries.
    In its response, Okanogan PUD states that the May 2009 HPMP 
provides procedures for the majority of the issues raised by Interior 
and that, as provided for in the HPMP, Okanogan PUD would review the 
HPMP within 1 year of license issuance to address any concerns raised 
by the CRWG, including by Interior.
    As previously mentioned, the Washington SHPO concurred that a 
portion of the Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation Canal within the project's 
defined APE is considered ``non-contributing'' to other portions of the 
system that have previously been determined National Register eligible. 
However, the Washington SHPO recommends that the system be re-evaluated 
for National Register eligibility 5 to 10 years hence.

Our Analysis

    Okanogan PUD's May 2009 HPMP addresses many of Interior's 
recommendations and contains measures for the protection of historic 
properties within the defined Enloe Project APE. However, we discuss 
particular measures contained within the HPMP, and where appropriate, 
Interior's recommendations.
    The two APEs defined for the Enloe Project encompass all areas 
related to, or necessary for, the construction, operation, and 
maintenance of the entire proposed project. However, the May 2009 HPMP 
does not identify or discuss the side-channel enhancement site, 
including its defined APE. While no historic properties have been 
identified in this area, we find that inclusion of the side-channel 
enhancement site and a definition of its APE in the HPMP would ensure 
that measures applied to lands within the project boundary would also 
apply to lands within the side-channel enhancement site APE. 
Additionally, as recommended by Interior, the HPMP should include a 
process for reviewing and revising the APE, particularly where project-
related ground-disturbing activities may occur in the future. In 
particular, this provision would ensure that any design modification to 
the proposed side-channel enhancement site would be taken into account.
    Okanogan PUD's proposal to appoint an HPMP Coordinator would ensure 
that the requirements of the HPMP are followed. Annual reporting to 
agencies and the Colville on the status of cultural resources 
management over the course of the year would provide a regularly 
scheduled forum for parties to discuss the HPMP and provide comments. A 
periodic review process for the HPMP undertaken every 5 years would 
provide a basis for continued implementation of the HPMP. Interior 
recommended that the May 2009 HPMP be revised within 1 year of license 
issuance to address its recommendations. Interior's recommended 
timeframe should allow Okanogan PUD sufficient time to consult with 
Interior and the CRWG in order to revise the HPMP accordingly.
    Okanogan PUD's proposal to conduct training sessions as needed for 
staff involved with the public or involved in planning and 
implementation of actions potentially affecting cultural resources at 
the project would ensure that employees are regularly informed about 
issues, procedures, and protocols regarding cultural resource. 
Consulting with the Colville with regard to Okanogan PUD employee 
training would contribute toward staff understanding properties of 
traditional religious and cultural importance to the tribe.
    Okanogan PUD's implementation of review procedures during the 
planning of potential ground-disturbing activities, as well as 
protocols for inadvertent discovery of previously unknown cultural 
resources (as recommended by Interior), human remains, and emergency 
procedures as specified in its HPMP, would ensure that cultural 
resources are not inadvertently affected by project-related actions; 
and, therefore cultural resources and human remains would be 
appropriately addressed.
    While the May 2009 HPMP does not specifically contain a detailed 
discussion of public interpretation and education, HIST-03 includes a 
provision for installing public interpretive panels. Okanogan PUD's 
proposed measures REC-11 and REC-12 also provide for installing 
interpretive signs and an information board that would focus on the 
history of hydroelectric power, the falls, and the fishery resources. 
Including a provision in the HPMP to coordinate public information on 
archaeological and historic resources at the project with REC-11 and 
REC-12 interpretive signage could lead to an enhanced visitor 
experience and encourage protection of environmental and cultural 
resources.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to: (1) Maintain records relating to cultural 
resources located within the APE; (2)

[[Page 28596]]

ensure confidentiality of these records; (3) provide any recovered 
cultural materials to BLM for inclusion in its repository; and (4) 
consider donating historic materials recovered from the historic Enloe 
powerhouse to the Okanogan Historical Society or another group. This 
proposal would address Interior's recommendation regarding the 
collection of cultural resource materials and would ensure that such 
materials are properly conserved and also accessible, under properly 
controlled conditions, to those with appropriate research or cultural 
interests.
    Okanogan PUD's proposal to implement a long-term monitoring program 
at all sites within the project boundary APE would help determine if 
any observed effects are project-related. This would enable Okanogan 
PUD to determine the need for and frequency of future monitoring. It 
would also assist in the development of appropriate treatment measures 
if disturbances are identified as being related to project-related 
activities. As recommended by Interior, including a provision in the 
HPMP to develop a more detailed monitoring plan would ensure that 
monitoring is undertaken and in a way that documents and quantifies 
resulting data for consideration. This measure could also apply to the 
side channel enhancement site.
    Okanogan PUD determined that erosion has the potential to adversely 
affect site 45OK532 and that the site would also be adversely affected 
by road construction. In its HPMP, Okanogan PUD discusses the 
possibility of capping the site to protect it from road construction 
activities and use. A 1992 study by the Corps (Mathewson et al., 1992) 
found that burial of archaeological resources increases the vertical 
load on sites, causes changes in chemical characteristics (including 
pH) of soils, and increases the moisture content. These changes can 
affect the preservation of site components, particularly organic 
materials such as botanical and faunal remains. The Corps concluded 
that site burial ``* * * should be used only when preservation of the 
site by burial is ensured.'' If the processes that result from burial 
are deemed to be detrimental to the site components, other preservation 
techniques should be considered (Mathewson et al., 1992). While capping 
of site 45OK532 may be viewed as a protective measure, further 
consideration of this measure within the HPMP, particularly as it may 
relate to site preservation, would ensure that archaeological materials 
contained within the site are not inadvertently damaged over the long 
term.
    Okanogan PUD identifies measure ARCH-05 (Determine Potential 
Recreational Impacts to Archaeological Sites) and states that it is 
``discussing the proposed recreation plan with the CRWG to determine if 
there would be impacts on archaeological sites in the vicinity of the 
recreation facilities'' (Okanogan PUD, 2008a). Okanogan PUD further 
explains that the HPMP would specify necessary mitigation and treatment 
measures to protect prehistoric sites from recreational effects and 
that its staff would be provided with information about the potential 
for archaeological deposits to be found. While the HPMP includes 
employee training and a protocol for pre-project review, the HPMP does 
not specifically address measure ARCH-05 and it does not address 
proposed or future recreational improvements. Revision of the HPMP to 
specifically address recreational use and currently proposed or future 
project recreation sites would be consistent with ARCH-05 and would 
ensure that cultural sites are considered during recreation planning.
    Also, Okanogan PUD explains in its May 2009 HPMP that because site 
45OK566 is situated on a terrace outcrop above the river, the potential 
for project-related erosion at the site is limited. However, Okanogan 
PUD acknowledges that the site may also be affected by increased public 
use. The site sketch map contained within the site record depicts a 
foot path leading to the site; however, the HPMP concludes that there 
would be no adverse effects on site 45OK566 resulting from project 
operation. Absent information related to the assessment of effects at 
this site, it is uncertain how the determination of ``no adverse 
effects'' to this site was made. A discussion of this assessment within 
a revised HPMP and how it may related to measure ARCH-05 would provide 
clarification.
    In its HPMP, Okanogan PUD acknowledges that modifications to Enloe 
dam would affect this historic structure, but recommends that, if 
undertaken in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards 
for Rehabilitation, effects would not be adverse. Implementation of 
Okanogan PUD's proposed guidance contained within the HPMP with respect 
to construction and maintenance standards would ensure that the 
qualities of this property that make it eligible for the National 
Register are not diminished over the license term. However, in its 
HPMP, Okanogan PUD states that HAER documentation of Enloe dam has been 
previously undertaken, but does not discuss the purpose of the Enloe 
dam HAER documentation nor does it provide evidence of Washington SHPO 
or Park Service acceptance of the documentation as a resolution of an 
adverse effect. Typically, HAER documentation is completed as 
mitigation of an adverse effect on a historic property. If HAER 
documentation was undertaken to resolve such effects, and agency 
concurrence has been received, additional measures may not be 
necessary. Including a discussion in a revised HPMP regarding the 
purpose of HAER documentation and agency consultation would provide 
clarification.
    In section 4.2 of the HPMP, Okanogan PUD states that under this 
plan, the existing Enloe powerhouse would be demolished. However, in 
section 5.14 of the HPMP, Okanogan PUD explains that it is soliciting 
outside parties to assume ownership of the structure. Revision of the 
HPMP to correct and clarify Okanogan PUD's intent with regard to the 
powerhouse would be appropriate. Additionally, Appendix C of the HPMP 
states that the transfer, lease, or sale of property out of federal 
ownership without adequate and legally enforceable restrictions or 
conditions to ensure long-term preservation of the property's historic 
significance would be an adverse effect in accordance with the 
implementing regulations of the NHPA found at 36 CFR800.5(a)(2)(vii). 
Consequently, consultation with the CRWG regarding the resolution of 
adverse effects on the historic Enloe powerhouse prior to any transfer 
or demolition would ensure compliance with section 106.
    Two TCPs have been identified within the project boundary APE. In 
its Section 106 Technical Report, Okanogan PUD (2008b) states that 
short-term effects on one of the identified TCPs would not be adverse 
and that construction of the new powerhouse would have an adverse 
visual effect. In its HPMP, Okanogan PUD also implies that there would 
be a potential adverse effect on this resource as a result of any 
demolition activities at the historic Enloe powerhouse. While Okanogan 
PUD does not propose any measures to mitigate visual effects on this 
TCP in its HPMP, it proposes to monitor this resource during any 
powerhouse demolition activities. Inclusion of measures within the HPMP 
to mitigate adverse visual effects and a requirement to consult with 
the Colville prior to initiating demolition activities, in addition to 
monitoring, would ensure that this resource is addressed in accordance 
with section 106.

[[Page 28597]]

3.3.9 Socioeconomics
3.3.9.1 Affected Environment
    The City of Oroville is the nearest community, with an estimated 
population of 1,653 in 2000 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2009a). The 
U.S. Bureau of the Census reports that the top three industries in the 
City of Oroville in terms of employment were educational, health, and 
social services (18.2 percent); retail trade (17.1 percent); and 
agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining (11.2 percent).
    Table 19 presents population and other demographic data for the 
City of Oroville, Okanogan County, and for Washington from the U.S. 
Bureau of the Census.

          Table 19--Population Characteristics of the City of Oroville, Okanogan County, and Washington
                                  [Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2009a,b]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Private
                                    Population      Population        nonfarm         Median       Persons below
                                       2000        estimate 2008    employment       household     poverty level
                                                                       2007        income  2008   2008 (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Oroville................           1,653  ..............  ..............     \a\ $30,114        \a\ 28.9
Okanogan County.................          39,564          40,033           8,718          37,900            19.6
Washington......................       5,894,143       6,549,224   \b\ 2,501,684          58,081            11.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\1999 statistics.
\b\Includes data not distributed by county.

    The U.S. Census Bureau reports that in 2000 there were 
approximately 7.5 persons per square mile in Okanogan County and 88.6 
persons per square mile in Washington as a whole. Population increases 
between 2000 and 2008 have shown a slight 1.2 percent increase in 
Okanogan County (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2009b). The very slow 
growth in Okanogan County can be accounted for by the remoteness of 
most of the county from population centers.
3.3.9.2 Environmental Effects
    In terms of construction employment, Okanogan PUD estimates a small 
increase in engineering and construction management employment of 1 
person or 0.4 full-time equivalents (FTE) in year one, ramping up to 
3.5 FTE at the start of year two. It would peak at 4 FTE during that 
year, and then stabilize throughout year three at 3 FTE. Construction 
employment requirements begin at the start of year two, with 2.5 FTE, 
increasing to 46.5 FTE near the end of year two. Construction during 
year three would require 27 FTE at the start of the year, ramping down 
to 9 FTE by the end of the three-year construction phase.
    The Enloe Project would have an unmanned power station. The 
increased human-hours associated with the operation and maintenance of 
the project would be 8,000 hours (or approximately 4 FTE) per year. 
However, due to the ability of current Okanogan PUD staff to 
accommodate these needs, there would be no long-term increase in on-
site employment or payroll due to the operation of the project.
    The Enloe Project would benefit the local economy by providing a 
reliable source of power and by providing recreational opportunities. 
Okanogan PUD did not propose any measures specifically associated with 
socioeconomic resources.

Our Analysis

    Operation of the proposed project by Okanogan PUD would provide an 
economical source of power to the region, helping to support future 
economic growth. The additional spending associated with implementing 
various resource measures, such as the rehabilitation of degraded 
vegetation and the improvement of developed and dispersed recreation 
areas, would provide for some additional employment during the period 
of construction and monitoring.

3.4 No-Action Alternative

    Under the no-action alternative, the Enloe Project would not be 
constructed. There would be no changes to the physical, biological, or 
cultural resources of the area and electrical generation from the 
project would not occur. The power that would have been developed from 
a renewable resource would have to be replaced from nonrenewable fuels.

4.0 Developmental Analysis

    In this section, we look at the Enloe Project's use of the 
Similkameen River for hydropower purposes to see what effect various 
environmental measures would have on the project's costs and power 
generation. Under the Commission's approach to evaluating the economics 
of hydropower projects, as articulated in Mead Corp.,\41\ the 
Commission compares the current project to an estimate of the cost of 
obtaining the same amount of energy and capacity using a likely 
alternative source of power for the region (cost of alternative power). 
In keeping with Commission policy as described in Mead Corp., our 
economic analysis is based on current electric power cost conditions 
and does not consider future escalation of fuel prices in valuing the 
hydropower project's power benefits.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Mead Corporation, Publishing Paper Division, 72 FERC ] 
61,027 (July 13, 1995). In most cases, electricity from hydropower 
would displace some form of fossil-fueled generation, in which fuel 
cost is the largest component of the cost of electricity production.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For each of the licensing alternatives, our analysis includes an 
estimate of: (1) The cost of individual measures considered in the EA 
for the protection, mitigation and enhancement of environmental 
resources affected by the project; (2) the cost of alternative power; 
(3) the total project cost (i.e., for construction, operation, 
maintenance, and environmental measures); and (4) the difference 
between the cost of alternative power and total project cost. If the 
difference between the cost of alternative power and total project cost 
is positive, the project produces power for less than the cost of 
alternative power. If the difference between the cost of alternative 
power and total project cost is negative, the project produces power 
for more than the cost of alternative power. This estimate helps to 
support an informed decision concerning what is in the public interest 
with respect to a proposed license. However, project economics is only 
one of many public interest factors the Commission considers in 
determining whether, and under what conditions, to issue a license.

4.1 Power and Economic Benefits of the Project

    Table 20 summarizes the assumptions and economic information we use 
in our analysis. This information was provided

[[Page 28598]]

by Okanogan PUD in its license application. We find that the values 
provided by Okanogan PUD are reasonable for the purposes of our 
analysis. Cost items common to all alternatives include: Taxes and 
insurance costs; net investment (the total investment in power plant 
facilities remaining to be depreciated); estimated future capital 
investment required to maintain and extend the life of plant equipment 
and facilities; relicensing costs; normal operation and maintenance 
cost; and Commission fees. We do not include, in our analysis, any 
measures with minimal, zero, or unknown costs.

       Table 20--Parameters for the Economic Analysis of the Enloe
                          Hydroelectric Project
           [Source: Okanogan PUD, 2008a, as modified by Staff]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Parameter                              Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of analysis (years)............................                30
Initial construction cost, $\a\.......................        28,887,550
Operation and maintenance of project, $/year\b\.......           894,470
Energy value ($/MWh)\c\...............................             67.88
Capacity rate ($/kilowatt-year)\d\....................               157
Interest rate (%)\e\..................................               4.5
Discount rate (%)\f\..................................               4.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ License application, table D-1, adjusted to 2010 dollars.
\b\ License application, table D-1, adjusted to 2010 dollars.
\c\ License application, table D-4, total value divided by total average
  annual generation.
\d\ Staff based on Energy Information Administration Annual Outlook for
  2010. This value is based on the amortization and fixed operation and
  maintenance cost for a simple-cycle combustion turbine.
\e\ License application, table D-2.

4.2 Comparison of Alternatives

    Table 21 summarizes the installed capacity, annual generation, cost 
of alternative power, estimated total project cost, and difference 
between the cost of alternative power and total project cost for each 
of the alternatives considered in this EA: Okanogan PUD's proposal and 
the staff alternative.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ There are no mandatory conditions filed at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.2.1 No-Action Alternative
    Under the no-action alternative, the project would not be 
constructed as proposed. The dam is managed by the Okanogan PUD, but 
because there are no operational generating facilities, the project is 
not subject to a Commission license.

Table 21--Summary of Annual Cost of Alternative Power and Annual Project
      Cost for the Alternatives for the Enloe Hydroelectric Project
                             [Source: Staff]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Okanogan PUD's         Staff
                                          Proposal         Alternative
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installed capacity (MW).............               9.0               9.0
Annual generation (MWh).............            44,409            44,409
Dependable capacity (MW)............              1.14              1.14
Annual cost of alternative power....        $3,193,460        $3,193,460
($/MWh).............................             71.91             71.91
Annual project cost.................        $3,086,990        $3,109,540
($/MWh).............................             69.51             70.02
Difference between the cost of                $106,470           $83,920
 alternative power and project cost.
($/MWh).............................              2.40              1.89
------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.2.2 Okanogan PUD's Proposal
    Okanogan PUD proposes to construct a new hydroelectric project 
using the existing Enloe dam. Okanogan PUD also proposes to implement 
numerous environmental measures, as presented in table 23, prior to 
initial construction, during construction, and after construction once 
the proposed project is operational. Under Okanogan PUD's proposal, the 
project would have an installed capacity of 9 MW, and generate an 
average of 44,409 MWh of electricity annually. The average annual cost 
of alternative power would be $3,193,460, or $71.91/MWh. The average 
annual project cost would be $3,086,990, or $69.51/MWh. Overall, the 
project would produce power at a cost that is $106,470, or $2.40/MWh, 
less than the cost of alternative power.
4.2.3 Staff Alternative
    The staff alternative includes all of Okanogan PUD's proposed 
environmental measures except for its proposal to place boulder 
clusters in riffles or in plain-bed portions of the river and 
entrainment and resident fish monitoring. Additionally, staff made 
modifications and recommended additional measures. Table 22 shows the 
staff-recommended additions, deletions, and modifications to Okanogan 
PUD's proposed environmental protection and enhancement measures and 
the estimated cost of each. The staff alternative would have the same 
capacity and energy attributes as Okanogan PUD's proposal. Under the 
staff alternative, the average annual cost of alternative power would 
be

[[Page 28599]]

$3,193,460, or $71.91/MWh. The annual project cost would be $3,109,540, 
or $70.02/MWh. Overall, the project would produce power at a cost that 
is $83,920, or $1.89/MWh, less than the cost of alternative power.

4.3 Cost of Environmental Measures

    Table 22 gives the cost of each of the environmental enhancement 
measures considered in our analysis. We convert all costs to equal 
annual (levelized) values over a 30-year period of analysis to give a 
uniform basis for comparing the benefits of a measure to its cost.

  Table 22--Cost of Environmental Mitigation and Enhancement Measures Considered in Assessing the Environmental
                 Effects of Constructing and Operating the Proposed Enloe Hydroelectric Project
                                                 [Source: Staff]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Capital cost       Annual cost      Levelized annual
Enhancement/Mitigation measures          Entity             (2010$) \a\        (2010$) ;\a\      cost  (2010$)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Geology and Soils Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Develop and implement an      Okanogan PUD,.........  $21,510..........  $0...............  $1,460
 ESCP (WQ-06).                   Interior--10(j),......
                                 NMFS--10(j),..........
                                 Staff.................
2. Develop and implement a CSMP  Okanogan PUD, Staff...  80,660...........  0................  5,460
 (WQ-08).
3. Develop and implement a       Interior, Washington    5,000 \b\........  0................  340
 Spoil Disposal Plan.             DOE, Staff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Water and Water Quality
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Monitor water temperatures    Okanogan PUD,           0................  580..............  580
 at three locations for a         Interior--10(j),
 period of 5 years (WQ-01).       NMFS--10(j), Staff.
2. Provide aeration in the       Okanogan PUD, NMFS--    43,020...........  2,150............  5,060
 turbine draft tubes (WQ-03).     10(j), Staff.
3. Monitor TDG and DO at the     Okanogan PUD, Staff...  26,890...........  7,000 for 1st 5    3,850
 project intake and in the pool                                              years.
 below the falls for a period
 of 5 years (WQ-04).
4. Monitor DO at the project     NMFS..................  0................  7,000 for years 6- 5,500
 intake and in the pool below                                                30.
 the falls for the term of
 license.
5. Develop and file with the     Staff.................  10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 Commission, in consultation
 with the TRG, a water quality
 monitoring plan including:
 Selecting the monitoring
 locations; filing a report at
 the end of year 5 documenting
 the results of monitoring and
 recommendations for the need
 for continued monitoring
 development, and conducting
 water temperature, TDG, and DO
 monitoring for a period longer
 than 5 years if needed.
6. At project initiation,        Okanogan PUD, NMFS--    26,890...........  0................  1,820
 develop and implement the        10(j), Staff.
 Spill Plan including a
 hazardous substance plan (WQ-
 07).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Aquatic Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Implement a Blasting Plan     Okanogan PUD, Staff...  107,540..........  0................  7,280
 and use BMPs (FISH-01).
2. Place two boulder clusters    Okanogan PUD..........  64,520...........  0................  4,370
 in riffles or in flat sections
 of the river (FISH-02).
3. Ensure that logs and other    Okanogan PUD,           0................  4,300............  4,300
 large woody debris can pass      Interior--10(j),
 over the dam spillway during     Staff.
 the annual flood and, if
 needed, transport some large
 woody debris around the dam
 and place it in the river
 downstream of the dam to
 provide fish habitat (FISH-03).
4. Design and construct the      Okanogan PUD, Staff...  32,260...........  0................  2,180
 intake trashracks with a 1-
 inch bar spacing (FISH-04).

[[Page 28600]]

 
5. Design, construct, and file   Interior, Washington    16-24M...........  0................  1.1-1.6M
 detailed drawings of the         DFW.
 intake fish screen with a
 schedule to build the facility
 before commercial operation
 starts.
6. Monitor seasonal variation    Okanogan PUD, Interior  107,540..........  0................  7,280
 in entrainment susceptibility;
 observe trauma and mortality
 caused by entrainment, and
 monitor fish population
 distribution and abundance in
 the reservoir (FISH-05).
7. Install tailrace barrier      Okanogan PUD,           26,510...........  5,380............  7,180
 nets in the powerhouse draft     Interior--10(j),
 tubes including annual           NMFS--10(j),
 inspection and maintenance       Washington DFW--
 (FISH-06).                       10(j), Staff.
8. File detailed design          Okanogan PUD,           2,000 \b\........  0................  140
 drawings of the conical net      Interior--10(j),
 barrier at least 1 year before   NMFS--10(j),
 the start of land-disturbing     Washington DFW--
 or land-clearing activities.     10(j), Staff.
9. Monitor tailrace barriers     Okanogan PUD,           0................  1,240............  1,240
 with video cameras (FISH-07).    Interior--10(j),
                                  Staff.
10. Develop and implement a      Okanogan PUD,           5,000 \b\........  0................  340
 written operation plan for the   Interior--10(j),
 tailrace barriers.               NMFS--10(j), Staff.
11. Develop and implement a      Okanogan PUD,           10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 postconstruction evaluation      Interior--10(j),
 and monitoring plan for the      NMFS--10(j), Staff.
 tailrace barrier.
12. Develop and implement an     Okanogan PUD,           5,000 \b\........  0................  340
 inspection and maintenance       Interior--10(j),
 plan for the tailrace barrier.   NMFS--10(j), Staff.
13. Develop a powerhouse         Interior..............  5,000 \b\........  0................  340
 operation plan to provide 48
 hours of flow continuation in
 the event of emergency project
 shutdown.
14. Develop and implement a      Staff.................  10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 project operations and
 compliance monitoring plan.
15. Design and construct the     Okanogan PUD, Staff...  120,450..........  0................  8,150
 tailrace to avoid effects on
 fish (FISH-09).
16. Enhance an existing side     Okanogan PUD,           397,510..........  3,310............  30,210
 channel (FISH-10).               Interior--10(j),
                                  NMFS--10(j),
                                  Washington DFW--
                                  10(j), Staff.
17. Implement a gravel           Okanogan PUD,           0................  11,950...........  11,950
 supplementation program (FISH-   Interior--10(j),
 11).                             NMFS--10(j),
                                  Washington DFW--
                                  10(j), Staff.
18. File a Resident Fish         Interior..............  5,000 \d\........  50,000 \d\.......  50,340
 Habitat Management Plan that
 includes provisions for WQ-01,
 FISH-05, BOTA-01, -02, -04, -
 05, to stock sterile triploid
 trout, and to implement a fish
 habitat monitoring plan.
19. File a Fisheries             Washington DFW........  0................  50,000 \d\.......  50,000
 Enhancement Plan that includes
 provisions for FISH-10, FISH-
 11, and to stock sterile
 triploid trout.
20. File a Fisheries             Interior..............  0 \d\............  0 \d\............  0 \d\
 Enhancement Plan that includes
 provisions for FISH-03, FISH-
 10, and FISH-11.
21. Develop a biological review  Okanogan PUD,           16,130...........  10,750...........  11,840
 process which includes           Washington DFW, Staff.
 provisions for establishing a
 TRG to provide ongoing
 refinement and measure
 effectiveness of environmental
 measures (FISH-12).

[[Page 28601]]

 
22. Develop a fisheries          Okanogan PUD, Staff...  48,390...........  0................  3,280
 monitoring database for
 organizing and storing
 monitoring data related to
 aquatic resources for use by
 the TRG to monitor
 effectiveness of measures
 (FISH-13).
23. Develop an adaptive          Washington DFW........  10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 management plan within 1 year
 of license issuance for the
 protection and mitigation of
 impacts to fish and wildlife
 resources.
24. Conduct a paleolimnological  CRITFC................  100,000 \b\......  0................  6,770
 study of historical anadromy
 above Enloe dam.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Minimum Flow Proposal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Provide a minimum flow of 10  Okanogan PUD,           5,000 \b\........  37,610 \b\.......  37,940
 cfs year-round and 30 cfs from   Washington DFW,
 mid-July to mid-September,       Washington DOE, Staff.
 monitor temperature and DO,
 select an appropriate minimum
 flow release location, and
 make appropriate project
 modifications to provide
 minimum flow releases for the
 bypassed reach.
2. Determine appropriate         Okanogan PUD,           5,000 \b\........  0................  340
 thresholds for downramping       Washington DFW,
 rates after emergency shutdown   Washington DOE, Staff.
 immediately downstream of
 Enloe dam.
3. Establish minimum instream    American Rivers et al.  0................  1,295,830 \b\....  1,295,830
 flows in the bypassed reach
 varying from 400 cfs to 3,400
 cfs depending on the month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Terrestrial Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Implement the Vegetation      Okanogan PUD,           32,260...........  0................  2,180
 Plan, including goals, the       Interior--10(j),
 species to be used, methods,     Washington DFW--
 and benchmarks of success for    10(j), Staff.
 botanical resources (BOTA-01).
2. Develop a Vegetation          Interior--10(j),        10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 Resource Management Plan.        Washington DFW--10(j).
3. Develop a Wildlife            Interior, Washington    10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 Management Plan including        DFW.
 planting native riparian
 trees, grasses, and shrubs.
4. Plant riparian vegetation     Okanogan PUD,           32,260...........  0................  2,180
 along the west and east banks    Interior--10(j),
 of the reservoir shoreline       Washington DFW--
 (BOTA-02).                       10(j), Staff.
5. Return existing shoreline     Okanogan PUD,           376,390..........  1,450............  26,920
 road to natural conditions,      Interior--10(j),
 eliminate the current            Washington DFW--
 interruption between the         10(j), Staff.
 shoreline and upland habitat,
 relocate access road segment,
 and develop trail to provide
 recreation access to the river
 below the dam on the east bank
 (BOTA-03 and part of REC-13).
6. Plant woody riparian species  Okanogan PUD,           16,130...........  0................  1,090
 in the riparian area along the   Interior--10(j),
 abandoned road corridor (BOTA-   Washington DFW--
 04).                             10(j), Staff.
7. Plant woody riparian          Okanogan PUD,           21,510...........  0................  1,460
 vegetation along the east and    Interior--10(j),
 west banks of the reservoir      Washington DFW--
 downstream of Shanker's Bend     10(j), Staff.
 (BOTA-05).

[[Page 28602]]

 
8. Install grazing control       Okanogan PUD,           26,890...........  0................  1,820
 measures including fencing       Interior--10(j),
 (BOTA-06).                       Washington DFW--
                                  10(j), Staff.
9. Monitor restored areas        Okanogan PUD, Staff...  16,130...........  2,900............  3,990
 annually for 5 years and
 replant as necessary, and
 provide annual reports of the
 monitoring results (BOTA-07).
10. Additional monitoring of     Interior--10(j),        100,000 \b\......  0................  6,770
 restored areas.                  Washington DFW--10(j).
11. Employ BMPs including        Okanogan PUD,           2,690............  0................  180
 measures such as flagging and    Interior--10(j),
 temporarily fencing any          Washington DFW--
 wetland and riparian             10(j), Staff.
 vegetation in the vicinity of
 the project, and limiting
 construction and maintenance-
 related disturbance of
 sensitive habitats to the
 extent possible (BOTA-08).
12. Develop and implement an     Okanogan PUD, Staff...  5,380............  0................  360
 environmental training program
 (BOTA-09).
13. Provide a biological         Okanogan PUD,           77,430...........  0................  5,240
 monitor during construction      Interior--10(j),
 (BOTA-10).                       Washington DFW--
                                  10(j), Staff.
14. Implement the Noxious Weed   Okanogan PUD,           13,980...........  1,340............  2,290
 Control Program (BOTA-11).       Interior--10(j),
                                  Washington DFW--
                                  10(j), Staff.
15. Survey disposal sites and    Okanogan PUD, Staff...  3,230............  0................  220
 control noxious weeds by
 implementing control measures
 prior to spoil disposal (BOTA-
 12).
16. Hydroseed disposal sites     Okanogan PUD, Staff...  14,200...........  0................  960
 using native upland species
 (BOTA-13).
17. Conduct survey for Ute       Okanogan PUD..........  0................  1,820............  1,820
 ladies'-tresses prior to,
 during, and postconstruction
 (BOTA-14) for 3 years.
18. Develop an Ute ladies'-      Staff.................  10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 tresses plan after agencies
 consultation, and if present
 in project areas, develop plan
 to avoid or minimize effects.
19. Conduct survey for Ute       Interior--10(j),        70,000 \b\.......  0................  4,740
 ladies'-tresses within 1 year    Washington DFW--10(j).
 of license issuance, and every
 5 years thereafter.
20. GIS mapping and development  Interior..............  15,000 \b\.......  0................  1,020
 of a digital database for
 sensitive species, noxious
 weeds, and habitat restoration
 sites.
21. Place the project            Okanogan PUD,           540..............  0................  40
 transmission line in location    Interior--10(j),
 to reduce adverse effects of     Washington DFW--
 the line on raptors and other    10(j), Staff.
 birds (WILD-01).
22. Concentrate construction     Okanogan PUD,           134,430..........  0................  9,100
 activities to occur in summer    Interior--10(j),
 and early fall (WILD-02).        Washington DFW--
                                  10(j), Staff.
23. Conduct pre-disposal site    Okanogan PUD, Staff...  3,230............  0................  220
 survey for wildlife and time
 clearing vegetation at spoil
 disposal sites (WILD-03).
24. Install nest boxes for       Interior, Washington    25/box...........  0................  minimal
 small birds in areas that lack   DFW.
 snags or natural tree cavities.
25. Retain dead tress and        Interior, Washington    10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 install 10 artificial perch      DFW, Staff.
 poles along the reservoir
 shoreline.
26. Install barriers on          Interior, Washington    2,000 \b\........  0................  140
 irrigation canal tunnels to      DFW.
 prevent human entry while
 still allowing use by bats.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 28603]]

 
                                        Recreation and Land Use Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Revise and implement the      Okanogan PUD,           91,410 \c\.......  0................  6,190
 Fence Plan in coordination       Interior, Staff.
 with the Recreation Management
 Plan to include (a)
 installation of barricades and
 fencing on the east side of
 the dam and the area below the
 dam; (b) use of non-barbed
 wire at the recreation area;
 and (c) installation of a
 stock watering tank north of
 the proposed recreation site
 as an alternative source of
 drinking water for all grazing
 cattle with rights to this
 area (REC-01).
2. Provide recreation access     Okanogan PUD,           5,000............  2,000............  2,340
 below Enloe dam on the east      Interior, Staff.
 bank by developing a trail to
 the river below the dam (REC-
 02).
3. Transfer to Okanogan County   Okanogan PUD,           10,750...........  0................  730
 ownership rights to the          Interior, Staff.
 trestle bridge that is located
 on the west side of the river
 with certain conditions (REC-
 03).
4. Improve the existing          Okanogan PUD,           80,660...........  0................  5,460
 informal boat ramp located on    Interior, Staff.
 the east bank upstream of the
 dam (REC-04).
5. Clean up and restore wooded   Okanogan PUD,           10,750...........  0................  730
 area on east bank of the         Interior, Staff.
 reservoir (REC-05).
6. Develop an interpretive       Okanogan PUD,           5,380............  0................  360
 publication including a map      Interior, Staff.
 illustrating public access and
 recreation sites (REC-06).
7. Remove existing trash and     Okanogan PUD,           5,380............  1,610............  1,970
 conduct annual cleanup           Interior, Staff.
 activities (REC-07).
8. Develop parking area and      Okanogan PUD,           107,540..........  0................  7,280
 install a vault toilet on the    Interior, Staff.
 east bank and upstream of
 Enloe dam (REC-08).
9. Install picnic tables near    Okanogan PUD,           16,130...........  0................  1,090
 the parking area taking          Interior, Staff.
 advantage of existing trees
 for shading (REC-09).
10. Develop primitive campsites  Okanogan PUD,           26,890...........  0................  1,820
 near the parking and picnic      Interior, Staff.
 area (REC-10).
11. Install one interpretive     Okanogan PUD,           5,380............  0................  360
 sign near the parking and        Interior, Staff.
 picnic area and one sign near
 the abutment of the old
 powerhouse access bridge (REC-
 11).
12. Place an information board   Okanogan PUD,           2,690............  0................  180
 near Enloe dam (REC-12).         Interior, Staff.
13. Finalize and implement the   Okanogan PUD,           43,020...........  0................  2,910
 Recreation Management Plan       Interior, Staff.
 (REC-13).
14. Implement major              Interior..............  125,000 \b\......  15,000 \b\.......  23,460
 recreational development at
 the BLM-owned Miner's Flat
 site and bring into project
 boundary.
15. Develop a formal boater      BLM, Staff............  35,000 \b\.......  1,000 \b\........  3,370
 take-out area at Miner's Flat,
 upgrade the access roads to
 the take-out if necessary, and
 include approximately 1 acre
 on which the take-out would be
 located within the project
 boundary.
16. Conduct recreation           Interior, Staff.......  0................  5,000 \b\........  5,000
 monitoring and provide
 Recreation Management Plan
 updates.

[[Page 28604]]

 
17. Provide for recreation site  Interior..............  0................  50,000 \b\.......  50,000
 grounds maintenance.
18. Rebuild the footbridge       Interior..............  10,000 \b\.......  500 \b\..........  1,180
 across the Similkameen River.
19. Develop and post a snow      Staff.................  1,000 \b\........  0................  70
 plowing schedule annually for
 the project access road.
20. Remove the small,            BLM...................  2,500 \b\........  0................  170
 deteriorated, privately-owned
 pump house at the north end of
 the proposed Enloe dam
 recreation area.
21. Remove the one small,        BLM, Staff............  2,500 \b\........  0................  170
 deteriorated building on
 Okanogan PUD land at the north
 end of the proposed Enloe dam
 recreation area.
22. Maintain the existing signs  Okanogan PUD, Staff...  10,750...........  2,690............  3,420
 and system of safety cables
 and grab ropes above the dam,
 install canoe/kayak take-out
 signs, install dam safety/
 warning signs for boaters, and
 install a log boom access the
 powerhouse intake channel to
 protect boaters (SAFETY-01).
23. Identify options for         Okanogan PUD, Staff...  10,750...........  0................  730
 preventing public access to
 the old powerhouse (SAFETY-03).
24. Develop and implement the    Okanogan PUD,           5,000 \b\........  0................  340
 Safety During Construction       Interior, Staff.
 Plan.
25. Develop and implement a Law  Interior..............  5,000 \b\........  15,000 \b\.......  15,340
 Enforcement, Fire, and
 Emergency Services Plan.
26. Develop a Fire Suppression   Staff.................  2,000 \b\........  5,000 \b\........  5,140
 Program.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Aesthetic Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Use visually-compatible       Okanogan PUD,           10,750...........  0................  730
 colors and building materials    Interior, Staff.
 for construction (AES-01).
2. Consult with the Colville     Okanogan PUD,           21,510...........  0................  1,460
 during restoration activities    Interior, Staff.
 (AES-02).
3. Revise and implement the      Interior, Staff.......  5,000 \b\........  0................  340
 Aesthetics Management Plan,
 including provisions of AES-
 01, AES-02, and AES-04, and
 consultation with BLM on the
 revision of the aesthetic
 analysis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Cultural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Solicit a new owner of the    Okanogan PUD,           5,380............  0................  360
 existing historic Enloe          Interior, Staff.
 powerhouse within 4 years from
 issuance of a license (HIST-
 01).
2. Allow at least 5 years        Interior..............  4,390 \b\........  0................  300
 during which Okanogan PUD
 would solicit and review
 offers to parties that might
 be interested in acquiring the
 historic Enloe powerhouse.
3. If a qualified owner is not   Okanogan PUD, Staff...  129,050..........  0................  8,730
 identified for the existing
 historic powerhouse, consult
 with the CRWG, which includes
 the Commission, prior to
 demolition of the historic
 Enloe powerhouse (HIST-02).

[[Page 28605]]

 
4. Install interpretive panels   Okanogan PUD,           26,890...........  0................  1,820
 about the historic powerhouse    Interior, Staff.
 (HIST-03).
5. Review and reach agreement    Okanogan PUD..........  5,000 \b\........  0................  340
 on the May 2009 HPMP and
 incorporate information into a
 PA (HIST-04).
6. Monitor effects of shoreline  Okanogan PUD,           69,900...........  0................  4,730
 fluctuations on archaeological   Interior, Staff.
 sites in shoreline areas, and
 mitigate, as needed (ARCH-01).
7. Avoid known National          Okanogan PUD,           16,130...........  0................  1,090
 Register-eligible                Interior, Staff.
 archaeological sites to
 prevent damage during
 construction (ARCH-02).
8. Monitor eligible sites        Okanogan PUD,           20,000 \b\.......  0................  1,350
 during construction activities   Interior, Staff.
 to avoid damage to these sites
 (ARCH-03).
9. Develop and implement an      Okanogan PUD,           16,130...........  0................  1,090
 inadvertent discovery plan if    Interior, Staff.
 a site is discovered during
 construction and include
 training of staff and
 construction workers about the
 potential for discovery of
 archaeological deposits (ARCH-
 04).
10. Determine if there would be  Okanogan PUD,           10,000 \b\.......  0................  680
 effects on archaeological        Interior, Staff.
 sites in the vicinity of
 recreation facilities (ARCH-
 05).
11. Revise the May 2009 HPMP     Interior, Staff.......  16,000 \e\.......  10,000 \e\.......  11,080
 (as identified in section 3).
12. Include in the revised HPMP  Staff.................  52,000 \b\.......  5,000 \b\........  8,520
 provisions for: (a) Further
 consideration of capping site
 45OK532; (b) a description of
 the proposed side-channel
 enhancement site; (c) two
 separate defined APEs; (d)
 consultation with the CRWG
 regarding the resolution of
 adverse effects on the
 historic Enloe powerhouse; and
 (e) re-evaluating the Oroville-
 Tonasket Irrigation Canal for
 National Register-eligibility.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Unless otherwise noted, all cost estimates are from Okanogan PUD.
\b\ Cost estimated by Staff.
\c\ Cost estimated by Okanogan PUD and Staff.
\d\ Cost estimated by Staff and includes only addition measures not proposed by Okanogan PUD.
\e\ This staff-estimated cost includes all of the revisions to the HPMP that Interior recommends. Staff does not
  recommend that Okanogan PUD needs to allow 5 years to solicit entities that might be interested in acquiring
  the historic Enloe powerhouse; there is no additional cost for this measure.

5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1 Comparison of Alternatives

    In this section we compare the development and non-developmental 
effects of Okanogan PUD's proposal and Okanogan PUD's proposal as 
modified by staff (staff alternative).
    We estimate the annual generation of the project under the two 
alternatives identified above. Our analysis shows that the annual 
generation would be 44,409 MWh for the proposed action and the staff 
alternative.
    We summarize the environmental effects of the action alternatives 
in Table 23.

[[Page 28606]]

    Table 23--Summary of Key Differences in the Potential Effects of
            Okanogan PUD's Proposal and the Staff Alternative
                             [Source: Staff]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Okanogan PUD
       Resource/issue               proposal          Staff alternative
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spoil Disposal Plan.........  No provisions for     Spoil Disposal Plan
                               spoil disposal..      to address disposal/
                                                     storage of waste
                                                     soil and/or rock
                                                     materials (spoils)
                                                     generated by road
                                                     maintenance, slope
                                                     failures, and
                                                     construction
                                                     projects.
Water Quality...............  Reduced TDG from      Same as Okanogan
                               diversion of water    PUD's proposal, but
                               around falls, and     with Water Quality
                               adequate DO from      Monitoring Plan to
                               aeration of the       provide more
                               draft tube            specificity and
                               downstream.           oversight to ensure
                               Adequate              intended results.
                               temperature and DO
                               in bypassed reach
                               from minimum flows.
                               Adequate levels
                               ensured by
                               monitoring, with
                               potential for
                               additional
                               measures.
                               Protections from
                               erosion and
                               sedimentation
                               during construction.
Project Operations and        Protection of         Same as Okanogan
 Compliance Monitoring Plan.   aquatic,              PUD's proposal, but
                               recreation, and       with Project
                               aesthetics            Operations and
                               resources from run-   Compliance
                               of-river operation,   Monitoring Plan to
                               minimum flows in      further define
                               the bypassed reach,   protective
                               and ramping rates     operations and
                               both in the project   ensure compliance.
                               tailrace and in the
                               bypassed reach.
Aquatic Resources...........  Potential minor       Same as Okanogan
                               losses of fish from   PUD's proposal, but
                               blasting and          without further
                               increased turbidity   evaluation of
                               and sedimentation     potential effects
                               during                to resident
                               construction.         fishery, and no
                               Enhanced anadromous   potential limited
                               fish habitat          benefit to
                               downstream of         whitefish or
                               project (including    adverse effects
                               critical habitat      from boulder
                               for threatened UCR    placement in river
                               steelhead) due to     upstream of
                               decrease in TDG and   project.
                               maintenance of
                               adequate DO levels
                               and temperature,
                               enhanced side
                               channel habitat,
                               woody debris
                               transfer
                               downstream, gravel
                               augmentation, and
                               new riparian
                               vegetation. Reduced
                               aquatic habitat in
                               short bypassed
                               reach for resident
                               fish. Minor losses
                               to fish
                               entrainment, with
                               further evaluation
                               of potential
                               effects to resident
                               fishery. Potential
                               limited benefits to
                               whitefish in river
                               upstream of
                               project, but
                               potential negative
                               effect on
                               recreational
                               boating and water
                               temperatures.
Raptor and Other Avian        Retention of non-     Same as Okanogan
 Perching Habitat.             hazard dead trees     PUD's proposal, but
                               along the reservoir.  with addition of 10
                                                     artificial perch
                                                     poles along the
                                                     reservoir
                                                     shoreline.
Vegetation..................  Vegetation Plan and   Same as Okanogan
                               control of noxious    PUD's proposal, but
                               weeds.                with additional
                                                     oversight.
Ute Ladies'-Tresses Plan....  Protection of Ute     Same as Okanogan
                               Ladies'-Tresses       PUD's proposal, but
                               during initial        protection measures
                               construction and      postconstruction if
                               continued             warranted.
                               monitoring.
Recreation Management Plan..  Recreation            Same as Okanogan
                               Management Plan,      PUD's proposal, but
                               including numerous    with additional
                               measures to protect   provisions for fire
                               and enhance           suppression,
                               recreation at the     monitoring to
                               project. Potential    ensure resource
                               negative effect on    protection, added
                               recreational          assurance of O&M of
                               boating in river      the entire length
                               upstream of project   of the public
                               from boulder          access road from
                               placement.            the Loomis-Oroville
                                                     Road to Enloe dam
                                                     (5 acres),
                                                     additional river
                                                     access take-out
                                                     point at Miner's
                                                     Flat, and removal
                                                     of one small,
                                                     deteriorated
                                                     building. No
                                                     potential negative
                                                     effect on
                                                     recreational
                                                     boating from
                                                     boulder placement
                                                     in river upstream
                                                     from project.
Aesthetics..................  Aesthetics            Same as Okanogan
                               Management Plan,      PUD's proposal, but
                               including numerous    with additional
                               measures to address   provisions to
                               aesthetics, and new   ensure oversight
                               riparian vegetation   and compliance, and
                               enhancing             ensure other
                               appearance of         resource measures
                               shoreline over        do not detract
                               existing condition    significantly from
                               with trees lost to    aesthetics.
                               fire. Restoration     Additionally,
                               of a shoreline road   removal of a
                               to a natural          deteriorated
                               condition.            building.
                               Reduction of flows
                               in short bypassed
                               reach and over
                               falls.
Cultural Resources..........  May 2009 HPMP.......  Same as proposed,
                                                     but with greater
                                                     detail, evaluation,
                                                     consultation, and
                                                     oversight to ensure
                                                     protection of
                                                     cultural resources.
Consultation and Commission   Limited consultation  Oversight of
 approval.                     and Commission        resource plans to
                               approvals for plans.  ensure intended
                                                     results.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

5.2 Comprehensive Development and Recommended Alternative

    Sections 4(e) and 10(a)(1) of the FPA require the Commission to 
give equal consideration to all uses of the waterway on which a project 
is located. When we review a proposed hydropower project, we consider 
the water quality, fish and wildlife, recreation, cultural, and other 
non-developmental values of the involved waterway equally with its 
electric energy and other developmental values. In deciding whether, 
and under what conditions a hydropower project should be licensed, the 
Commission must determine that the project would be best adapted to a 
comprehensive plan for improving or developing the waterway. This 
section contains the basis for, and a summary of, our recommendations 
for licensing the Enloe Project. We weigh the costs and benefits of our

[[Page 28607]]

recommended alternative against other proposed measures.
Recommended Alternative
    Based on our independent review and evaluation of the environmental 
and economic effects of the proposed action, the proposed action with 
additional staff-recommended measures, and the no-action 
alternative,\43\ we recommend the proposed action with staff-
recommended measures as the preferred alternative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ BLM stated that it would require Okanogan PUD to remove the 
dam and all associated facilities from the public lands under the 
existing right-of-way permit if a license is be issued. We discussed 
dam removal under cumulative effects Section 3.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We recommend the staff alternative because: (1) Issuance of a new 
license would allow Okanogan PUD to construct and operate the project 
as a beneficial and dependable source of electrical energy; (2) the 9.0 
MW of electric capacity available comes from a renewable resource which 
does not contribute to atmospheric pollution; and (3) the recommended 
environmental measures would protect water quality, enhance fish and 
wildlife resources, protect cultural resources, and improve public use 
of the project's recreational facilities and resources.

Measures Proposed by Okanogan PUD

    Based on our environmental analysis of Okanogan PUD's proposal 
discussed in section 3 and the costs discussed in section 4, we 
conclude that the following measures proposed by Okanogan PUD would 
protect and enhance environmental resources and would be worth the 
cost. Therefore, we recommend including these measures in any license 
issued for the project.
     Develop and implement an ESCP to minimize the effects of 
construction, repair, and operation of the dam and intake, penstocks, 
powerhouse, tailrace, impoundment, access roads, powerline, and 
construction camp (WQ-06).
     Develop and implement a CSMP to minimize sediment 
disturbance and maximize sediment containment during construction (WQ-
08).
     Operate the project in a run-of-river mode so that there 
are no detectable changes in flows below Similkameen Falls (FISH-08) 
and avoid flow fluctuations that might affect downstream resources by 
complying with ramping rate restrictions as recommended by resource 
agencies.
     Monitor water temperatures at three locations for a period 
of 5 years to determine if the operation of the new crest gates causes 
an increase in the water temperatures when compared with upstream of 
the reservoir (WQ-01) (as modified below).
     Design the powerhouse tailrace so that it discharges to 
and circulates water in the plunge pool downstream of Similkameen 
Falls, preventing stagnation and consequently water quality degradation 
of the pool habitat (WQ-02).
     Provide aeration in the powerhouse turbine draft tubes 
during low flow summer months (WQ-03).
     Monitor total TDG and DO at the project intake and in the 
pool below Similkameen Falls for a period of 5 years to assess TDG and 
DO levels under project operations (WQ-04) (as modified below).
     Design a broad, shallow intake structure and channel to 
minimize sediment disturbance from project construction and operation 
in the reservoir near the intake (WQ-05).
     Develop and implement at project initiation a Spill Plan 
to reduce potential effects from accidental spills when heavy machinery 
is operating near the river and reservoir (WQ-07).
     Implement the Blasting Plan and use BMPs to avoid and 
minimize potential blasting effects on aquatic resources, including 
federally listed or sensitive species, associated with blasting (FISH-
01).
     Ensure that logs and other large woody debris can pass 
over the dam spillway during the annual flood and, if needed, transport 
some large woody debris around the dam and place it in the river 
downstream of the dam to provide fish habitat (FISH-03).
     Design the intake trashrack with 1-inch bar spacing so 
that smaller fish would be able to pass safely through the trashrack 
and larger fish would be discouraged or prevented from passing through 
the trashracks and turbines (FISH-04).
     Install tailrace barrier nets in the powerhouse draft 
tubes to prevent fish in the tailrace from swimming upstream into the 
draft tubes during low flows and maintain the nets (FISH-06).
     Monitor barrier nets with video cameras to observe if 
adult salmonids are able to enter the draft tubes past the barrier nets 
(FISH-07). Develop and implement a written operation plan, a 
postconstruction evaluation and monitoring plan, and an inspection and 
maintenance plan to ensure that the tailrace barrier operates 
effectively.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Okanogan PUD proposed these additional plans as modified 
(April 9, 2010) from NMFS recommendations (February 26, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Design and locate the tailrace in an area to avoid effects 
on fish that use the plunge pool below Similkameen Falls (FISH-09).
     Enhance an existing side channel to improve spawning, 
rearing, and summer thermal refugia downstream of the powerhouse 
tailrace (FISH-10).
     Implement a gravel supplementation program to increase the 
amount of gravel in the river downstream of Enloe dam and improve 
spawning habitat (FISH-11).
     Develop a biological review process which includes 
establishing a TRG to provide ongoing refinement and evaluate 
effectiveness of environmental measures (FISH-12).
     Develop a fisheries monitoring database for organizing and 
storing monitoring data related to aquatic resources for use by the TRG 
to monitor effectiveness of measures. (FISH-13).
     Provide minimum flows of 30 cfs from mid-July to mid-
September, and 10 cfs rest of the year in the bypassed reach for 
resident fish using the plunge pools.
     Monitor DO and water temperature in the bypassed reach for 
a period of time postconstruction to be determined in consultation with 
the TRG, and adopt an adaptive management program to enhance DO and 
water temperatures should monitoring indicate that state water quality 
standards are not being met (as modified below).
     Determine appropriate thresholds for downramping rates in 
the bypassed reach based on monitoring and field observations prior to 
operations (as modified below).
     Select an appropriate minimum flow release location in 
consultation with fisheries resource agencies (Washington DOE, 
Washington DFW, Interior, NMFS, BLM, and the Colville), and make 
appropriate project modifications to provide minimum flow releases for 
the bypassed reach (as modified below).
     Implement the Vegetation Plan to minimize effects on 
riparian and wetland vegetation, including goals, the species to be 
used, methods, and benchmarks of success for botanical resources (BOTA-
01) (as modified below).\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ The Vegetation Plan (BOTA-01) contains the measures BOTA-2 
through BOTA-7, BOTA-11, REC-01, and AES-04.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Plant riparian vegetation along the west and east banks of 
the reservoir shoreline to mitigate the temporary loss of habitat due 
to higher reservoir levels while fringe riparian vegetation establishes 
along the new water line (BOTA-02).
     Return the existing shoreline road to natural conditions 
after project construction to improve wildlife habitat along the 
reservoir and eliminate the current interruption between the

[[Page 28608]]

shoreline and upland habitat (BOTA-03, also analyzed as part of REC-
13).
     Plant woody riparian species in the riparian area along 
the abandoned road corridor (BOTA-04).
     Plant woody riparian vegetation along the east and west 
banks of the reservoir downstream of Shanker's Bend and upstream of the 
reservoir (BOTA-05).
     Install grazing control measures, including fencing, to 
protect riparian plantings and sensitive areas from cattle grazing 
(BOTA-06, also analyzed as part of REC-1).
     Monitor restored areas annually for 5 years and then once 
again at 8 years, and plant additional willows if performance criteria 
are not met; provide annual reports of the monitoring results to the 
Corps and Washington DOE (BOTA-07) (as modified below).
     Employ BMPs to protect riparian and wetland vegetation, 
including measures such as flagging and temporarily fencing any wetland 
and riparian vegetation in the vicinity of the project that would 
reduce or avoid accidental impacts, and limiting construction and 
maintenance-related disturbance of sensitive habitats to the extent 
possible to protect these resources (BOTA-08).
     Develop and implement an environmental training program to 
inform employees and contractor employees who work on the project site 
or related facilities during construction and operation about the 
sensitive biological resources associated with the project area (BOTA-
09).
     Provide a biological monitor to check construction sites 
on a weekly schedule to ensure that protected areas are not disturbed 
and that fencing and other control measures are intact (BOTA-10).
     Implement the Noxious Weed Control Program to control 
weeds along roads and construction sites (BOTA-11).
     Survey disposal sites and control noxious weeds by 
implementing control measures prior to spoil disposal (included in 
Okanogan PUD, 2009d) (BOTA-12).
     Hydroseed disposal sites using native upland species, 
following completion of spoil disposal (included in Okanogan PUD, 
2009d) (BOTA-13).
     Place and install the project transmission line to 
minimize effects on raptors and other birds (WILD-01).
     Concentrate construction activities to occur in summer and 
early fall to minimize effects on overwintering birds and bald eagles 
(WILD-02).
     Conduct pre-disposal site survey for wildlife and time the 
clearing of vegetation at spoil disposal sites to minimize wildlife 
impacts (WILD-03), (included in Okanogan PUD, 2009d).
     Conduct surveys for Ute ladies'-tresses prior to, during, 
and postconstruction to either confirm that the species does not occur 
in areas affected by the project or guide the development of avoidance 
or mitigative measures (BOTA-14) (as modified below).
     Revise and implement the Recreation Management Plan which 
includes 12 measures for recreation and four measures for safety of and 
access to the project areas (REC-13) (as modified below).
     Revise and implement the Fence Plan in coordination with 
the Recreation Management Plan to include: (a) Installation of 
barricades and fencing on the east side of the dam and the area below 
the dam; (b) use of non-barbed wire at the recreation area; and (c) 
installation of a stock watering tank north of the proposed recreation 
site as an alternative source of drinking water for all grazing cattle 
with rights to this area (REC-01).
     Provide public access below Enloe dam on the east bank by 
developing a trail to the river below the dam (REC-02).
     Transfer to Okanogan County ownership rights to the 
trestle bridge for the development of a future public trail located on 
the west side of the river downstream of the dam with certain 
conditions (REC-03).
     Improve the existing informal boat ramp located on the 
east bank upstream of the dam (REC-04).
     Clean up and restore the wooded area on the east bank of 
the reservoir (REC-05).
     Develop an interpretive publication, in collaboration with 
Okanogan County, the Water Trail Committee, and other interested 
parties, including a map illustrating public access and recreation 
sites (REC-06).
     Remove existing trash and conduct annual cleanup 
activities within the wooded area on the east bank of the reservoir and 
along the OTID Ditch Road leading from the Loomis-Oroville Road to the 
dam site (REC-07).
     Develop an accessible parking area and install a vault 
toilet on the east bank and upstream of Enloe dam (REC-08).
     Install picnic tables, at least one of which should 
incorporate universal design principles, near the parking area taking 
advantage of existing trees for shading (REC-09).
     Develop primitive campsites near the parking and picnic 
area (REC-10).
     At a minimum, install one interpretive sign near the 
parking and picnic area and one sign near the abutment of the old 
powerhouse access bridge, below Similkameen Falls (REC-11).
     Place an information board near Enloe dam to depict public 
access areas and information concerning visitor use of the project area 
(REC-12).
     Maintain the existing signs and system of safety cables 
and grab ropes above the dam, install dam safety/warning signs for 
boaters, and install a log boom across the powerhouse intake channel to 
protect boaters (SAFETY-01).
     Allow limited public access to the project during 
construction (SAFETY-02).
     Coordinate with BLM and other land owners, as appropriate, 
to identify options for preventing public access to the old powerhouse 
(SAFETY-03).
     Develop and implement a Safety During Construction Plan.
     Implement the Aesthetics Management Plan (as modified 
below), including:
    [cir] Using visually-compatible colors and building materials for 
construction occurring on the east bank (AES-01).
    [cir] Consulting with the Colville and other stakeholders during 
restoration activities (AES-02).
    [cir] Using non-reflective surfaces where possible during 
construction (AES-03).
    [cir] Grading and repairing all slopes where buildings are removed 
and plant native grasses and other riparian vegetation (AES-04).
     Solicit a new owner for the existing historic powerhouse 
(HIST-01).
     If a qualified owner is not identified for the existing 
historic powerhouse, demolish the existing historic powerhouse and 
create an interpretive site (HIST-02).
     Install interpretive panels about the existing historic 
powerhouse (HIST-03).
     Review and reach agreement on the draft HPMP and 
incorporate information into a PA (HIST-04) (as modified below).
     Monitor effects of shoreline fluctuations on 
archaeological sites in shoreline areas, and mitigate, as needed. 
(ARCH-01).
     Avoid known National Register-eligible archaeological 
sites to prevent effects during construction (ARCH-02).
     Monitor eligible sites during construction activities to 
avoid effects on these sites (ARCH-03).
     Develop and implement an inadvertent discovery plan, 
specifying required actions and procedures if a site is discovered 
during construction and including training staff and construction 
workers about the potential for discovery of archaeological deposits 
(ARCH-04).

[[Page 28609]]

     Determine if there would be effects on archaeological 
sites in the vicinity of recreational facilities (ARCH-05).

Additional Staff-Recommended Measures

    We recommend the measures described above, along with nine 
additional staff-recommended measures/modifications. The additional 
staff-recommended measures include the following: (1) A spoils disposal 
plan; (2) consultation and approval of plans; (3) a water quality 
monitoring plan; (4) a project operations and compliance monitoring 
plan; (5) modifications to the proposed Vegetation Plan; (6) provision 
for eagle perching habitat; (7) modifications to the Recreation 
Management Plan; (8) modifications to the Aesthetics Management Plan; 
(9) modifications to the Ute ladies'-tresses survey proposal; and (10) 
modifications to the proposed HPMP. Below, we discuss the rationale for 
our modifications and our additional staff-recommended measures.
Spoil Disposal Plan
    Although Okanogan PUD proposed to implement an ESCP and a CSMP 
which would lessen the potential effects associated with land-
disturbing activities during project construction and operation, they 
do not propose anything for spoil disposal. Interior recommends that 
Okanogan PUD develop and implement a Spoil Disposal Plan prior to any 
construction activities that may affect the BLM-administered public 
lands. The plan would address disposal and/or storage of waste soil 
and/or rock materials (spoils) generated by road maintenance, slope 
failures, and construction projects. Introduction of waste soil or rock 
into the Similkameen River would have negative effects on water 
quality. Implementation of the measures in a Spoil Disposal Plan would 
minimize effects from excavated materials on water quality or the 
surrounding environment within the project boundary and that such a 
plan would be worth the estimated levelized annual cost of $340.
Consultation and Approval of Plans
    Okanogan PUD proposes a Blasting Plan, a plan for woody debris, a 
plan for the side-channel enhancement, a gravel supplementation 
program, and a Spill Plan. We recommend consultation with the TRG and 
Commission approval prior to implementation of these plans to ensure 
that these plans are developed with expertise and recommendations from 
the TRG. The cost of this additional measure would be minimal.
Water Quality Monitoring Plan
    Okanogan PUD's water quality monitoring proposals include a number 
of aspects that need to be clarified. These include: (1) A description 
of the methods, equipment, maintenance and calibration procedures, and 
specific locations that will be used to monitor water temperature, TDG, 
and DO above the dam and below the dam in both the bypassed reach and 
in the tailrace; (2) a description of the protocol for annually 
reporting monitoring data to the Commission and Washington DOE; and (3) 
an implementation schedule. Therefore, we recommend that Okanogan PUD 
develop a Water Quality Monitoring Plan for the Enloe project, in 
consultation with the TRG, to be filed for Commission approval that 
includes these measures and with this level of detail.
    Okanogan PUD proposes to monitor temperature at three unspecified 
locations in the reservoir for a period of five years and in the 
bypassed reach to determine if state water quality standards are being 
met. Additionally, Okanogan PUD proposes to monitor TDG and DO at the 
project intake and in the project tailrace for the same time period, as 
well as DO monitoring in the bypassed reach. Interior and NMFS have 
recommended these same provisions, and NMFS further recommends that DO 
be monitored for the life of any license granted. Monitoring 
temperature, TDG, and DO during the first 5 years of operation would 
provide information on possible project effects on these parameters, 
but if water quality standards are not met regularly, additional 
monitoring and alternative measures may be necessary. A report at the 
end of five years evaluating the need for continued monitoring and/or 
measures, and implementation of any additional measures as needed, 
would ensure that water quality is maintained at a level that will 
support aquatic resources at the project. Therefore, we recommend that 
the Water Quality Management Plan includes provisions for Okanogan PUD 
to file a report with the Commission for approval at the end of the 
five-year monitoring period, developed in consultation with the TRG, 
documenting the results of the monitoring and any proposals and 
recommendations for the need for continued monitoring and/or measures. 
This plan would ensure that water quality at the project is effectively 
monitored and maintained, and would be worth the estimated levelized 
annual cost of $680.
Project Operations Compliance and Monitoring Plan
    Okanogan PUD proposes to operate the project in a run-of-river 
mode, to provide minimum flows in the bypassed reach, and to implement 
ramping rates both in the project tailrace and in the bypassed reach. 
The proposal includes many details which are yet to be determined, 
including: (1) How to document compliance with the run-of-river 
operations, minimum flow requirements (including exact dates to provide 
the minimum flows), and ramping rates requirements; (2) critical flow 
thresholds for downramping of flows in the bypassed reach; and (3) the 
means of flow delivery to the bypassed reach. Therefore, we recommend 
that Okanogan PUD develop a project operations compliance and 
monitoring plan for the Enloe project, in consultation with the TRG, to 
be filed for Commission approval that includes the details above. This 
plan would ensure that the project operation is clearly defined and 
that compliance could be demonstrated. The benefit of such a plan would 
be worth the estimated levelized annual cost of $680.
Reporting Monitoring Results for Restored Areas
    In its Vegetation Plan, Okanogan PUD proposes to provide to the 
Corps and Washington DOE an annual report on its monitoring of restored 
areas annually for 5 years and then once again at year 8. Comments 
provided by the FWS, BLM, and Washington DFW indicate interest in 
reviewing the reports on the restoration efforts, given the agencies' 
responsibilities. In addition, the Commission would need to be apprised 
of the success of restoration and the need for any further measures to 
meet the Vegetation Plan's performance criteria. Therefore, Okanogan 
PUD should revise its Vegetation Plan to include providing FWS, BLM, 
and Washington DFW with its monitoring reports at the same time it 
provides them to the Corps and Washington DOE. In addition, the 
Vegetation Plan should be revised to include filing with the Commission 
its monitoring reports for years 1 through 5 and 8, and for approval, 
any proposals for further measures, developed in consultation with the 
agencies.
Eagle Perching Habitat
    A previous fire resulted in a loss of large shoreline cottonwoods 
and other trees that could be used by bald eagles and other raptors. 
Interior and Washington DFW recommend retaining dead trees along the 
reservoir for bald

[[Page 28610]]

eagle perching habitat, with the exception of trees that pose a hazard. 
Okanogan PUD agrees with this measure in their reply comments. Interior 
and Washington DFW also recommend installation of 10 artificial perch 
poles for perching habitat along the reservoir shoreline. The retention 
of dead trees, until such time as they pose a hazard, and installation 
and maintenance of artificial perch poles, would enhance the use of the 
project area by bald eagles and other raptors. We estimate that 
retaining non-hazard dead trees would have no additional cost than 
typical maintenance, and the levelized annual cost of the perch poles 
would be $680. We conclude that the potential benefits of these 
measures would justify the low cost, and therefore would be in the 
public interest.
Ute Ladies'-Tresses Plan
    Okanogan PUD proposes to conduct additional surveys prior to, 
during, and postconstruction for the threatened Ute ladies'-tresses. 
Okanogan PUD should prepare a plan, after consulting with FWS, BLM, and 
Washington DFW, for conducting these additional surveys, and should 
include in the plan a provision to provide each year's survey results 
to the Commission and the consulted agencies. The plan should also 
include a provision to file with the Commission for approval, an 
additional plan, after consultation with the agencies, with measures to 
avoid or mitigate adverse impacts on Ute ladies'-tresses or other 
listed species if the surveys identify a listed species in areas that 
would be affected by the proposed project or side channel enhancement. 
Development of the plan would have an estimated levelized annual cost 
of $680. Therefore, we recommend development of the plan to ensure that 
the additional surveys to confirm the presence or absence of Ute 
ladies'-tresses are conducted and adequate, and that appropriate 
measures are developed to avoid or mitigate impacts to the species.
Recreation Management Plan
    Okanogan PUD proposes to implement a Recreation Management Plan. 
Staff recommends that Okanogan PUD revise the proposed Recreation 
Management Plan to coordinate with other proposed plans for the project 
(specifically, the Aesthetics Management Plan and the HPMP) and include 
consultation with stakeholders. In addition to Okanogan PUD's proposal, 
staff recommends Okanogan PUD establish a snow plowing schedule to 
allow visitors winter access to project lands and waters; develop and 
implement a recreation use monitoring plan to include monitoring at the 
falls; develop and implement a fire suppression program; add 
approximately 5.0 acres to the project boundary incorporating the 
entire length of the public access road from the Loomis-Oroville Road 
to Enloe dam; develop a river access take-out point at Miner's Flat and 
incorporate approximately 1 acre into the project boundary; and removal 
of the one small, deteriorated building on Okanogan PUD land at the 
north end of the proposed Enloe dam recreation area. Including 
consultation with stakeholders and coordinating the Recreation 
Management Plan with other proposed plans for the project would ensure 
proposed measures would not adversely affect other environmental 
resources at the project. Including these measures in the proposed 
Recreation Management Plan would improve access to existing 
recreational facilities and opportunities at the project, prevent 
wildfire on project lands and adjoining wildlife areas, and would be 
worth the estimated levelized annual cost of $13,580.
Building Removal
    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD remove two small, deteriorating 
buildings at the north end of the proposed Enloe Dam Recreation Area. 
Okanogan PUD states that one of two small structures on the north end 
of the proposed Enloe dam recreation area is owned by a private 
landowner that maintains a lease with BLM. Okanogan PUD states it is 
not in a position to remove the BLM-leased structure, however, it will 
take reasonable measures to secure existing structures from 
unauthorized entry. Removal of the BLM-leased structure is discussed 
later in this section under Measures Not Recommended. Because the 
remaining structure is not currently being used as a pump house, nor is 
it being used for project purposes, staff recommends Okanogan PUD 
remove this building from the north end of the proposed Enloe Dam 
Recreation Area. Removal of this deteriorating building would improve 
visual aesthetics at the proposed Enloe Dam Recreation Area, improve 
safety at the site, and would be worth the estimated levelized annual 
cost of $170.
Aesthetics Management Plan
    Okanogan PUD proposes to implement an Aesthetics Management Plan. 
Staff recommends that Okanogan PUD revise the Aesthetics Management 
Plan to coordinate with other proposed plans for the project 
(specifically the Recreation Management Plan and the HPMP). Staff also 
recommends Okanogan include consultation with the Colville and BLM, and 
file with Commission for approval, to ensure the project area has been 
appropriately evaluated and that appropriate measures are undertaken to 
preserve the aesthetic character of the area at a minimal cost of $340.
Cultural Resources
    Okanogan PUD proposes to implement its May 2009 HPMP; however, the 
May 2009 HPMP does not include consideration of Okanogan PUD's proposed 
side-channel enhancement site. We recommend that Okanogan PUD revise 
its May 2009 HPMP to include the proposed side-channel enhancement site 
and additional measures for the protection of historic properties at 
the Enloe Project. These measures include: (1) Further consideration of 
the potential effects of capping site 45OK532; (2) a description of the 
proposed side-channel enhancement site; (3) two separate defined APEs 
that delineate the proposed Enloe project and the proposed side-channel 
enhancement site; (4) consultation with the Cultural Resources Working 
Group (CRWG) regarding the resolution of adverse effects on the 
historic Enloe powerhouse; (5) re-evaluating the Oroville-Tonasket 
Irrigation Canal for National Register-eligibility; (6) completing 
determinations of eligibility for unidentified cultural resources on 
BLM lands; (7) periodic review of the HPMP; (8) a site monitoring 
program; (9) cultural interpretative and education measures; and (10) 
revising the APEs to accommodate modifications to the project boundary, 
if any. These additional measures would ensure protection of historic 
properties and would be worth the estimated levelized annual cost of 
$19,600.

Measures Not Recommended

    Some of the measures proposed by Okanogan PUD and recommended by 
other interested parties would not contribute to the best comprehensive 
use of the Similkameen River water resources, do not exhibit sufficient 
nexus to project environmental effects, or would not result in benefits 
to non-power resources that would be worth their cost. The following 
discusses the basis for staff's conclusion not to recommend some of the 
measures proposed by Okanogan PUD and recommended by other entities.

DO Monitoring for Term of License

    NMFS recommends that DO be monitored at the project intake and in 
the tailrace for the life of any license

[[Page 28611]]

granted. Monitoring DO during the first 5 years of operation would 
provide good information on possible project effects on DO, but if 
water quality standards are not met regularly, additional monitoring 
and alternative measures may be necessary. For this reason, we 
recommend that Okanogan PUD file a report with the Commission at the 
end of five years evaluating the need for continued monitoring and/or 
measures as part of the Water Quality Management Plan. This plan would 
be developed in consultation with the TRG and would ensure that the 
water quality monitoring effort would be designed and implemented in an 
effective manner. This approach would be sufficiently protective of 
water quality in the area; therefore, we do not recommend that Okanogan 
PUD be required to monitor DO for the life of any license that may be 
granted.

Minimum Flows

    Washington DFW, American Rivers et al., Interior, and CRITFC 
recommend a minimum flow be provided in the bypassed reach immediately 
downstream of Enloe dam. Washington DFW, Interior, and CRITFC did not 
specify a recommended minimum flow, but American Rivers et al. 
recommended a minimum flow that would range from 400 cfs to 3,400 cfs 
depending on the month. In a filing with the Commission on October 28, 
2010, Okanogan PUD stated that it has agreed with Washington DOE and 
Washington DFW to provide a minimum flow of 10 to 30 cfs downstream of 
Enloe dam. Although American Rivers et al. states that their 
recommended flow is based on Washington regulations to ensure that 
state water quality standards are met, neither of the Washington 
agencies has recommended this flow, nor has American Rivers et al. 
provided a technical justification for its flows beyond stating that 
its flow would provide adequate depth, substrate, cover and velocity in 
the bypassed reach. The bypassed reach is only 370-feet long and there 
is no evidence that this short reach provides habitat that is critical 
for the life stages of any fishes. In addition, anadromous fish do not 
occur in the bypassed reach because they are unable pass Similkameen 
Falls. Therefore, American Rivers et al.'s recommended minimum flows 
would not result in benefits that would justify the estimated levelized 
annual cost of $1,295,830.

Boulder Clusters

    Okanogan PUD proposes (FISH-02) to construct and install boulder 
clusters to improve mountain whitefish habitat and recreational 
fisheries in the river upstream of the reservoir. Interior does not 
recommend the boulder clusters because they could be a hazard to 
recreational boaters and may further increase water temperatures in the 
reservoir by creating further heat sink. Washington DFW also does not 
recommend the boulder cluster placement, as it states that boulder 
clusters are an insufficient measure to mitigate for project impacts on 
resident fish.
    As discussed in section 3.3.3.1, the current reservoir and the 
river upstream of the reservoir is shallow, has little habitat 
diversity, and habitat quality is the limiting factor for resident 
fishes. Most of the fish in the reservoir are non-native species that 
are better adapted to warmer, slower velocity water than native 
coldwater fishes, such as the mountain whitefish. The project would 
raise the elevation of the reservoir by 4 feet, which would result in 
more warm, slow water habitat and less riverine habitat suitable for 
coldwater, resident fishes. Okanogan PUD's proposal to add boulder 
clusters upstream of the reservoir to provide habitat for resident, 
coldwater fish may create a small amount of pool habitat behind the 
clusters that could be used by native coldwater fishes, such as the 
mountain whitefish. However, very few whitefish (0 in 2006; 2 in 2007) 
have been found in the reservoir during recent surveys, probably due to 
a combination of northern pikeminnow predation, warm water 
temperatures, lack of cover, and the sand-silt substrate It is unlikely 
that the proposed boulder clusters would provide much if any benefit to 
the limited mountain whitefish fishery due to these limiting factors, 
while creating additional negative effects on recreational boating and 
water temperatures. We do not recommend this measure at an estimated 
levelized annual cost of $4,370.

Entrainment and Resident Fish Population Monitoring

    Okanogan PUD proposes to monitor seasonal variation in entrainment 
susceptibility, to observe trauma and mortality caused by entrainment, 
and to monitor reservoir fish populations to relate the entrainment 
observations with the fish distribution and abundance in the reservoir. 
Interior recommends monitoring resident fish populations in the 
reservoir as part of its Resident Fish Habitat Management Plan, which 
is discussed below. As discussed in section 3, both entrainment levels 
and mortality of entrained fish are expected to be very low since there 
are very few small fish in the area of the intake due to unsuitable 
habitat. Likewise, effects of project entrainment on reservoir 
populations are expected to be nominal for the same reason. Therefore, 
these data collection efforts likely would not produce useful data. 
Additionally, Okanogan PUD did not specify if these monitoring efforts 
could lead to potential additional measures to adjust the proposed 
measures to reduce any adverse effects associated with operation of the 
intake. Therefore, we conclude that this monitoring would not be worth 
the estimated levelized annual cost of $7,280.

Fisheries Enhancement Plan and Resident Fish Habitat Management Plan

    Washington DFW recommends a Fisheries Enhancement Plan that would 
consist of three measures: (1) Side channel enhancement at locations in 
the lower Similkameen River; (2) gravel supplementation downstream of 
the tailrace; and (3) stocking of sterile triploid trout above Enloe 
Dam. Interior also recommends a Fisheries Enhancement Plan that 
contains three measures, the first two of which were identical to the 
measures proposed by Washington DFW. The third measure of Interior's 
recommended plan provides for downstream transport and placement of 
large woody debris captured at the project intake and trashrack. The 
first two measures of the Washington DFW plan and all three of the 
measures in Interior's recommended plan are identical to measures 
proposed by Okanogan PUD (FISH-10, FISH-11, and FISH-03) and are 
recommended by staff. We discuss the third measure recommended by 
Washington DFW (stocking of sterile triploid trout) below.
    Interior recommends a Resident Fish Habitat Management Plan. This 
plan consists of six measures including: (1) A study of resident fish 
populations and habitat conditions in the project reservoir; (2) a 
study of the impacts of the project on water temperatures; (3) an 
evaluation of the possible solutions for lowering water temperatures 
and improving fish habitat in the Similkameen River, particularly 
through riparian plantings; (4) the possible stocking of sterile 
rainbow trout in the reservoir; and (5) a monitoring plan for fish 
habitat in the project reservoir. Recommendation 1 is identical to 
Okanogan PUD's proposal for resident fish population monitoring (FISH-
05), which we do not recommend as discussed above. Recommendation 2 
would be accomplished by Okanogan PUD's proposal to monitor water 
temperatures at the project for 5 years (WQ-01), which we recommend 
with the option of continued monitoring after

[[Page 28612]]

the preparation of a report at the end of the five years of monitoring. 
Recommendations 3 and 4 are consistent with Okanogan PUD's 
recommendations for riparian plantings in the project area (BOTA-01, -
02, -04, -05), which we recommend. Recommendation 5 is discussed below. 
Regarding recommendation 6, the proposed run-of-river operation of the 
project would likely have no effect on reservoir species, and would 
have little effect on the riverine habitat upstream of the reservoir. 
The raising of the reservoir would have short-term effects, but the 
system would stabilize over time and the habitat would be enhanced by 
the planting of riparian vegetation. Therefore, we do not recommend the 
measure because it is not worth the estimated levelized annual cost of 
$65,110.
    As mentioned above, Interior and Washington DFW recommend stocking 
sterile triploid rainbow trout to support a recreational fishery 
upstream of Enloe dam. This recommendation could result in a number of 
adverse effects. While these fish would not live long and cannot 
reproduce, there is a potential that stocking of fish could introduce 
disease into native fish populations. The British Columbia Ministry of 
Environment opposes stocking of fish in the Similkameen River above the 
falls citing concerns that stocking could introduce disease into 
upstream native populations. Stocking rainbow trout would also not 
substantially contribute to the recreational fishery, in that the 
fishery would be limited to a brief time during cooler months, because 
of the high water temperatures in the reservoir. Stocked rainbow trout 
would also compete with resident fishes for resources and could 
negatively affect their populations. Due to the potential adverse 
effects and limited benefit to the fishery, we do not recommend the 
stocking of triploid trout in the project reservoir at an estimated 
levelized annual cost of $50,000.

Intake Fish Screen

    Okanogan PUD proposes to install a modified, narrow-spaced 
trashrack to prevent fish entrainment. Interior and Washington DFW 
recommend that Okanogan PUD install a fish screen at the project 
intake, instead of the narrow-spaced trashrack, but do not specify the 
kind of screen. Okanogan PUD's proposed trashrack would have a 1-inch 
spacing between its bars, which would physically exclude most larger 
fish (greater than 6 inches in length) from entrainment. As discussed 
in Section 3.3.3.2, smaller fish which would be unable to swim away 
from the trashrack and would fit though the one-inch spacing would 
become entrained, but it is estimated that their survival rate would be 
in the range of 84-95%. Additionally, fish surveys have shown that few 
fish reside in the area of the proposed intake. A fish screen would 
likely exclude smaller fish from entrainment, but at a much higher cost 
to build, install, and maintain. Okanogan PUD estimates that a fish 
screen in its proposed intake channel would cost between $16 and $24M, 
or $1.1 and $1.6M annualized, to construct.\46\ While we can not verify 
this number due to the agencies' lack of specificity in their 
recommendations, we can assume that a fish screen would cost much more 
than the $32,260 annualized cost of Okanogan PUD's proposed narrow-
spaced trashrack. Given the analysis above, and that the proposed 
narrow-spaced trashrack would provide a sufficient level of protection 
to resident fish, and at a much lower cost, we do not recommend a fish 
screen at the project intake. We do, however, recommend that Okanogan 
PUD consult with Interior and Washington DFW during the final design of 
the intake structure and trashrack with 1-inch spacing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Okanogan PUD's response to REA comments filed on April 
9, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fish Passage

    CRITFC and BIA recommended that production potential estimates for 
salmon and UCR steelhead upstream of Enloe dam be included as part of a 
fish passage alternative in the current licensing proceeding, and 
CRITFC recommended a paleolimnological study of historical anadromy 
above Enloe dam. The BIA also commented that cost estimates for 
designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining upstream and 
downstream fish passage facilities for the term of any license need to 
be developed in case such an action is required in the future.
    Both FWS and NMFS recommend that upstream anadromous fish passage 
facilities not be required now, and have reserved their authority to 
require fish passage under section 18 in the future. The British 
Columbia Ministry of the Environment states that it does not support 
fish passage at Enloe Dam because the introduction of anadromous fishes 
above Enloe dam would have adverse effects on the ecosystem, in the 
form of disease transfer and competition for food and space with native 
fishes.
    As discussed in section 3.3.3.2, there are no documented accounts 
of Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, UCR steelhead, or Pacific lamprey 
above Similkameen Falls. In addition, Native Americans who have 
inhabited the area for thousands of years believe that Similkameen 
Falls has been a barrier to anadromous fish passage since the beginning 
of their history. The Okanogan Sub-basin Plan, which was prepared for 
the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, concluded that 
Similkameen Falls is an impassable historic barrier to upstream salmon 
migration. The Upper Columbia Salmon Recovery Board issued a recovery 
plan that does not identify upstream and downstream passage of fish at 
Enloe dam as being a short-term or long-term action that would 
contribute to the restoration of these fish stocks, based on the 
uncertainty of fish being able to ascend Similkameen Falls. Further, 
there have been no verified accounts of a sighting of an anadromous 
fish above the falls. We, therefore, have insufficient evidence to 
conclude that Enloe dam blocks anadromous fish passage into the upper 
Similkameen River. Additionally, due to the absence of anadromous fish 
and the potential adverse effects that could occur upstream if 
anadromous fish were to be passed, we conclude that any additional 
studies of historical anadromy above Enloe dam are not worth the 
estimated levelized annual cost of $6,770.

Flow Continuation

    Interior recommends the development of a plan to provide 48 hours 
of flow continuation in the event of an emergency project shutdown at 
the unmanned, remotely operated powerhouse. In the case of an unplanned 
outage, the power plant control system, using battery and diesel 
generator back-up, would automatically start opening the crest gates to 
maintain tailwater elevation at the powerhouse within the proposed 
ramping rate criteria. This would ensure an uninterrupted flow of water 
downstream of the project tailrace. The proposed crest gate operations, 
as proposed by Okanogan PUD, would protect and maintain aquatic habitat 
downstream of the project. Downstream aquatic habitat, including UCR 
steelhead designated critical habitat and Chinook salmon EFH below 
Similkameen Falls, would be protected in the event of operating 
emergencies or planned outages. Based on this, we conclude there would 
be no need for a specific flow continuation plan as recommended by 
Interior.

Evidence of Financial Capability for Project Decommissioning

    Washington DFW recommends that Okanogan PUD provide evidence of

[[Page 28613]]

financial securities to ensure that at the end of any license, they 
would be capable of decommissioning the project. The Commission has 
consistently denied requests for decommissioning cost studies and 
establishment of decommissioning funds in licenses where the project is 
determined to be economically and physically sound, not to have 
significant adverse environmental impacts, no party has suggested 
decommissioning in the foreseeable future after project construction, 
and there is no indication that the licensee would lack the financial 
resources to decommission the project if it were to be decommissioned. 
Commission policy states that a theoretical risk of licensee's 
inability to pay for decommissioning is insufficient basis for 
requiring a decommissioning fund or evidence of financial securities. 
Therefore, we do not recommend this measure.

Vegetation Resources Management Plan

    Interior and Washington DFW recommend the development of a 
Vegetation Resources Management Plan that would include the measures 
contained in Okanogan PUD's Vegetation Plan, but also include 
additional measures, such as long-term monitoring of restored areas, 
GIS mapping, and creation of a digital database. We discuss the 
agencies' recommended additional measures in the following sections and 
conclude that they are not necessary. Therefore, the levelized annual 
cost of $680 to develop a Vegetation Resources Management Plan that 
contains those additional measures is not justified, and we do not 
recommend development of such a plan.

Long-Term Monitoring for Restored (Revegetated) Areas and Surveys for 
the Ute Ladies'-Tresses

    Interior recommends a long-term survey effort for restored 
(revegetated) areas and threatened and endangered plants. Specifically, 
Interior recommends that Okanogan PUD monitor restored upland, 
riparian, and wetland habitat sites every year for 5 years, continue 
monitoring every 5 years thereafter, and replant sites as needed; and 
survey for threatened and endangered plants within 1 year of license 
issuance and every 5 years thereafter for the duration of any license.
    Okanogan PUD proposes in its Vegetation Plan to monitor restored 
areas annually for 5 years and to plant additional willows if 
performance criteria are not met, but states that monitoring should be 
discontinued once the criteria are met. We estimated that the levelized 
annual cost of Interior's recommended monitoring schedule would be 
$6,770. Monitoring restored areas after the new plantings have met 
performance criteria would serve no purpose, would not warrant the 
cost, and would not be in the public interest. Therefore, we cannot 
support this recommendation.
    The only threatened or endangered plant with suitable habitat in 
the project area is Ute ladies'-tresses, and Okanogan PUD's surveys did 
not locate any individuals of this species. Monitoring for Ute ladies'-
tresses for an additional 3 years, as Okanogan PUD proposes, would be 
adequate to confirm the presence or absence of this plant. If the 
surveys identify Ute ladies'-tresses in areas that could be affected by 
the proposed project, developing a plan, after consultation with the 
agencies, to avoid or minimize adverse impacts, as staff recommends, 
would be appropriate to protect these plants. Monitoring according to 
Interior's recommended schedule would have a levelized annual cost of 
$4,740, and because the additional monitoring would not be expected to 
provide greater protection to the species, the cost is not warranted. 
Therefore, we do not recommend Interior's schedule for threatened and 
endangered plant monitoring.

GIS Mapping and Digital Database

    Interior recommends GIS mapping and development of a digital 
database for sensitive species, noxious weeds, and habitat restoration 
sites, to assist in associated management activities at the project. 
Sufficient information exists on the location of sensitive species, 
noxious weeds, and habitat, with the exception of the side channel 
enhancement site that would be included in the proposed 3 years of 
surveys for Ute ladies'-tresses. Staff estimates that GIS mapping and 
the creation of a digital database would have an estimated levelized 
annual cost of $1,020. Staff supports Okanogan PUD's proposals for 
monitoring restored areas and noxious weeds and conducting Ute ladies'-
tresses surveys, but finds that using the monitoring and survey results 
to create GIS mapping and a digital database is not needed to manage 
project lands and their cost do not justify the benefits. Therefore, 
staff does not recommend these measures.

Wildlife Management Plan

    Interior and Washington DFW recommend the development of a Wildlife 
Management Plan that would include Okanogan PUD's proposed wildlife 
habitat mitigation measures, but also include additional measures, such 
as visually marking the transmission line, installing a maintaining 
nest boxes and artificial perch poles, placing seasonal restrictions on 
project activities, installing barriers on irrigation tunnels, and 
creating a 200-foot wetland/riparian buffer. We discuss each of the 
agencies' individual additional measures separately, and conclude that, 
with the exception of the artificial perch poles as discussed above, 
the measures are not necessary. Therefore, the levelized annual cost of 
$680 to develop a Wildlife Management Plan that contains those 
additional measures is not justified, and we do not recommend 
development of such a plan.

Visual Marking of Transmission Line

    Interior and Washington DFW recommend visual marking of the 
transmission line crossing the Similkameen River to prevent bald eagles 
and other birds from colliding with the line. We do not recommend this 
measure because the line would not cross the Similkameen River.

Nest Boxes

    Interior and Washington DFW recommend installing and maintaining 
nest boxes for small birds in areas that lack natural tree cavities. 
The agencies have not specified the number of nest boxes or the target 
species, nor have they documented the need for enhancing such species 
at the project. Therefore, we cannot estimate the total cost or support 
this recommendation at this time.

Seasonal Restrictions on Project Activities

    Interior and Washington DFW recommend excluding project activities 
during the winter hibernation period for Townsend's big-eared bats. 
This recommendation lacks specific activities that would be excluded 
and could result in Okanogan PUD's inability to operate and properly 
maintain the project facilities. Therefore, we do not recommend this 
measure.

Barriers on Tunnels

    Interior and Washington DFW recommend installing barriers on the 
OTID's abandoned irrigation tunnels to prevent human disturbance of 
Townsend's big-eared bats in the tunnels. Only one OTID tunnel has an 
entrance within the project boundary. Entrance to this tunnel is 
prevented due to landslide blockage. Tunnels with greater bat habitat 
potential are located near Shanker's Bend and further upstream, and are 
far enough from the

[[Page 28614]]

project site that recreational or construction activity associated with 
the project would be unlikely to affect bats using those tunnels. 
Therefore, we do not recommend installing barriers on the abandoned 
irrigation tunnel.

200-Foot Wetland/Riparian Buffer

    Washington DFW recommends providing a 200-foot wetland/riparian 
buffer to protect and enhance wildlife habitat. Under existing 
conditions, wetlands occur in scattered patches along the reservoir, 
and riparian shrub and forest communities occur in a narrow fringe 
along the reservoir, with the largest stand consisting of riparian 
forest on the east side of the reservoir just upstream from Enloe dam. 
With the exception of the riparian forest area just upstream from the 
dam, there are no 200-foot-wide areas of wetland/riparian habitat 
within the project boundary, and we do not expect the use of 
flashboards on the dam to foster a 200-foot-wide zone of wetland/
habitat area around the reservoir. The substrate along the reservoir is 
unsuitable in places (i.e., rocks) for wetland/riparian habitat. 
Therefore, providing a 200-foot wetland/riparian buffer around the 
entire reservoir would be impossible. Further, we conclude that the 
measures in the Vegetation Plan, including the planting of riparian 
vegetation and restoration of the existing shoreline road segment that 
traverses riparian forest, are adequate to protect and enhance riparian 
wildlife habitat, and a 200-foot buffer is not warranted.

Recreation and Land Use

    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD provide a footbridge to the west 
side of the Similkameen River at the project. Access to the west side 
of the Similkameen River is not needed due to the lack of public 
facilities and recreation opportunities (existing or proposed) on that 
side. Therefore, the provision for adding a footbridge to the west side 
of the Similkameen River downstream of the dam is not warranted because 
there is no project effect or need that would benefit from the measure 
BLM recommends.
    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD remove two small, deteriorating 
buildings at the north end of the proposed Enloe Dam Recreation Area. 
Okanogan PUD states that one of two small structures on the north end 
of the proposed Enloe dam recreation area is owned by a private 
landowner that maintains a lease with BLM. Okanogan PUD states it is 
not in a position to remove BLM-leased structure. Although staff 
recommended removal of the unused pump house earlier in this section 
under Additional Staff-Recommended Measures, removal of the BLM-leased 
pump house at the north end of the proposed recreation area is not 
warranted because it does not interfere with the project operation and 
it is being used for private purposes. We conclude that these measures 
would not be worth the estimated levelized annual cost of $1,350.
    Interior recommends that Okanogan PUD provide recreational 
development at the Miner's Flat site, including parking areas, water 
access for launching and landing boats, installing an information kiosk 
with a map, establishing primitive campsites, including picnic tables 
and steel fire rings, and installing a vault toilet.\47\ Miner's Flat 
is BLM-owned and operated, and it is reasonable to assume BLM will 
continue to operate and maintain the site throughout a new license 
term. Moreover, Okanogan PUD has proposed to develop formalized 
campsites within the project boundary and staff is recommending a river 
access site within BLM's Miner's Flat recreation site for a boating 
take-out. These measures provide sufficient access to formal campsites 
and water-based recreation at the project. Therefore, making BLM's 
Miner's Flat recreation area a project feature and bringing the entire 
site into the project boundary would not be justified. We conclude that 
the cost for BLM's recommendation would not be worth the estimated 
levelized annual cost of $23,460.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ BLM also recommends Okanogan PUD provide recreation site 
grounds maintenance. Grounds maintenance is included in Okanogan 
PUD's proposal and is included in the normal, day-to-day O&M costs 
for the project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BLM recommends that Okanogan PUD provide for law enforcement and 
emergency services plan, including funds. The Commission is concerned 
with protecting resources through specific measures enforceable as to 
the licensee, rather than requiring a licensee to provide funding to 
another entity, because the Commission would have no way of assuring 
that the activity paid for by the licensee would actually serve a 
project purpose or ameliorate a project effect. Moreover, while 
enforcement of the requirements of any license would be Okanogan PUD's 
responsibility, enforcement of local laws within the project area and 
the river basin is not a matter of Commission jurisdiction but is the 
responsibility of local law enforcement agencies. Therefore, we do not 
recommend this provision with an estimated levelized annual cost of 
$15,140.

Cultural Resources

    Interior recommends Okanogan PUD revise its May 2009 HPMP to allow 
at least 5 years during which Okanogan PUD would solicit and review 
offers to parties that might be interested in acquiring the historic 
Enloe powerhouse. We do not recommend this measure. Instead, Okanogan 
PUD's May 2009 HPMP proposes, and we recommend, a 4-year provision. If 
a new owner is not identified within 4 years, Okanogan PUD would 
consult with the CRWG, which includes the Commission, to identify 
appropriate mitigation options prior to demolishing the structure. If 
demolition is determined necessary, a Memorandum of Agreement between 
the Commission and the Washington SHPO would be developed that would 
identify agreed-upon mitigation measures. We conclude that Interior did 
not provide any evidence to indicate why 4 years is insufficient to 
allow parties to come forward with an offer for acquiring the historic 
Enloe powerhouse.

Conclusion

    Based on our review of the agency and public comments filed on the 
project and our independent analysis pursuant to sections 4(e), 
10(a)(1), and 10(a)(2) of the FPA, we conclude that licensing the Enloe 
Project, as proposed by Okanogan PUD (with the exception of the boulder 
clusters and entrainment and resident fish monitoring), with additional 
staff-recommended measures, would be best adapted to a plan for 
improving or developing the Similkameen River watershed.

5.3 Unavoidable Adverse Effects

    Although Okanogan PUD proposes to implement a Blasting Plan and 
BMPs, it is expected that blasting would cause short-term disturbance 
to fish. It is not expected that there would be any long-term effects.
    Although Okanogan PUD proposes to implement an ESCP, a CSMP, and 
use appropriate BMPs, it is expected that sediment transport created by 
project construction would cause short-term disturbances to fish and 
aquatic species in the project area. These effects are expected to be 
short-term and should have no lasting impact.
    There would be a short-term loss of riparian and wetland habitats 
resulting from the change in reservoir elevation. The long-term effect 
of this change would be minimal due to the planting of native riparian 
species.
    There would be a reduction of flow in the bypassed reach which 
would reduce fish habitat and DO in this short reach

[[Page 28615]]

and reduce the aesthetics of flows over Similkameen Falls. Raising of 
the reservoir by 4 feet would convert 16 acres of riparian habitat to 
aquatic habitat; however, new riparian habitat would be established and 
enhanced with vegetative planting.

5.4 Fish and Wildlife Agency Recommendations

    Under the provisions of section 10(j) of the FPA, each 
hydroelectric license issued by the Commission shall include conditions 
based on recommendations provided by federal and state fish and 
wildlife agencies for the protection, mitigation, and enhancement of 
fish and wildlife resources affected by the project.
    Section 10(j) of the FPA states that whenever the Commission 
believes that any fish and wildlife agency recommendation is 
inconsistent with the purposes and the requirements of the FPA or other 
applicable law, the Commission and the agency will attempt to resolve 
any such inconsistency, giving due weight to the recommendations, 
expertise, and statutory responsibilities of such agency.
    In response to our REA notice, the following fish and wildlife 
agencies submitted recommendations for the project: NMFS (letter filed 
February 26, 2010); Interior, on behalf of BLM and FWS (letter filed 
February 26, 2010); and Washington DFW (letter filed February 26, 
2010). Table 23 lists the federal and state recommendations filed 
subject to section 10(j) and whether the recommendations are adopted 
under the staff alternative. Environmental recommendations that we 
consider outside the scope of section 10(j) have been considered under 
section 10(a) of the FPA and are addressed in the specific resource 
sections of this document and the previous section.
    Of the 35 recommendations that we consider to be within the scope 
of 10(j), we wholly include 28, include 1 in part, and do not include 
6. We discuss the reasons for not including those recommendations below 
in table 24.

             Table 24--Fish and Wildlife Agency Recommendations for the Enloe Hydroelectric Project
                                                 [Source: Staff]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Within the scope                         Adopted or not
         Recommendation                 Agency             of 10(j)         Annualized cost         adopted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Downstream Water Quality
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improve DO concentrations during  NMFS..............  Yes...............  $5,060............  Adopted.
 low flow period by providing
 aeration in the draft tubes.
Monitor and report water          NMFS..............  Yes...............  $3,850............  Adopted.
 temperature and TDG
 concentrations for 5 years.
Monitor and report DO             NMFS..............  Yes...............  $5,500............  Not adopted--5
 concentrations for life of the                                                                years of
 license.                                                                                      monitoring likely
                                                                                               would be adequate
                                                                                               to characterize
                                                                                               DO conditions.
                                                                                               Also, monitoring
                                                                                               could be extended
                                                                                               if needed by the
                                                                                               TRG after the
                                                                                               first 5 years.
Implement the ESCP..............  NMFS..............  Yes...............  $1,460............  Adopted.
Implement the spill prevention,   NMFS..............  Yes...............  $1,820............  Adopted.
 containment and clean-up plan.
Allow Washington DFW, tribes,     Washington DFW....  No--not a specific  n/a...............  Adopted--provided
 and other interested resource                         measure to                              that adequate
 agencies to inspect the project                       protect fish and                        notice is given.
 site during construction and                          wildlife.
 operation.
Develop an adaptive management    Washington DFW....  No--not a specific  n/a...............  Adopted--Okanogan
 plan.                                                 measure to                              PUD's proposed
                                                       protect fish and                        biological review
                                                       wildlife.                               process appears
                                                                                               to fulfill the
                                                                                               recommendation.
Provide evidence of financial     Washington DFW....  No--not a specific  n/a...............  Not adopted--
 security to ensure that                               measure to                              theoretical risk
 Okanogan PUD would be capable                         protect fish and                        of applicant's
 of project decommissioning at                         wildlife.                               inability to pay
 the end of any license.                                                                       for
                                                                                               decommissioning
                                                                                               is insufficient
                                                                                               basis for
                                                                                               requiring.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Fisheries Enhancement Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construct and file detailed       Interior,           Yes...............  $16-$24M..........  Not adopted--
 design drawings of an intake      Washington DFW.                                             Okanogan PUD's
 fish screen.                                                                                  proposed trash
                                                                                               rack will provide
                                                                                               adequate
                                                                                               protection at
                                                                                               significantly
                                                                                               less cost.
Implement a powerhouse            Interior..........  Yes...............  $340..............  Adopted.
 operational plan.

[[Page 28616]]

 
Provide continuous instream       Washington DFW....  Yes...............  $37,940...........  Adopted.
 flows in the bypassed reach.
Design and construct tailrace     Interior, NMFS,     Yes...............  $9,580............  Adopted.
 net barriers and implement        Washington DFW.
 associated plans.
Implement side-channel/off-       Interior, NMFS,     Yes...............  $30,210...........  Adopted.
 channel development/              Washington DFW.
 enhancement at locations in the
 lower Similkameen River or near
 the Okanogan River.
Implement gravel supplementation  Interior, NMFS,     Yes...............  $11,950...........  Adopted.
 downstream of Enloe dam.          Washington DFW.
Transport downstream and place    Interior..........  Yes...............  $4,300............  Adopted.
 large woody debris captured at
 the project's intake and
 trashrack.
Stock sterile triploid rainbow    Interior,           Yes...............  $10,340...........  Not adopted--
 trout to support a recreational   Washington DFW.                                             Stocked trout
 fishery upstream of Enloe dam.                                                                pose a disease
                                                                                               and competition
                                                                                               risk to native
                                                                                               populations.
Provide ramping rates during      Interior, NMFS,     Yes...............  $0................  Adopted.
 project start-up and shut-down.   Washington DFW.
Select the location for ramping   Interior, NMFS,     Yes...............  n/a...............  Adopted.
 rate monitoring in consultation   Washington DFW.
 with NMFS, FWS, Washington DFW,
 the Yakima, and the Colville.
Develop a Wildlife Management     Interior,           Yes...............  $680..............  Adopted (for
 Plan including the following      Washington DFW.                                             preparing plan).
 measures:
Restore the existing unimproved   Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $26,920.......  Adopted.
 shoreline road along Enloe        Washington DFW.
 reservoir to a natural
 condition, eliminating the
 current interruption between
 the shoreline and upland
 habitat.
Relocate access road to the       Interior,           Yes...............  Cost included in    Adopted.
 reservoir.                        Washington DFW.                         measure above.
Locate the project's existing     Interior,           Yes...............  minimal...........  Adopted.
 and proposed transmission lines   Washington DFW.
 and pole to prevent raptor
 electrocution and include the
 line within the project
 boundary.
Include a provision to avoid      Interior,           Yes...............  $9,100............  Adopted.
 disturbing foraging bald eagles   Washington DFW.
 between October 31 and March 31
 in the schedules for project
 and transmission line
 construction.

[[Page 28617]]

 
Retain dead trees along the       Interior,           Yes...............  \a\ $680..........  Adopted.
 reservoir unless they become a    Washington DFW.
 hazard, and install 10
 artificial perch poles along
 the reservoir shoreline and in
 places where perch trees are
 sparse or lacking, and
 maintain, repair, or replace
 perch poles as necessary.
Plant native riparian trees,      Interior,           Yes...............  $6,730............  Adopted.
 grasses, and shrubs, when they    Washington DFW.
 are called for. Part of BOTA-
 02, 04, and 05.
Visually mark the section of the  Interior,           No--no              minimal...........  Not adopted--The
 project transmission line         Washington DFW.     relationship to                         transmission line
 crossing the Similkameen River.                       proposed project.                       does not cross
                                                                                               the Similkameen
                                                                                               River.
Install nest boxes for small      Interior,           No--number of       \a\ $25/box.......  Not adopted--
 birds in areas that lack snags    Washington DFW.     boxes and type                          Insufficient
 or natural tree cavities.                             unspecified.                            detail on measure
                                                                                               and support for
                                                                                               need.
Install barriers on irrigation    Interior,           Yes...............  \a\ $140..........  Not adopted--
 canal tunnels to prevent human    Washington DFW.                                             Tunnel near Enloe
 entry while still allowing use                                                                dam blocked by
 by bats.                                                                                      landslide and
                                                                                               other tunnels are
                                                                                               far enough away
                                                                                               from activity to
                                                                                               not warrant
                                                                                               barriers.
Exclude project activities in     Interior,           No--not a specific  n/a...............  Not adopted--
 the winter hibernation period     Washington DFW.     measure; specific                       Generic exclusion
 for bats.                                             activities                              could prohibit
                                                       undefined.                              necessary project
                                                                                               activities.
Provide a 200-foot wetland/       Washington DFW....  Yes...............  n/a...............  Not adopted--The
 riparian buffer.                                                                              measures in the
                                                                                               Vegetation Plan
                                                                                               are adequate to
                                                                                               protect riparian
                                                                                               habitat
Develop a Vegetation Resources    Interior,           Yes...............  $680..............  Adopted (for
 Management Plan.                  Washington DFW.                                             preparing plan).
Plant fast-growing native shade   Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $4,730........  Adopted.
 producing trees along the         Washington DFW.
 reservoir, such as native
 willows, alders, and/or
 cottonwoods.
Abandon and restore the existing  Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $26,920.......  Adopted.
 shoreline road.                   Washington DFW.
Plant riparian species along      Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $1,090........  Adopted.
 abandoned road corridor.          Washington DFW.
Plant riparian species on the     Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $1,460........  Adopted.
 east and west banks downstream    Washington DFW.
 of Shanker's Bend.
Install grazing control           Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $1,820........  Adopted.
 measures, including fencing to    Washington DFW.
 protect sensitive riparian
 areas and restored sites.
Monitor restored areas (upland    Interior,           Yes...............  \a\ $6,770........  Adopted in part--
 sites, riparian and wetland       Washington DFW.                                             Staff recommends
 sites) every year for 5 years                                                                 monitoring for 5
 and continue monitoring every 5                                                               consecutive years
 years thereafter and replant                                                                  and once in year
 sites as needed.                                                                              8.

[[Page 28618]]

 
Employ BMPs during construction   Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $180..........  Adopted.
 and implementation to protect     Washington DFW.
 riparian and wetland vegetation.
Provide biological monitoring     Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $5,240........  Adopted.
 during construction to ensure     Washington DFW.
 minimal impact to aquatic and
 terrestrial resources.
Implement a noxious weed control  Interior,           Yes...............  \b\ $2,290........  Adopted.
 program.                          Washington DFW.
Survey for and document           Interior,           Yes...............  $4,740............  Not adopted--
 threatened and endangered         Washington DFW.                                             Okanogan PUD's
 plants within one year of the                                                                 proposed measures
 license issuance and every 5                                                                  are adequate to
 years thereafter for the                                                                      protect
 duration of the license.                                                                      resources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Unless otherwise noted, all costs are from Okanogan PUD.
\a\ Estimated by Staff.
\b\ Part of Okanogan PUD's Vegetation Plan.

5.5 Consistency With Comprehensive Plans

    Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 803(a)(2)(A), requires 
the Commission to consider the extent to which a project is consistent 
with the federal or state comprehensive plans for improving, 
developing, or conserving a waterway or waterways affected by the 
project. We reviewed 23 comprehensive plans that are applicable to the 
Enloe Project, located in Washington State. No inconsistencies were 
found.

Bureau of Land Management. 1987. Spokane resource area management 
plan. Department of the Interior, Spokane, Washington. May 1987.
Bureau of Land Management. U.S. Forest Service. 1994. Standards and 
guidelines for management of habitat for late-successional and old-
growth forest related species within the range of the northern 
spotted owl. Washington, D.C. April 13, 1994.
Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation. 1995. State of 
Washington outdoor recreation and habitat: Assessment and policy 
plan 1995-2001. Tumwater, Washington. November 1995.
Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation. 1991. Washington State 
trails plan: policy and action document. Tumwater, Washington. June 
1991.
Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation. 2002. Washington State 
Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning Document (SCORP): 2002-
2007. Olympia, Washington. October 2002.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council. 2009. Columbia River Basin 
fish and wildlife program. Portland, Oregon. Council Document 2009-
09. October 2009.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council. 2010. The Sixth Northwest 
conservation and electric power plan. Portland, Oregon. Council 
Document 2010-09. February 2010.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council. 1988. Protected areas 
amendments and response to comments. Portland, Oregon. Council 
Document 88-22 (September 14, 1988).
Northwest Power and Conservation Council. 2003. Mainstem amendments 
to the Columbia River Basin fish and wildlife program. Portland, 
Oregon. Council Document 2003-11.
State of Washington. 1977. Statute establishing the State scenic 
river system, Chapter 79.72 RCW. Olympia, Washington.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Undated. Fisheries USA: the 
recreational fisheries policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 
Washington, DC.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Canadian Wildlife Service. 1986. 
North American waterfowl management plan. Department of the 
Interior. Environment Canada. May 1986.
Washington Department of Community Development. Office of 
Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 1987. A resource protection 
planning process identification component for the eastern Washington 
protohistoric study unit. Olympia, Washington.
Washington Department of Community Development. Office of 
Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 1989. Resource protection 
planning process--study unit transportation.
Washington Department of Ecology. 1978. Water resources management 
program--Okanogan River Basin. Olympia, Washington. February 1978.
Washington Department of Ecology. 1986. Application of shoreline 
management to hydroelectric developments. Olympia, Washington. 
September 1986.
Washington Department of Fisheries. 1987. Hydroelectric project 
assessment guidelines. Olympia, Washington.
Washington Department of Game. 1987. Strategies for Washington's 
wildlife. Olympia, Washington. May 1987.
Washington Department of Natural Resources. 1987. State of 
Washington natural heritage plan. Olympia, Washington.
Washington Department of Natural Resources. 1997. Final habitat 
conservation plan. Olympia, Washington. September 1997.
Washington State Energy Office. 1992. Washington State hydropower 
development/resource protection plan. Olympia, Washington. December 
1992.
Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. 1988. Washington 
State scenic river assessment. Olympia, Washington. September 1988.
Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. 1988. Scenic 
rivers program--report. Olympia, Washington. January 29, 1988.

6.0 Finding of No Significant Impact

    Construction and operation of the Enloe Project, with our 
recommended measures, involves land disturbing activities associated 
with access road clearing and grading and excavation of intake channel, 
powerhouse, and powerhouse tailrace. There would be a temporary loss of 
riparian and wetland habitats from the increased reservoir operating 
level. There may also be short-term turbidity and contamination caused 
from the resuspension of reservoir sediments and in-water excavation of 
the powerhouse tailrace channel. Our recommended measures would ensure 
water quality standards are not exceeded, ensure protection of

[[Page 28619]]

anadromous and resident fish, restore riparian vegetation, protect and 
enhance public access and recreation opportunities, and protect 
cultural and historic resources.
    On the basis of our independent analysis, we find that the issuance 
of a license for the Enloe Project, with our recommended environmental 
measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly 
affecting the quality of the human environment.

7.0 Literature Cited

Altman, B. and A. Holmes. 2000. Conservation strategy for landbirds 
in the Columbia Plateau of eastern Oregon and Washington. Final 
Report Version 1.0. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight, Boring, 
OR.
Bayer, K.C. 1983. Generalized structural, lithologic, and 
physiographic provinces in the fold and thrust belts of the United 
States (exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii). U.S. Geological Survey. 
Scale: 1:2,500,000.
Boreson, K. 1992. A report of test excavations at three sites near 
Enloe on the Similkameen River, Okanogan County, WA. Archaeological 
and Historical Services, Eastern Washington University, Cheney, WA.
Chapman, D., C. Peven, T. Hillman, A. Giorgi, and F. Utter. 1994. 
Status of summer steelhead in the mid-Columbia River. Don Chapman 
Consultants, Inc. (now BioAnalysts, Inc., Eagle, ID.), Boise, ID.
Christensen Associates. 2007. Restoration of renewable hydropower 
generation at Enloe dam. Geology Report. April 2007.
City of Oroville. 2010. City of Oroville's webpage. http://oroville-wa.com/. Accessed April 12, 2010. Oroville, Washington.
ENTRIX, Inc. (ENTRIX). 2009. Similkameen River Appraisal Level 
Study. Prepared for Okanogan County Public Utility District No. 1 of 
Okanogan. Prepared by ENTRIX, Inc., Seattle, WA. April 2009.
ENTRIX, Inc. 2007. Fish distribution and habitat use of the 
Similkameen River in Relation to the Enloe Dam, Draft Report. 
ENTRIX, Inc., Olympia, WA.
ENTRIX. 2006. Okanogan River watershed resource inventory area 49, 
level I water quality technical assessment (Project No. 4138301). 
Prepared for Okanogan County Watershed Planning Unit, Okanogan, WA. 
Prepared by ENTRIX, Inc., Seattle, WA. June 2006.
EPA (U. S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2007. EPA identifies 
noise levels affecting health and welfare. http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/noise/01.htm. Accessed April 30, 2008.
EPA. 1974. Information on levels of environmental noise requisite to 
protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. 
http://www.nonoise.org/library/levels74/levels74.htm. Accessed April 
30, 2008.
Fertig, W., R. Black, and P. Wolken. 2005. Rangewide status review 
of Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis). Prepared for the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Central Utah Water Conservancy 
District. 30 September 2005.
Ford, J, 2010a. Paleolimnological investigations in the Palmer Lake 
Watershed, Okanogan County, Washington. Phase I report for the 
Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission.
Ford, J. 2010b. Further reflections concerning Paleolimnological 
investigations in the Palmer Lake Watershed, Okanogan County, 
Washington: Phase I report. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, 
Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Franklin, J. F., and C.T. Dyrness. 1973. Natural vegetation of 
Oregon and Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 
Service, General Technical Report PNW-8. Portland, Oregon.
FWS. 2010. Listed and proposed endangered and threatened species and 
critical habitat; candidate species; and species of concern in 
Okanogan County, Washington as prepared by the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Central Washington Fish and Wildlife Field Office. 
Revised May 4, 2009. http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/pdf/Okanogan_Cty_5-4-09.pdf Accessed March 4, 2010.
FWS. 2008. Final recovery plan for the northern spotted owl (Strix 
occidentalis caurina). Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
Portland, Oregon. May 13, 2008.
FWS. 2004. Species Assessment and Listing Priority Recovery Form--
Grizzly Bear Populations in the North Cascades Ecosystem. U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service. http://www.fws.gov/mountainprairie/species/mammals/grizzly/grizzlybearCascades2004.pdf. Accessed March 4, 2010. 
FWS. 2008. Final recovery plan for the northern spotted owl (Strix 
occidentalis caurina). Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
Portland, OR. May 13.
Galm, J. 1991. Cultural resource investigation of the Enloe Project, 
Okanogan County, WA. Archaeological and Historical Services, Eastern 
Washington University, Cheney, WA.
Hunter, M. A. 1992. Hydropower flow fluctuations and salmonids: A 
review of the biological effects, mechanical causes, and options for 
mitigation. Tech. Report No. 119, Washington DFW, Olympia, WA.
IEC Beak Consultants. 1984. Natural propagation and habitat 
improvement--Similkameen River, Washington. Habitat Inventory, 
Volume I and II, Final Report.
Johnson, A. 2002. A total maximum daily load evaluation for arsenic 
in the Similkameen River: Section 303(d) listings waterbody No. WA-
49-1030, arsenic. Washington DOE, Publication No. 02-03-044.
KWA Ecological Sciences Inc., Okanogan County, the Colville 
Confederated Tribes, Okanogan Nation Alliance. 2004. Okanogan 
Subbasin Plan. Prepared for the Northwest Power and Conservation 
Council by the lead agencies referenced and numerous other 
contributors. Available at: http://www.nwcouncil.org/fw/subbasinplanning/okanogan/plan/.
MacDonald D.D., C.G. Ingersoll and T.A. Berger. 2000. Development 
and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for 
freshwater ecosystems. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 39:20-31.
Mathewson, C.C., T. Gonzalez, and J. S. Eblen. 1992. Burial as a 
method of archaeological site protection. Prepared for U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, MS. Prepared by Center for 
Engineering Geosciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.
MaxDepth. 2006. Hydroacoustic Survey of bathymetry, sediment 
accumulation, and fish populations in Enloe Impoundment, Washington. 
Prepared for Okanogan Public Utility District No. 1, Okanogan, WA. 
Prepared by MaxDepth Aquatics, Inc., Bend, OR. June 2006.
Myers, J. 2010. Review of Ford, J. 2010 paleolimnological 
investigations in the Palmer Lake Watershed, Okanogan County, WA.
Michelsen, T. 2003. Development of freshwater sediment quality 
values for use in Washington state: Phase II report: Development and 
recommendation of SQVs for freshwater sediments in Washington State. 
Publication No. 03-09-088. Prepared for Toxics Cleanup Program, 
Sediment Management Unit, Washington Department of Ecology. Prepared 
by Avocet Consulting.
Moyle, P. B. 2002. Inland fishes of California: Revised and 
Expanded. University of California Press. 502 p.
NERC (North American Electric Reliability Corporation). 2010. 2010 
Long-term reliability assessment to ensure the reliability of the 
bulk power system. Princeton, NJ. October 2010.
Nedeau, E. A. K. Smith, J. Stone. 2010. Mussels of the Pacific 
Northwest. Accessed on line May 1, 2010 at: http://www.fws.gov/columbiariver/mwg/pdfdocs/Pacific_Northwest_Mussel_Guide.pdf.
Okanogan County. 2010. Nighthawk trail. Available at: http://www.okanogancounty.org/planning/pdf/Nighthawk%20Trail.jpg. Accessed 
November 11, 2010.
Okanogan PUD (Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County). 
2010. Enloe Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 12569): Response 
to comments on FERC's ready for environmental analysis notice. 
Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County, Okanogan, WA. 
April 9, 2010.
Okanogan PUD. 2009a. Enloe Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 
12569): Responses to FERC additional information requests. Public 
Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County, Okanogan, WA. January 26, 
2009.
Okanogan PUD. 2009b. Enloe Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 
12569): Responses to FERC additional information requests. Public 
Utility

[[Page 28620]]

District No. 1 of Okanogan County, Okanogan, WA. February 27, 2009.
Okanogan PUD. 2009c. Enloe Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 
12569): Responses to FERC additional information requests. Public 
Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County, Okanogan, WA. July 21, 
2009.
Okanogan PUD. 2009d. Enloe Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 
12569): Responses to FERC additional information requests. Public 
Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County, Okanogan, WA. September 
21, 2009.
Okanogan PUD. 2009e. Final Historic Properties Management Plan, 
Enloe Dam Project licensing, FERC Project No. 12569. Prepared for 
Okanogan PUD, Okanogan, WA. Prepared by ENTRIX, Inc., Seattle, WA.
Okanogan PUD. 2009f. Section 106 addendum report for side channel 
enhancement project, Enloe Dam Project licensing, FERC Project No. 
12569. Prepared for Okanogan PUD, Okanogan, WA. Prepared by ENTRIX, 
Inc., Seattle, WA.
Okanogan PUD. 2009g. Recreation needs assessment, Enloe Dam Project 
licensing, FERC Project No. 12569. Okanogan PUD, Okanogan, WA. April 
2009.
Okanogan PUD. 2009h. Analysis of aesthetics from the proposed 
recreation sites, Enloe Dam Project licensing, FERC Project No. 
12569. Okanogan PUD, Okanogan, WA. May 29, 2009.
Okanogan PUD. 2008a. Enloe Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 
12569): Final license application. Public Utility District No. 1 of 
Okanogan County, Okanogan, WA. August 22, 2008.
Okanogan PUD. 2008b. Enloe dam licensing project, Okanogan County, 
Washington, final cultural resources Section 106 technical report. 
Prepared for Okanogan PUD, Okanogan, WA. Prepared by ENTRIX, Inc., 
Seattle, WA.
Okanogan PUD. 1991. Application for license for major unconstructed 
project, Enloe Hydroelectric Project, Project No. 10536. Okanogan 
PUD, Okanogan, WA. June 1991.
Pacific Fisheries Management Council. 2010. Habitat and communities: 
Essential fish habitat web page. Available online at http://www.pcouncil.org/habitat-and-communities/habitat/. Accessed August 
19, 2010. Pacific Fisheries Management Council, Portland, OR.
Peterschmidt, M. and L. Edmond. 2004. Lower Similkameen River total 
daily maximum load. Publication Number 03-10-074. Washington 
Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
PNRBC (Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission). 1977. The 
Okanogan River Basin Level B study of the water and land related 
resources. Okanogan Conservation District, Pacific Northwest River 
Basins Commission, Okanogan, WA.
Reclamation (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation). 2007. Dams, projects, and 
powerplants: Chief Joseph Dam Project, Washington. Available at 
http://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/html/chiefjoseph.html. Accessed March 
29, 2007. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
Salo, L.V. 1987. Similkameen River multipurpose project feasibility 
study cultural resource reconnaissance technical report. U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Seattle, WA.
State Parks Commission (Washington State Parks and Recreation 
Commission). 2010. Washington State Parks and Recreation 
Commission's Osoyoos Lake webpage. http://www.parks.wa.gov/parks/?selectedpark=Osoyoos%20Lake. Accessed April 7, 2010. Washington 
State Parks and Recreation Commission, Olympia, WA.
Stinson. 2001. Stinson, D.W. 2001. Washington State Recovery Plan 
for the Lynx. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife 
Management Program, Olympia, WA. June.
Thomas, J.W., E.D. Forsman, J.B. Lint, E.C. Meslow, B.R. Noon, and 
J. Verner. 1990. A conservation strategy for the northern spotted 
owl: a report to the Interagency Scientific Committee to address the 
conservation of the northern spotted owl. U.S. Forest Service, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service, Washington, 
DC. 427 pp.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2009a. City of Oroville QuickFacts from 
the U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: http://censtats.census.gov/data/WA/1605351970.pdf. Accessed April 12, 2009. U.S. Bureau of the 
Census.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2009b. Okanogan County QuickFacts from 
the U.S. Census Bureau. Available at: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/53047.html. Accessed April 12, 2009. U.S. Bureau of 
the Census.
USGS (United States Geological Survey). 2002. National seismic 
hazard map. Earthquake Hazards Program website. Available at: http:/
earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/products_data/2002/2002October/PN/PN1hz2500v3.pdf.
USGS-NEIC (National Earthquake Information Center). 2007a. 
Significant U.S. earthquakes (USHIS). Available at: http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/epic/. U.S. Geological Survey.
USGS-NEIC. 2007b. Preliminary determination of epicenters catalog, 
1973-present. U.S. Geological Survey.
Vedan, A. 2002. Traditional Okanogan environmental knowledge and 
fisheries management. Prepared by Okanogan Nation Alliance, Westbank 
B.C., Canada.
Vinson, M. 1994. Aquatic benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring 
report: Similkameen River. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Spokane, 
WA.
Washington DOE (Washington DOE). 2005. River and stream water 
quality monitoring: 49B070--Similkameen R@ Oroville: Continuous 
temperature monitoring results. Available at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/apps/watersheds/riv/station.asp?theyear=&tab=temperature&scrolly=385&wria=49&sta=49B070. 
Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office. 2008. Defining 
and Measuring Success: The Role of State Government in Outdoor 
Recreation, A State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning 
Document. Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office, 
Olympia, WA. June 2008.
Weitkamp, D.E. and M. Katz. 1980. A review of dissolved gas 
supersaturation literature. Transactions of the American Fisheries 
Society 109:659-702.
Wydoski, R. S. and R. R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. 
University of Washington Press. 220 p.

8.0 List of Preparers

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Kim Nguyen--FERC Project Coordinator, Need for Power, Geology and 
Soils Resources, Water Quantity, and Developmental Resources (Civil 
Engineer; B.S., Civil Engineering)
Ryan Hansen--Aquatic Resources and Water Quality (Fisheries 
Biologist; M.S., Environmental Science and Public Policy; B.S. 
Biology)
Mark Ivy--Aesthetic Resources, Recreation and Land Use, and 
Socioeconomics (Outdoor Recreation Planner; Ph.D., Outdoor 
Recreation Management; M.S., Recreation & Resources Development; 
B.S., Natural Resource Planning)
Shana Murray--Aesthetic Resources and Recreation and Land Use 
(Outdoor Recreation Planner; M.S., Recreation, Park, and Tourism 
Management; B.S., Leisure Services)
Patricia Leppert--Cultural Resources (Environmental Protection 
Specialist; M.A. Recreation and Parks/Biology; B.S. Recreation and 
Parks/Biology)
Dianne Rodman--Terrestrial Resources and Threatened and Endangered 
Species (Ecologist; M.S., Biology)
Kelly Wolcott--Terrestrial Resources and Threatened and Endangered 
Species (Environmental Biologist; M.S., Natural Resources; B.S., 
Biology)

Louis Berger Group

Jim Holeman--Task Management (Senior Environmental Manager; B.A., 
Wildlife Management)
Alynda Foreman--Terrestrial Resources and Threatened and Endangered 
Species (Ecologist; M.S., Multidisciplinary Studies; B.A., Biology)
Kenneth Hodge--Need for Power, Water Quantity, and Developmental 
Analysis (Senior Engineer; B.S., Civil Engineering)
Coreen Johnson--Editorial Review (Technical Editor; B.A., English/
Education)
Lucy Littlejohn--Aquatic Resources and Water Quality (Senior 
Fisheries Biologist; M.S., Marine Science, Department of 
Ichthyology; B.S., Natural Science)
Alison Macdougall--Cultural Resources (Senior Environmental Manager; 
B.A., Anthropology)
Jean Potvin--Recreation and Land Use, Cultural Resources, Aesthetic 
Resources, and Socioeconomics (B.S., Recreation and Park Management)

[[Page 28621]]

Jane True--Graphics (Graphic Designer; B.A., Graphic Arts)
[FR Doc. 2011-11757 Filed 5-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P