Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery Surface Water Intake Fish Screens and Fish Passage Project Environmental Impact Statement Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Columbia-Pacific Northwest Regional Office 1150 N. Curtis Road Boise, ID 83706 November 2020

Mission Statements The Department of the Interior conserves and manages the Nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of the American people, provides scientific and other information about natural resources and natural hazards to address societal challenges and create opportunities for the American people, and honors the Nation’s trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities to help them prosper.

The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public.

Executive Summary The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery (hereafter, LNFH or Hatchery) Surface Water Intake Fish Screens and Fish Passage (SWISP) Project (Map A-1 in Appendix A). The purpose of this specialist report is to provide a comprehensive environmental baseline and analysis of the potential impacts of the SWISP Project under four separate alternatives, including Alternative A, No Action.

The Analysis Area for air quality is Chelan County, Washington. The Analysis Area for climate is broader. Potential impacts on climate from the Project are based on regional climate scenarios, downscaled from global climate models. The indicators for identifying impacts on air quality and climate are the following:

• Acres of surface disturbance resulting from construction and measures to reduce fugitive dust • Total vehicle miles traveled by on-road trucks and personal vehicles and tons of criteria pollutants resulting from their use • Total hours of operation of off-road vehicles and equipment and tons of criteria pollutants resulting from their use • Tons of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from construction

The analysis also examines the projected hydrological effects of climate change on Icicle Creek.

Affected Environment

Air Quality Air quality in Washington is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Washington Department of Ecology. The latter is responsible for enforcing air quality standards of the federal Clean Air Act. The national ambient air quality standards established by the EPA under the Clean Air Act specify limits of air pollutant levels for several criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide, particulate matter 10 micrometers or less in diameter (PM10), particulate matter 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter (PM2.5), ozone, sulfur dioxide, lead, and nitrogen dioxide. When an area exceeds the specified pollutant limit, it is identified as a nonattainment area. States and some federal agencies operate air monitoring stations to measure concentrations of criteria pollutants and to determine compliance with national and state ambient air quality standards. Chelan County is in attainment for all national and state ambient air quality standards (EPA 2020a, 2020b).

The EPA’s air quality index is used for reporting daily air quality. It describes how clean or polluted the air is by geographic area and what the associated health effects may be. Based on annual air

SWISP Project EIS ES-1 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report Executive Summary

quality index data for Chelan County for the past 5 years, air quality trends in the county show that the air quality most days fall in the category of good; the small number of unhealthy days are likely associated with wildfire activity (EPA 2020d).

Climate Climate in the Pacific Northwest is influenced by the interactions and seasonal variation of atmospheric circulation patterns, especially the seasonal migrations of the Aleutian low pressure system and the North Pacific (Hawaii) high pressure system (Climate Impact Group [CIG] 2004). The Wenatchee River watershed, which contains the Icicle Creek subbasin, is on the eastern slopes of the Cascade Mountains. The headwaters at high elevations in the Cascades receive considerable precipitation, which mostly falls as snow. Lower elevations receive more modest amounts of precipitation (Montgomery Water Group 2003). Precipitation patterns in the Icicle Creek subbasin are similar to those of the Wenatchee River Watershed; however, because of its elevation and location, the lowest elevations in the Icicle Creek subbasin receive more precipitation than the lowest elevations in the Wenatchee River Watershed (Montgomery Water Group 2003).

During the past 100 years, the Pacific Northwest has become warmer and wetter (Mote and Salathé 2010). Temperatures are projected to continue to increase in the region, along with small increases in precipitation, shifts in the seasonality of precipitation, and increased high precipitation events. These changes could result in the Wenatchee River Watershed transitioning from a snow-dominant watershed to a rain/snowmelt transient watershed by the 2040s. There would be lower snowpack, earlier run off, and more precipitation falling as rain (Tohver 2016).

The analysis in this report relies on modeling results that were developed for the water management strategy for Icicle Creek (CIG 2017a). The modeling analysis used a combination of datasets from five different regional studies on climate change to show potential changes in streamflow in Icicle Creek (CIG 2017a). Each of the datasets projected the same changes in the seasonal cycle of streamflow: increased flow in winter, an earlier peak in streamflow, and decreased flow in summer (CIG 2017a).

Environmental Consequences

Alternative A – No Action Alternative Air quality. Under Alternative A, air pollutant emissions related to operation and maintenance of the LNFH would continue. These include emissions from vehicles and equipment, limited road dust from travel on unpaved portions of access roads, and emissions from periodic sediment removal operations.

Climate. Under Alternative A, greenhouse gas emissions related to operation and maintenance of the LNFH would continue. These emissions include vehicle and equipment operations associated with LNFH operations. Emissions would continue to be below 25,000 metric tons per year.

Historical trends and future climate projections showing increased warming and shifts in the seasonality of precipitation are projected to continue, as described under the Affected Environment for

ES-2 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report Executive Summary

climate. The movement of the Wenatchee River Watershed and the Icicle Creek subbasin from a snow-dominant watershed to a rain/snowmelt transient watershed would result in less snowpack, earlier runoff, and more precipitation falling as rain, affecting the timing and volume of flows entering Icicle Creek.

Projected climate-induced hydrological changes are not anticipated to affect Hatchery operations, as water needs would continue to be met through a combination of surface water and groundwater inputs, as well as storage rights from Nada and Snow Lakes. However, the timing of groundwater inputs and storage water use may be affected based on instream flow and temperature conditions that differ from those found historically.

LNFH would continue to divert instream waters from Icicle Creek and draw on groundwater resources to support Hatchery operations at current rates. Because there would be no changes in diversions from Icicle Creek, Alternative A would not impact the hydrological conditions of Icicle Creek and therefore not enhance any climate-induced hydrological changes.

Alternative B – Proposed Action Air quality. Rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system under Alternative B would have a short-term impact on air quality. Construction activities would generate fugitive dust during surface-disturbing activities and from travel on unpaved portions of access roads and staging areas and emit pollutants through the combustion of fuel in commute vehicles, trucks, construction equipment, and pumps and generators.

The emissions of fugitive dust would be greatest during site grading activities, and emissions would vary over the course of construction based on the level of activity during each construction phase. Emissions would be localized to the area surrounding any given construction activity and would cease when construction ends and any temporary disturbance areas are revegetated or water is returned to previously dewatered areas. Approximately 0.84 acres would be disturbed temporarily. Most of the construction-related activities, including access roads and staging areas, would occur on already disturbed areas, limiting the creation of new areas of disturbance that would be subject to windblown dust impacts.

Combustion of fuel in commute vehicles, trucks, construction equipment, and pumps and generators would emit criteria air pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act and small amounts of hazardous air pollutants (diesel particulate matter, acetaldehyde, benzene, and formaldehyde). These emissions would occur for the duration of construction.

Best Management Practices (BMPs) and conservation measures would be implemented during construction to minimize fugitive dust and combustion-related impacts on air quality and the associated effects on sensitive populations such as nearby residents. Impacts related to traffic congestion would be avoided to the extent practicable by developing and implementing traffic control measures to minimize traffic congestion. BMPs and conservation measures are described in Appendix B.

SWISP Project EIS ES-3 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report Executive Summary

Construction-related emissions are shown in Table ES-1, below. As shown in this table, emissions of each criteria pollutant would represent a small percentage of annual emissions in Chelan County.

Table ES-1 Estimated Equipment-Related Emissions by Proposed Work Component, Alternatives B and D (Tons)

GHGs Criteria Pollutants (Tons) (Metric Element Tons)

VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2e Alternative B Mobilization, Site Access, Cofferdam Phase I Construction, 0.499 4.058 1.827 0.006 0.114 0.081 558.32 Gatehouse and Intake Structure Construction Roughened Channel Construction 0.230 1.514 0.991 0.003 0.078 0.041 293.19 Conveyance Pipeline 0.331 2.718 2.290 0.007 0.104 0.104 609.73 Replacement/ Rehabilitation Total Emissions (tons)1 1.060 8.291 5.109 0.016 0.296 0.226 1,461.24 % Comparison to 2017 NEI 0.029% 0.061% 0.233% 0.070% 0.066% 0.058% — Stationary and Mobile Emissions % Comparison to the GHG Reporting Rule 25,000-metric ton — — — — — — 6% threshold2 Alternative D Mobilization, Site Access, Cofferdam Phase I Construction, 0.783 6.151 3.921 0.011 0.213 0.179 987.95 Gatehouse and Intake Structure Construction Roughened Channel Construction 0.231 1.518 0.997 0.003 0.079 0.042 295.01 Conveyance Pipeline 0.331 2.718 2.290 0.007 0.104 0.104 609.73 Replacement/ Rehabilitation Total Emissions (tons)1 1.345 10.388 7.207 0.021 0.396 0.324 1,892.69 % Comparison to 2017 NEI 0.037% 0.076% 0.329% 0.092% 0.089% 0.084% — Stationary and Mobile Emissions % Comparison to the GHG Reporting Rule 25,000-metric ton — — — — — — 8% threshold2 Source: EMPSi staff analysis (see Appendix D) Notes: VOC = volatile organic compounds, CO = carbon monoxide, NOx = nitrogen oxides, SOx = sulfur oxides, PM = particulate matter, CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents, GHG = greenhouse gases, NEI = National Emissions Inventory 1Construction activities will occur over a 2- to 3-year (Alternative B), or 4- to 5-year (Alternative D) period; the analysis assumes that construction emissions will occur in 1 year for the purposes of comparing project emissions to the NEI and GHG report rule comparison thresholds 2Greenhouse gas emissions from construction are compared with the greenhouse gas reporting requirement threshold under 40 Code of Federal Regulations 98 (25,000 metric tons of CO2e per year) to provide context for the scale of emissions. Fish hatchery operations are not one of the 41 source categories required to report greenhouse gas emissions under this program.

ES-4 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report Executive Summary

Emissions associated with operations and maintenance would be similar in nature to Alternative A but potentially reduced because the frequency and intensity of maintenance activities would be reduced after the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system has been rehabilitated.

Climate. Construction activities would result in short-term emissions of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide [CO2], nitrous oxide, and methane) through the combustion of fuels in on-road and non- road equipment. In addition to directly emitted greenhouse gas emissions, minor amounts of carbon in soils and vegetation would be released during surface-disturbing activities. Estimated construction-related emissions of approximately 1,461 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) would be below 25,000 metric tons per year. BMPs and conservation measures that reduced combustion-related criteria pollutant emissions would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Greenhouse gas emissions associated with operations and maintenance would be similar in nature to those described for Alternative A, though emissions may be less because the frequency and intensity of required activities would be reduced after the system has been rehabilitated.

Under Alternative B, LNFH would continue to divert instream waters from Icicle Creek and draw on groundwater resources to support Hatchery operations. Rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system would not affect water usage requirements or rates compared with current conditions; the authorized diversion rate from Icicle Creek or groundwater or storage water rights would be the same as under Alternative A. Projected climate-induced hydrological changes would be the same as described for Alternative A.

Alternative C Air Quality. Alternative C would have the same short-term impacts on air quality as described under Alternative B, and the same BMP and conservation methods would be employed to minimize these impacts. Emissions under Alternative B would also occur under Alternative C, with the exception that fewer emissions from replacing or rehabilitating the conveyance pipeline would occur. This is because more of the pipeline would be lined in place rather than replaced with new piping, resulting in fewer fugitive dust and combustion-related emissions. Approximately 0.71 acres would be temporarily disturbed under Alternative C. Emissions associated with operations and maintenance of the LNFH would be the same as described under Alternative B.

Climate. Greenhouse gas emissions described under Alternative B would also occur under Alternative C, with the exception that fewer emissions from replacing or rehabilitating the conveyance pipeline would occur. The amount of soil and vegetation disturbed along the conveyance pipeline may also be reduced, resulting in less released carbon compared with Alternative B though this change would be small. Like Alternative B, BMPs and conservation measures that reduced combustion-related criteria pollutant emissions would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions associated with operations and maintenance of the LNFH would be the same as described under Alternative B.

Projected climate-induced hydrological changes and their effects on Hatchery operations would be the same as described for Alternative B.

SWISP Project EIS ES-5 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report Executive Summary

Alternative D Air Quality. Alternative D would have the same types of short-term impacts on air quality as described under Alternative B, and the same BMP and conservation methods would be employed to minimize these impacts. Compared with Alternative B, Phase I construction activities under Alternative D would be limited to workday hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and the in-water work window would be two weeks shorter. Because of these restrictions, the sequence of Phase I component construction would extend through two additional in-water work windows (i.e., in-water work would occur in two additional years when compared with Alternative B). In addition, the Hatchery’s surface water would need to be supplied by pumping from the spillway pool for a longer period of time (8 months compared with 10 days under Alternative B). This would result in greater emissions under Alternative D than described for Alternative B (Table ES-1). The same number of acres (0.84) would be temporarily disturbed as under Alternative B.

Emissions associated with operations and maintenance of the LNFH would be the same as described under Alternative B.

Climate. Sources of greenhouse gas emissions from rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system and the amount of soil and vegetation disturbed along the conveyance pipeline would be the same as described under Alternative B, though emissions would be greater due the extended work period and additional water pumping requirements described above. Like Alternative B, estimated combustion-related emissions would be below 25,000 metric tons per year (Table ES- 1). BMPs and conservation measures that reduced combustion-related criteria pollutant emissions would also reduce greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gas emissions associated with operations and maintenance of the LNFH would be the same as described under Alternative B.

Projected climate-induced hydrological changes and their effects on Hatchery operations would be the same as described for Alternative B.

ES-6 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Table of Contents Chapter Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... ES-1 CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION ...... 1 1.1 Project Area ...... 1 1.2 Alternatives ...... 1 1.2.1 Alternative A – No Action ...... 1 1.2.2 Alternative B – Proposed Action...... 3 1.2.3 Alternative C ...... 7 1.2.4 Alternative D ...... 8 CHAPTER 2. RELEVANT LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND POLICY ...... 11 2.1 Federal Laws, Regulations, Statutes, and Orders ...... 11 2.2 State and Local Laws ...... 11 2.3 Other ...... 12 CHAPTER 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ...... 13 3.1 Analysis Area ...... 13 3.2 Air Quality ...... 13 3.2.1 Air Quality Conditions ...... 13 3.2.2 Visibility ...... 15 3.2.3 Air Pollution Sources ...... 16 3.2.4 Sensitive Receptors ...... 17 3.3 Climate ...... 18 3.3.1 Climate Conditions ...... 18 3.3.2 Projected Future Climatic Conditions and Climate-Induced Changes to Icicle Creek ...... 19 3.3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 21 CHAPTER 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...... 23 4.1 Methods ...... 23 4.1.1 Analysis Indicators ...... 23 4.1.2 Issue Statements ...... 23 4.1.3 Assumptions ...... 23 4.2 Alternative A – No Action Alternative ...... 24 4.2.1 Air Quality ...... 24 4.2.2 Climate ...... 24 4.3 Alternative B – Proposed Action ...... 25 4.3.1 Air Quality ...... 25 4.3.2 Climate ...... 28 4.4 Alternative C...... 29 4.4.1 Air Quality ...... 29 4.4.2 Climate ...... 29 4.5 Alternative D ...... 30 4.5.1 Air Quality ...... 30

SWISP Project EIS i Air Quality and Climate Resource Report Table of Contents

4.5.2 Climate ...... 31 4.6 Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity ...... 31 4.7 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts ...... 31 4.8 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources ...... 31 CHAPTER 5. GLOSSARY ...... 33 CHAPTER 6. REFERENCES CITED ...... 35

Tables Page

ES-1 Estimated Equipment-Related Emissions by Proposed Work Component, Alternatives B and D (Tons)...... ES-4 1 National and Washington Ambient Air Quality Standards ...... 13 2 Wenatchee Monitoring Site PM2.5 Data (2015–2017) ...... 15 3 Air Quality Index Summary Report for Chelan County (2015–2019) ...... 15 4 Chelan County, Washington Criteria Pollutant Emissions by Source Category (2011, 2014, and 2017) (Tons/Year) ...... 17 5 Average Annual Precipitation and Temperature, City of Leavenworth ...... 19 6 Estimated Equipment-Related Emissions by Proposed Work Component, Alternative B (Tons) ...... 28 7 Estimated Equipment-Related Emissions by Proposed Work Component, Alternative D (Tons) ...... 30

Figures Page

1 Visibility Trends, Snoqualmie Pass, Washington (1993−2018) ...... 16 2 Geographic and Hydrological Features Referenced in Climate Discussion (USGS 2020) ...... 18 3 Average monthly streamflow for three time periods under low (Figure 3a) and high (Figure 3b) greenhouse gas emission scenarios using the ensemble average streamflow from the global climate model instances used in the bcMACA dataset (CIG 2017b). This figure is meant to highlight the changing timing and general volume of streamflow and not the absolute values, which varies based on the global climate model and dataset shown. See Appendix C for a discussion of datasets and figures showing both the ensemble average and the individual climate model outcomes for the bcMACA dataset...... 25

Appendices

Appendix A. Maps Appendix B. Best Management Practices Appendix C. Predicted Streamflows In Icicle Creek Appendix D. Emissions Calculations

ii SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Acronyms and Abbreviations Full Phrase

AQI air quality index

BMP Best Management Practice

CFR Code of Federal Regulations cfs cubic feet per second CIPP cure-in-place pipe CMIP Coupled Model Intercomparison Project CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CO2e carbon dioxide equivalents COIC Cascade Orchard Irrigation District CUA contractor use area

Ecology Washington Department of Ecology EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act

FLIGHT Facility Level Information on Greenhouse Gases Tool Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

IO&MA Intake Operations and Maintenance Area

LNFH Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery

NAAQS national ambient air quality standard NEI National Emissions Inventory NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOx nitrogen oxide NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System

O&M operations and maintenance O3 ozone

Pb lead PEIS programmatic environmental impact statement PISMA pipeline intake and sediment management area PM10 particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter PM2.5 particulate matter smaller than 10 micrometers in diameter

RCP representative concentration pathway Reclamation U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation ROW right-of-way

SWISP Project EIS iii Air Quality and Climate Resource Report Acronyms and Abbreviations

SO2 sulfur dioxide

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USC United States Code USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

iv SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Chapter 1. General Project Information The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery (hereafter, LNFH or Hatchery) Surface Water Intake Fish Screens and Fish Passage (SWISP) Project (Map A-1 in Appendix A). The purpose of this specialist report is to provide a comprehensive environmental baseline and analysis of the potential impacts of the SWISP Project under four separate alternatives, including Alternative A, No Action.

1.1 Project Area

The Project Area is on and near the LNFH, near the City of Leavenworth in Chelan County, Washington. The Project Area includes the LNFH’s surface water intake and primary point of diversion on Icicle Creek, and conveyance pipeline to the Hatchery. The surface water intake is on U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) property, while the conveyance pipeline crosses several private parcels before re-entering USFWS property. Access to private parcels is via existing easement agreements between the landowner and federal government. The Project Area also includes approximately 1.25 miles of Icicle Creek Road, from the surface water intake to a U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (Forest Service) kiosk to the west, as well as access roads and staging areas on the USFWS property. The Project Area is depicted on Map A-1 in Appendix A.

1.2 Alternatives

Reclamation identified a reasonable range of alternatives for analysis in the EIS through the development of screening criteria, the assessment of Project components and elements against these criteria, and the consideration of scoping comments received. The major Project components are Intake, Fish Passage, Sediment Management, Conveyance Pipeline, Temporary Hatchery Water Supply, and Access and Staging. Each component has technical and operational requirements; generally, there are different techniques to meet these requirements. These different techniques are termed elements.

Chapter 2 of the EIS describes the No Action Alternative and three action alternatives in detail, along with a summary comparison of the differences and common impacts between the alternatives. A summary of the alternatives and component elements considered but eliminated from detailed study is also provided. Map A-2 through Map A-8 in Appendix A depict the alternatives in detail.

1.2.1 Alternative A – No Action The No Action Alternative represents continuation of current operation and maintenance (O&M) of the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system on Icicle Creek and provides a basis for comparison to the action alternatives. The existing intake and delivery system, constructed in 1939 and 1940, would remain in its current degraded condition and likely continue to deteriorate. All

SWISP Project EIS 1 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

existing features listed and summarized below and depicted in Map A-2 and Map A-3 in Appendix A, would remain in place and would not be modified, improved, or rehabilitated under this alternative.

• Low-head diversion dam • Intake channel • Intake trashrack structure • Access road • Fish ladder/Sediment sluice • Gatehouse • Outlet channel • Conveyance pipeline • Sand settling basin • Inside and outside screen chambers

The diversion dam would continue to divert water from Icicle Creek to the intake channel, through an unscreened diversion. The start of the intake system would remain at the intake trashrack structure. The excavated intake channel above the intake trashrack structure and concrete intake channel below would continue to convey water through gravity flow to the gatehouse. The channel would remain unscreened. The intake trashrack structure at the entrance to the concrete intake channel would remain in operation. The trashrack’s 6-inch bar spacing would continue to prevent large debris from entering the concrete intake channel. The road would not be modified or extended and would continue to provide access to the stairs leading to the intake trashrack structure. The existing fish ladder would not be modified to alter flow or enhance fish passage.

The existing gatehouse serves to transition surface water from the open intake channel to the enclosed conveyance pipeline It houses a fine rack with 1.5-inch bar spacing and an overflow spill and sediment sluicing sections separated by a bulkhead. The fine rack limits the size of objects that enter the pipeline. A gate valve can be opened to flush sediment; however, it does not function reliably. The gatehouse would remain in place, and the outlet channel would continue to direct bypassed water and sluice material (sediment) from the gatehouse back to Icicle Creek.

The aging 31- to 33-inch diameter buried concrete pipeline would continue to convey water up to 42 cubic feet per second (cfs) from the gatehouse to the Hatchery. No sections would be lined or replaced and introduced sediment would continue to be transported to the Hatchery. Transported sediments would continue to degrade the existing pipeline. Before water enters the Hatchery’s rearing units it is either routed into the sand settling basin (normal operation) or directly to the inside or outside screen chamber. The sand settling basin would continue to trap sediment and minimize the amount of remaining sediment from entering fish production facilities. Sediment and entrained fish would continue to be periodically removed from the sand settling basin in accordance with existing biological opinions (USFWS 2011; NMFS 2017). From the sand settling basin, water can be directed to either the inside or outside screen chamber before entering the Hatchery’s rearing units. The screens in the inside and outside screen chambers are composed of vertical static screen

2 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

panels that filter fish and debris from the Hatchery’s water supply. The screen chambers do not meet National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) current screening criteria (NMFS 2011) 1. Screens must be manually cleaned, and entrained fish must be captured, removed, counted, and returned to Icicle Creek. LNFH reports the number and species of Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed fish entrained in the intake and delivery system in their annual take report to NMFS and the USFWS.

Hatchery O&M is subject to both the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and O&M consultations under the ESA Section 7 with NMFS and USFWS (USFWS 2011; NMFS 2017). Extraordinary maintenance would continue to be handled on a case-by-case basis as determined to be necessary by the Hatchery. ESA Section 7 consultation has been reinitiated with the USFWS for O&M of the Hatchery.

The Cascade Orchard Irrigation Company (COIC) is expected to relocate its point of diversion on Icicle Creek downstream of the Hatchery. Once the new point of diversion is constructed, COIC would no longer divert water at the current intake location.

1.2.2 Alternative B – Proposed Action Reclamation proposes to rehabilitate the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system on Icicle Creek by constructing new headworks2 and a creek-width roughened channel and replacing and lining the surface water conveyance pipeline to the Hatchery. In addition, the current access road would be modified and extended to provide better entry to an expanded Intake Operations and Maintenance Area (IO&MA). A conceptual drawing of the proposed intake facilities is included as Map A-4 in Appendix A. See Map A-5 and Map A-6 in Appendix A showing activities proposed under Alternative B.

Intake and Fish Passage Construction of the headworks and roughened channel would incorporate the existing low-head diversion dam and intake channel. The roughened channel would incorporate a portion of the fish ladder/sediment sluice; the unincorporated portion would be removed. Two self-cleaning, cylindrical, screens would be installed at the diversion headworks to comply with NMFS fish screening criteria, provide redundancy in case of screen maintenance, and to facilitate the Hatchery’s ability to meet future water conservation goals. A low-flow boulder weir fishway would be integrated into the roughened channel to provide NMFS-compliant fish passage during typical low flows, and a portion of the roughened channel would be extended upstream of the diversion dam to facilitate fish passage overall and at higher flows in particular. The intake trashrack structure would be removed, and a new pipeline would be placed in the intake channel to connect the headworks to the conveyance pipeline. The intake channel would be filled to cover the pipeline and create the IO&MA to enable Hatchery personnel to safely and efficiently access, operate, and maintain the

1 The existing inside and outside screen chambers meet NMFS standards for fish screening (NMFS 1997), but not current criteria (NMFS 2011). Even if the screen chambers were upgraded to NMFS current criteria, take would still occur. This is because take occurs at the point of entrainment, at the existing intake facilities on Icicle Creek. The screen chambers are at the distal end of the conveyance pipeline, approximately 6,300 feet from the existing intake facilities on Icicle Creek. 2 Headworks means any dam, weir, barrage, or reservoir and all works appurtenant thereto, used for or in connection with the storage, control, conveyance, or distribution of water. For the SWISP Project, the headworks includes the combined intake structure elements, such as the intake structure, gates, and retaining walls.

SWISP Project EIS 3 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

intake facilities. The existing stairway from the access road to the intake channel would be removed as this area would become part of the IO&MA. See Map A-4 in Appendix A for a conceptual drawing of the proposed intake facilities.

Sediment Management Elements to manage sediment accumulated at the intake include a ramp on the upstream side of the roughened channel to help mobilize sediment over the feature, a vertical access pipe incorporated into the IO&MA behind the screens to enable a submersible pump to draw in screened water and force it through a hose and nozzle to mobilize sediment through propulsion, and a series of pipes, valves, and outlet channel at the pipeline intake and sediment management area (PISMA) to flush sediment through the intake pipeline back to Icicle Creek (as needed). Components of the PISMA would be placed at the former gatehouse location. See Map A-4 in Appendix A for a conceptual drawing of the proposed intake facilities.

Conveyance Pipeline Under Alternative B, approximately 2,180 feet of the conveyance pipeline would be replaced using cut and cover trenching on USFWS property and approximately 4,000 feet of conveyance pipeline would be lined with cure-in-place pipe (CIPP) on private parcels (Map A-5 in Appendix A). Construction of several temporary access points (contractor use areas [CUAs]) along the existing conveyance pipeline alignment would be installed to provide ingress and egress for pipe lining on private lands. These areas would be restored to pre-construction conditions following lining activities.

The uppermost segment of the existing concrete cylinder pipeline on USFWS property would be removed and replaced with 520 feet of new 42-inch high-density polyethylene pipe in the same location. The 1,660 feet of the lower segment of pipeline on USFWS property would be constructed parallel to the existing concrete cylinder pipeline. The current control valve system at the sand settling basin on USFWS property would be replaced with a new control valve vault to allow safe pipe filling operations. After control valve connections are made, this segment of the existing pipeline would be decommissioned and abandoned-in-place. All rehabilitation, replacement, and modernization of the LNFH intake and delivery facilities would conclude at the control valve system; the sand settling basin and inside and outside screen chambers would remain unaltered.

Temporary Hatchery Water Supply Temporary Hatchery water would primarily be supplied by a gravity-fed diversion. A 40 cfs water supply to LNFH would be maintained during Phase I construction3. Temporary pumping from the spillway pool would supply water while the gravity-fed bypass pipeline and outlet are installed and connected to the existing conveyance pipeline approximately 200-300 feet below the intake construction area. This would occur over an approximately 1-week period. It is likely that multiple pumps would be needed to supply this water.

A 20 cfs water supply to LNFH would be maintained during Phase II construction between April 17 to May 20. This would be needed when pipeline replacement, lining with CIPP, and pipeline

3 During Phase I construction, the LNFH has agreed to a 40 cfs temporary Hatchery water supply, which is different than the LNFH’s full surface water right of 42 cfs.

4 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

interconnections were underway, and would occur through pumping from the spillway pool adjacent to LNFH (Map A-5 in Appendix A).

Access and Staging Staging and storage sites for construction equipment and materials, and construction staff administration and vehicle parking would be located at various places on LNFH grounds (see Map A-5 and Map A-6 in Appendix A). Trucks hauling construction equipment and containing construction materials would be required to turn around approximately 1.25 miles southwest of the intake access road, at the Forest Service and Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area kiosk on Icicle Creek Road. Construction access to the conveyance pipeline would use existing roads, temporary access routes, and the pipeline right-of-way (ROW).

Construction Construction of the SWISP Project would occur in three phases. Phase I would include construction of the intake access road and rehabilitation of the intake structures and facilities (e.g., fish screens, fish passage). Phase II would include replacement and lining of the conveyance pipeline. There would likely be temporal overlap between parts of Phase I and Phase II construction. For instance, in July 2022, it is likely that construction of the proposed intake facilities may overlap with pipeline replacement on the Hatchery grounds (see Appendix C in the SWISP Project EIS for additional assumptions). Phase III would include revegetation of upland and riparian areas that are proposed to be disturbed.

Phase I construction activities would occur up to 24 hours per day, 6 days per week, and up to 7 days per week. In addition, the in-water work window would be from July 1 to November 15 each year. Phase II construction activities and Phase III revegetation activities would not include any in- water work and would be limited to workday hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., 5 days per week, and up to 6 days per week.

Phase I includes:

• Construction activities occurring up to 24 hours a day, up to 7 days a week. • Construction occurring over two seasons primarily within the in-water work window of July 1 to November 15. • Construction of intake access road (2022). • Installation of temporary cofferdams4 (2022 and 2023). • Demolition of existing intake trashrack structure (complete), existing gatehouse (complete) and fish ladder/sediment sluice (partial) (2022). • Construction of headworks, including the intake structure, retaining walls, and vertical access pipe for sediment management tools (2022). • Placement of new intake pipeline (2022).

4 Temporary cofferdams would likely consist of geo-bags, or non-woven geotextile bags. These are large bags made of synthetic materials, such as polyester, polypropylene, or polyethylene, which are filled with sand, rock, or other material, fastened shut, and used to protect structures or riverbanks from erosion or scour.

SWISP Project EIS 5 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

• Construction of IO&MA over the headworks, retaining walls, and intake pipeline (2022). • Placement of guiderails, hydraulic equipment, NMFS-compliant fish screens, slide gates, covered control panel, and safety guardrails around the IO&MA (2022). • Construction of the PISMA at former gatehouse location (2022). • Rehabilitation of the outlet channel (2022). • Construction of roughened channel, including upstream sediment ramp and low-flow boulder weir fishway (2023). • Suppling LNFH with a temporary water supply of 40 cfs using a temporary above-ground, gravity-fed bypass pipeline connected to the conveyance pipeline or pumping from the spillway pool when necessary (2022). • Post-construction seeding of disturbed areas that do not have a surface treatment (e.g., gravel) with an upland or riparian seed mix, as appropriate (2023).

Phase II includes:

• Construction activities occurring during workday hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., 5 days per week, and up to 6 days per week. • The majority of pipeline lining construction occurring over three seasons during a 4- to 5- week period between April and May. • Pipeline replacement construction occurring year-round where practicable. • Replacing conveyance pipeline segments on USFWS property (2022, 2023, and 2024). • Utilizing existing roads and temporary access routes to gain access to CUAs, as coordinated with private landowners. No improvements are needed to existing roads and access routes. • CIPP lining of the conveyance pipeline on private parcels from CUAs. • Temporarily pumping Hatchery water out of the spillway pool during pipeline replacement, lining with CIPP, and pipeline interconnections. Pumping would take place between April 17 and May 20 during the Phase II construction period (2022, 2023, and 2024). • Constructing new control valve vault and system on USFWS property (2022 and 2023). • Post-construction seeding of disturbed upland areas (2022, 2023, and 2024).

Phase III includes:

• Planting of riparian tree cuttings in the riparian zone within the Phase I construction area (2024). • Planting of containerized upland shrubs and trees in uplands within the Phase I construction area (2024).

Best Management Practices Reclamation would implement practices to protect water quality and other resources and promote soil conservation during Project construction and O&M activities. While these measures are often called Best Management Practices (BMPs), they are conservation measures used to reduce Project impacts on resources and resource uses, including, but not limited to, fisheries and aquatic resources,

6 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

Tribal interests, public health and safety, and recreation. BMPs can be a ‘thing’ installed on-the- ground (e.g., silt fence, ground cover vegetation) or a ‘process’ used to plan and conduct an activity (e.g., marking stream buffers). The comprehensive list of BMPs is included in this report as Appendix B.

Permitting Because Alternative B would include work within Icicle Creek, several federal and state regulatory permit approvals would be required before construction begins. Reclamation would obtain all required regulatory permits prior to construction implementation. Reclamation would use the Washington State Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application form to apply for applicable permits. Permits that would be obtained include:

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Section 404 Nationwide Permits • Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) Section 401 Water Quality Certification • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Hydraulic Project Approval

Alternative B would also include the use of Icicle Creek Road on National Forest System lands, between the Snow Lakes Trailhead and the Forest Service and Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area kiosk. As a result, Reclamation would secure the required road use approval from the Forest Service, most likely under a special use permit. The kiosk is approximately 1.25 miles southwest of the intake facilities.

Operations and Maintenance O&M activities would periodically occur on an as-needed basis as determined by Hatchery staff, including daily visual inspections of the proposed intake facilities. Periodic maintenance of the fish screens would be facilitated by construction of the proposed IO&MA, while O&M of the conveyance pipeline would be facilitated by the PISMA and the new control valve system at the sand settling basin.

Hatchery O&M is subject to both the NPDES permit from the EPA and O&M consultations under the ESA Section 7 with NMFS and USFWS (USFWS 2011; NMFS 2017). Extraordinary maintenance is handled on a case-by-case basis as determined to be necessary by the Hatchery.

1.2.3 Alternative C Under Alternative C, Reclamation would rehabilitate the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system on Icicle Creek as described under Alternative B. However, under Alternative C, Reclamation would line the entire upper segment (520 feet) of the conveyance pipeline on USFWS property with CIPP instead of replacing it, as described under Alternative B (Map A-7 and Map A- 8 in Appendix A). As a result, the mature trees in the Icicle Creek riparian zone found in this conveyance pipeline segment would not be removed. Under Alternative C, the length of the conveyance pipeline, from the PISMA to CUA 5 (4,520 feet), would be lined with CIPP. The remaining segments lined with CIPP on private parcels and replaced on the Hatchery grounds proper would be the same as described under Alternative B (see Map A-7 in Appendix A). A conceptual drawing of the proposed intake facilities is included as Map A-4 in Appendix A.

SWISP Project EIS 7 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

A 20 cfs water supply to LNFH would be maintained during Phase II construction between April 17 and May 20, as described under Alternative B. No temporary pumping would be necessary for pipeline replacement during Phase II construction because the upper segment of the conveyance pipeline on USFWS property would be lined with CIPP instead. As discussed under Alternative B, temporary pumping would be needed while the conveyance pipeline is lined with CIPP, and when pipeline interconnections were underway.

Hatchery O&M is subject to both the NPDES permit from the EPA and O&M consultations under the ESA Section 7 with NMFS and USFWS (USFWS 2011; NMFS 2017). Extraordinary maintenance is handled on a case-by-case basis as determined to be necessary by the Hatchery.

1.2.4 Alternative D Under Alternative D, Reclamation would rehabilitate the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system on Icicle Creek as described under Alternative B but with the following differences. Phase I construction activities would be same as Alternative B but would be limited to workday hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., 5 days per week, and up to 6 days per week. In addition, the in-water work window would be limited to July 1 to October 31 each year. Alternative D was developed to minimize the effects of 24 hours a day construction and reduce the overlap of cofferdam use with a period of greater high-flow risk. Phase II construction activities and schedule would be the same as described under Alternative B. Phase III revegetation efforts would be the same as described under Alternative B except would occur a year later (2025).

The components and elements of the surface water intake facilities and construction activities would be the same as described for Alternative B during Phase I; however, because construction would be limited to workday hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and the in-water work window would be two weeks shorter than under Alternative B, construction of Phase I under Alternative D would require four years (i.e., four in-water work windows from 2022 to 2025) to complete. The sequence of Phase I construction activities would be very similar to those listed for Alternative B but would extend through two additional in-water work windows during two additional years (2024 and 2025). Initial mobilization, construction of the intake access road, temporary Hatchery water supply during the in- water work window, access and staging, BMPs, permitting, and O&M would be unchanged from Alternative B. Details of the Phase I construction schedule for intake and fish passage and temporary Hatchery water supply components for Alternative D are provided below.

During the first in-water work window in 2022, preparation for and installation of cofferdams and the gravity bypass pipeline and gravity bypass outlet, demolition of the intake trashrack structure, gatehouse, fish ladder/sediment sluice (partial), and construction of the PISMA and outlet channel, would be the same as Alternative B (Map A-6 in Appendix A). However, because of the shorter workdays and shorter in-water work window, construction of the intake structure would be limited to excavation, preparation and construction of the concrete slab foundation, and partial construction of the intake headworks. At the end of the 2022 in-water work window, the intake structure would be approximately 35 percent completed. Although the full extent of the intake headworks foundation would be in place, the area of the partially constructed intake headworks would be inundated between the 2022 and 2023 in-water work windows after cofferdam removal.

8 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

Demobilization of construction equipment in 2022 would leave the constructed elements of the intake structure in this condition until July 2023 when re-mobilization occurs.

From November 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023, the Hatchery’s surface water would be supplied by pumping from the spillway pool on Icicle Creek adjacent to LNFH (Map A-5 in Appendix A). Two high capacity pumps5 would provide 40 cfs of water to the Hatchery during this period. An operational third pump would be on site as a backup. The pumps would operate 24 hours per day for the 8-month period; as a result, they would require 24 hour per day, 7 day per week monitoring by the construction contractor.

During the second in-water work window in 2023, preparation for and installation of cofferdams and the gravity bypass pipeline and gravity bypass outlet again would occur as described under Alternative B. The remaining 65 percent of construction of the intake structure components and elements would be completed before cofferdam removal. By the end of the 2023 in-water work window, fish screens would be in place and fully operational, and the temporary gravity bypass pipeline and gravity bypass outlet would be removed. In addition, the transition to the new intake structure would be completed by connecting intake facilities to the conveyance pipeline to deliver the LNFH surface water supply by October 31, 2023. Because the intake structure would be fully operational at the end of this in-water work window, there would be no need to supply temporary water to the Hatchery during the remainder of Phase I construction.

During the third in-water work window in 2024, mobilization similar to previous Phase I in-water work window construction seasons would be required before construction of the low-flow boulder weir fishway and the left bank portion of the roughened channel could occur. Construction of the low-flow boulder weir fishway and the left bank portion of the roughened channel would include placement of cofferdams, dewatering of the construction area, regrading of the stream channel bottom, construction of the low-flow boulder weir fishway and the left bank portion of the roughened channel and finally, removal of the cofferdam.

During the fourth in-water work window in 2025, mobilization similar to previous Phase I in-water work window construction seasons would be required before construction on the remaining portion (right bank) of the roughened channel could occur. Construction of the remaining portion of the roughened channel would include placement of cofferdams, dewatering of the construction area, regrading of the stream channel bottom, construction of the roughened channel and finally, removal of the cofferdam. Once the entire roughened channel is complete and all cofferdams have been removed, the intake facilities would undergo final testing and commissioning to ensure proper operation and compliance with NMFS current screening and fish passage criteria for anadromous fish passage facilities (NMFS 2011), which would occur by October 31, 2025.

5 Pumps are assumed to be high-lift, 16-inch, trailer-mounted with 150 horsepower diesel engines.

SWISP Project EIS 9 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 1. General Project Information

This page intentionally left blank.

10 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Chapter 2. Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy The section below outlines laws, regulations, and policies that are applicable to air quality and climate change analyses, along with a brief description of these authorities.

2.1 Federal Laws, Regulations, Statutes, and Orders

Clean Air Act (42 United States Code [USC] 7401 et seq.)—is administered by the EPA. The EPA is mandated to set standards on air emissions considered harmful to public health (primary standards) and public welfare (secondary standards). These national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) are set for six criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter (fine particulate matter 2.5 micrometers or smaller [PM2.5] and large particulate matter less than 10 micrometers [PM10]), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). While the EPA is the primary regulatory authority for air quality in the U.S., the Clean Air Act is largely implemented by the states and local and Tribal authorities. Ecology’s Central Regional Office is responsible for air quality control in Chelan County, Washington.

Clean Air Act amendments—include provisions to maintain scenic vistas in federally designated Class I areas (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 81). Designated Class I areas include national parks larger than 6,000 acres and national wilderness areas larger than 5,000 acres that were established before 1977. The Project Area is immediately east of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness Class I area. Ecology has developed a Regional Haze State Implementation Plan to comply with requirements to minimize impacts on visibility in Class I areas. The plan focuses on controlling emissions from fixed large facilities, such as smelters and other industrial facilities, to meet by 2064 the goals of the Regional Haze Rule of improving visibility in Class I areas to natural background visibility conditions.

There are no federal laws or regulations related to climate change. Greenhouse gas reporting requirements under 40 CFR 98 are not expected to pertain to this Project (see Section 4, Environmental Consequences).

Columbia Basin Project Act of March 1943—reauthorized the Columbia Basin Project, bringing it under the provisions of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939.

2.2 State and Local Laws

Ecology has identified state ambient air quality standards for the protection of human health (primary standards). These supplement the national standards and include limits for emissions of total suspended particulates, lead, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, ozone, and nitrogen dioxide (Chapter 70.94 Revised Code of Washington). Several state regulations also apply

SWISP Project EIS 11 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 2. Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy

to regulating air emissions from such operations as stationary facilities and construction, consistent with these standards (Chapter 173-400 Washington Administrative Code).

There are no state laws or regulations related to climate change or limiting or reporting greenhouse gases that pertain to this Project.

2.3 Other

The Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the Icicle Creek Water Resource Management Strategy (Icicle Strategy), prepared jointly by Chelan County and Ecology (2019), is important to consider in terms of the interrelationship between projected changes in climate and resultant changes in hydrology. Although it is not a part of the regulatory framework, it evaluates the potential environmental impacts of implementing a comprehensive water resource management strategy in the Icicle Creek subbasin. Among the impacts evaluated are the ways in which various water resource management actions in the subbasin would reduce potential effects on streamflow in Icicle Creek that are projected to occur as a result of climate change, as determined through hydrological modeling using a variety of climate change datasets to capture a range of potential outcomes (Chelan County and Ecology 2019).

12 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Chapter 3. Affected Environment

3.1 Analysis Area

The Analysis Area for air quality is Chelan County, Washington. The Analysis Area for climate is broader (see Section 3.3.1, Climate Conditions). Potential impacts on climate from the Project are based on regional climate scenarios, downscaled from global climate models.

3.2 Air Quality

3.2.1 Air Quality Conditions State and some federal agencies operate air monitoring stations to measure concentrations of criteria pollutants and to determine compliance with national and state air quality standards (see Table 1). Chelan County is in attainment for all national and state air quality standards (EPA 2020a).

Table 1 National and Washington Ambient Air Quality Standards

Averaging National Standards Washington Pollutant Time Primary Secondary Form Standard Ozone 8-hour 0.070 Same as Annual 4th-highest daily max. 8- 0.70 ppm ppm1 primary hr concentration, averaged over 3 years Carbon 8-hour 9 ppm1 — Not to be exceeded more than 9 ppm monoxide 1-hour 35 ppm1 — once per year 35 ppm Nitrogen Annual 53 ppb2 Same as Annual mean 53 ppb dioxide (arithmetic primary mean) 1-hour 100 ppb2 — 98th percentile of 1-hour daily 100 ppb max. concentration, averaged over 3 years Sulfur Annual — — — 0.02 ppm dioxide (arithmetic mean) 24-hour — — — 0.14 ppm 3-hour — 0.5 ppm1 Not to be exceeded more than 0.50 ppm once per year 1-hour 75 ppb2 — 99th percentile of 1-hour daily — max. concentrations, averaged over 3 years

SWISP Project EIS 13 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

Averaging National Standards Washington Pollutant Time Primary Secondary Form Standard Particulate 24-hour 150 Same as Not to be exceeded more than — Matter µg/m3 primary once per year on average over 3

(PM10) years Particulate Annual 12 µg/m3 15 µg/m3 Annual mean averaged over 3 — Matter (arithmetic years

(PM2.5) mean) 24-hour 35 µg/m3 Same as 98th percentile, averaged over 3 — primary years Lead3 Rolling 3- 0.15 Same as Not to be exceeded — month µg/m3 primary average Source: EPA 2020b, Chapter 70.94 Revised Code of Washington Cells with a dash (—) indicate that there is no standard for that pollutant or averaging time. 1ppm—parts per million. Final rule signed October 1, 2015, and effective December 28, 2015. The previous (2008) ozone standards additionally remain in effect in some areas. Revocation of the 2008 ozone standards and transitioning to the 2015 standards will be addressed in the implementation rule for the current standards. 2ppb—parts per billion. Final rule signed June 2, 2010. The 1971 annual and 24-hour sulfur dioxide standards (0.03 ppm annual and 0.14 ppm 24-hour) were revoked in that same rulemaking; however, these standards remain in effect until 1 year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard. One exception is in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards, where the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standard are approved. 3μg/m3—micrograms per cubic meter. Final rule signed October 15, 2008. The 1978 lead standard (1.5 µg/m3) remains in effect until 1 year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard. The one exception is in areas designated nonattainment for the 1978 standard, where the 1978 standard remains in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2008 standard are approved.

There are two air quality monitoring stations in the vicinity of the general Project Area. The first is in the City of Leavenworth, approximately 2 miles north of the Project Area. It is operated by the Forest Service to monitor air quality and to make decisions on initiating controlled burns. The second station is in the City of Wenatchee, approximately 20 miles southeast of the Project Area. It is operated by Ecology. The purpose of this station is to collect wind speed, wind direction, and temperature in support of PM2.5 monitoring at Wenatchee. The three most recent years of monitoring data available for the Wenatchee monitoring station are shown in Table 2. No exceedances of the national or state ambient air quality standards were recorded in any of these three years; however, the data showed a trend of increasing PM2.5 emissions over that period that correlates with increased fire activity.

The EPA’s air quality index is used for reporting daily air quality. It describes how clean or polluted the air is by geographic area and what the associated health effects may be. Table 3 shows the annual air quality index data for Chelan County for the past 5 years.

As shown from the data above, air quality trends in the county show that the air quality is generally good, with unhealthy days in 2017 and 2018 likely associated with increased fire activity in those years.

14 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

Table 2 Wenatchee Monitoring Site PM2.5 Data (2015–2017)

Percent of Percent of Monitoring NAAQS Weighted NAAQS Station Year 24-hour Average (35.0 µg/m3) Annual Mean (12.0 µg/m3) Wenatchee #3 2015 17 48.6 5.4 45.0 Wenatchee #3 2016 13 37.1 3.0 25.0 Wenatchee #5 2016 19 54.3 6.9 57.5 Wenatchee #5 2017 27 77.1 9.6 80.0 Source: EPA 2020c

Table 3 Air Quality Index Summary Report for Chelan County (2015–2019)

Number Unhealthy Very of Days Good Moderate for Sensitive Unhealthy Unhealthy Hazardous Year with AQI Days Days Groups Days Days Days Days 2015 362 289 70 3 0 0 0 2016 366 330 36 0 0 0 0 2017 365 282 62 9 9 3 0 2018 365 290 50 8 12 5 0 2019 365 298 66 1 0 0 0 Source: EPA 2020d Good The air quality index (AQI) is 0 to 50. Air quality is considered satisfactory, and air pollution poses little or no risk. Moderate The AQI is 51 to 100. Air quality is acceptable; however, for some pollutants there may be a moderate health concern for a very small number of people. For example, people who are unusually sensitive to ozone may experience respiratory symptoms. Unhealthy for sensitive groups The AQI is 101 to 150. Although the general public is not likely to be affected at this AQI range, people with lung disease, older adults, and children are at a greater risk from exposure to ozone. People with heart and lung disease, older adults, and children are at greater risk from the presence of particles in the air. Unhealthy The AQI is 151 to 200. Everyone may begin to experience some adverse health effects, and members of the sensitive groups may experience more serious effects. Very Unhealthy The AQI is 201 to 300. This would trigger a health alert, signifying that everyone may experience more serious health effects.

3.2.2 Visibility Haze in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area affects the views that visitors to the lakes experience. An air quality monitor was established at Snoqualmie Pass (elevation 3,000 feet) in 1993 to assess visibility impairment in the surrounding area. This monitor is approximately 35 miles west of the Project Area. As shown on Figure 1, visibility on the 20 percent clearest days and 20 percent haziest days improved at similar rates between 1993 and 2018 (Federal Land Managers Environmental Database 2020). Based on the monitoring data, ammonium sulfate (typically associated with power plants and industrial sources) was the largest contributor to visibility impairment on the clearest days, followed by ammonium nitrate (typically associated with power plants and mobile pollution), organic carbon (typically associated with wildfire smoke), and elemental carbon (associated with road dust and soot). Organic carbon was the largest contributor to visibility impairment on the haziest

SWISP Project EIS 15 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

days, followed by ammonium sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, and elemental carbon (Federal Land Managers Environmental Database 2020).

Figure 1. Visibility Trends, Snoqualmie Pass, Washington (1993−2018)

Source: Federal Land Managers Environmental Database 2020

3.2.3 Air Pollution Sources Major air pollution sources in the Analysis Area include outdoor burning (year-round, except during summer fire safety burn bans), wildfires, agricultural burning (spring and fall burn seasons), orchard heaters, smudge pots (oil-burning devices used to prevent frost on fruit trees), silvicultural burning, and woodstoves. Smoke from some burns may become entrained in evening downslope flow and settle in sheltered valleys, though this is a rare occurrence (Ecology 2015).

The EPA prepares a national emissions inventory every 3 years to provide a comprehensive and detailed estimate of emissions from all air emission sources in the country. Emissions in the inventory are provided down to the county level. Table 4 shows the emissions in Chelan County for 2011, 2014, and 2017, the three most recent inventory years. As shown in this table, emission levels in the county depend largely on the amount of fire (agricultural burning, prescribed burning, and wildfire) in a given year.

16 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

Table 4 Chelan County, Washington Criteria Pollutant Emissions by Source Category (2011, 2014, and 2017) (Tons/Year)

Source 1 Category PM10 PM2.5 SO2 CO Lead VOC NOx 2011 Stationary 879 854 2,913 18,430 0.00 1,963 106 Mobile 170 133 15 16,652 0.07 2,170 3,088 Fire 910 771 61 9,141 — 2,145 106 Fugitive 1,153 172 — — — — — Dust Total 3,112 1,930 2,989 44,223 0.07 6,278 3,300

2014 Stationary 915 872 2,953 19,234 0.09 2,130 196 Mobile 141 103 7 15,043 0.07 1,919 2,500 Fire 31,162 26,409 2,064 314,938 — 74,021 3,318 Fugitive 1,143 190 — — — — — Dust Total 33,361 27,574 5,025 355,161 0.16 106,188 6,347

2017 Stationary 333 306 17 1,940 1.36 2,200 94 Mobile 114 81 6 11,661 133 1,403 2,099 Fire 7,116 6,037 453 71,192 — 16,722 775 Fugitive 1,344 193 — — — — — Dust Total 8,907 6,617 476 84,793 134.36 20,325 2,968 Source: EPA 2015, 2018, 2020e

3.2.4 Sensitive Receptors Air quality is an environmental concern primarily because it can affect human health. A secondary concern is its potential effects on vegetation and wildlife and on visibility in Class I areas, including the adjacent Alpine Lakes Wilderness. In addition, some air pollutants can damage structures, reduce visibility, or contribute to climate change. Potentially sensitive receptors are any groups or individuals who are particularly vulnerable to air pollution. This typically is children, the elderly, or any other persons with health complications. Potentially sensitive receptors in and near the Project Area are residences or businesses in the vicinity of the Project or along travel routes, such as the Icicle River RV Resort, the Icicle Creek Center for the Arts, and the Sleeping Lady Mountain Resort.

SWISP Project EIS 17 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

Potentially sensitive receptors in the analysis area are largely limited to the more urbanized areas, closer to the cities of Leavenworth and Wenatchee.

3.3 Climate

Climate is the collective typical weather conditions in a region averaged over a series of years (IPCC 2013). Climate change is a change in global or regional climate patterns, in particular a change apparent from the mid to late twentieth century onward and attributed largely to the increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). It can be identified by changes in the mean or the variability of its properties and persist for an extended period (IPCC 2013). Common indicators of climate change are temperature and precipitation (EPA 2016).

Climate change poses a challenge for water resource planning, protection, and use. This is because of increased uncertainty in timing, form, and distribution of precipitation and water demand. Climate change affects water supplies in the region, affecting such uses as instream flows, municipalities, and agriculture. This section discusses the current and projected climatic conditions regionally and in the analysis area.

3.3.1 Climate Conditions Climate in the Pacific Northwest is influenced by the interactions and seasonal variation of atmospheric circulation patterns, especially the seasonal migrations of the Aleutian low pressure system and the North Pacific (Hawaii) high pressure system (Climate Impact Group [CIG] 2004). These patterns generally lead to cold, wet winters and warm, dry summers, with local variation based on marine influences and elevation.

The Wenatchee River Watershed, which includes the Icicle Creek subbasin, is on the eastern slopes of the Cascade Mountains (Figure 2). The headwaters at high elevations in the Cascades receive considerable precipitation, which mostly falls as snow. Lower elevations of the Wenatchee River Watershed receive more modest amounts of precipitation (Montgomery Water Group 2003). In the eastern lowlands, average annual precipitation is generally less than 20 inches, with some places receiving as little as 7 inches (CIG 2004).

Figure 2. Geographic and Hydrological Precipitation patterns in the Icicle Creek subbasin Features Referenced in Climate Discussion are similar to those of the Wenatchee River (USGS 2020) Watershed; however, because of its elevation and location, the lowest elevations in the Icicle Creek subbasin receive more precipitation than the lowest elevations in the Wenatchee River Watershed (Montgomery Water Group 2003). Leavenworth is at the lowest and easternmost weather station in

18 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

the Icicle Creek subbasin. Average annual precipitation and temperature information at the Leavenworth station for the period of record (1914−2016) and for the last three 30-year climate normal6 cycles are shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Average Annual Precipitation and Temperature, City of Leavenworth

Average Annual Average Annual Average Annual Maximum Minimum Precipitation Temperature Temperature Time Period (inches) (°F) (°F) Period of Record 24.22 61.3 34.5 1961-1990 25.62 61.7 34.0 1971-2000 25.45 61.2 34.5 1981-2010 25.48 61.4 35.2 Source: Western Regional Climate Center 2020

3.3.2 Projected Future Climatic Conditions and Climate-Induced Changes to Icicle Creek

Projected Future Climatic Conditions The earth’s climate since the industrial revolution has been warming. This has been observed to coincide with widespread effects throughout the earth-atmosphere system, including reductions in the extent and duration of mountain winter snowpack, increases in mean nighttime minimum temperatures, shifts in historical rainfall patterns, and changes in the frequency, severity, and duration of weather events. These effects, in turn, have affected natural and human systems regardless of cause, implicating the sensitivity of natural and human systems to changing climate (IPCC 2013).

During the past 100 years, the Pacific Northwest has become warmer and wetter (Mote and Salathé 2010). Global climate models indicate a continuation of this trend. Temperatures are projected to continue to increase in the Pacific Northwest region, along with small increases in precipitation, shifts in the seasonality of precipitation, and increased high precipitation events; however, to what degree depends on projections based on low, medium, or high greenhouse gas emission scenarios (CIG 2009).

Climatic changes are likely going to decrease the snowpack in the Cascades, with earlier snowmelt. The CIG indicated in its 2009 Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment that probable impacts are as follows: a decreased April 1 snowpack by as much as 40 percent in the 2040s, reduced reservoir storage, and increased stream temperatures. These climate changes could result in the Wenatchee River Watershed transitioning from a snow-dominant watershed to a rain/snowmelt transient watershed by the 2040s. There would be less snowpack, earlier run off, and more

6 Climate normal cycles are defined as the three-decade averages of climatological variables, including temperature and precipitation (NOAA 2020).

SWISP Project EIS 19 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

precipitation falling as rain (Tohver 2016). These future conditions are anticipated in the Icicle Creek subbasin as well.

Climate-Induced Changes to Icicle Creek Future projected average monthly streamflow was modeled to aid in developing a water management strategy for Icicle Creek (CIG 2017a). The CIG analysis considered a wide range of potential climate-adjusted hydrology using a combination of datasets from five different regional studies on climate change (CIG 2017a, Table 3). These studies used multiple global climate models from Phase 3 and Phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), commonly known as CMIP3 (Meehl et al. 2007) and CMIP5 (Taylor et al. 2012), to generate potential changes to meteorological variables such as temperature and precipitation.7

Three emission scenarios were used as inputs to the global climate models to show potential changes in climatic outcomes depending on the level of greenhouse gases emitted globally over the next century:

• RCP 4.5 [representative concentration pathway 4.5] represents a low greenhouse gas emissions scenario in which greenhouse gas emission levels stabilize by the middle of the twenty-first century and fall sharply thereafter. • A1B represents a moderate emissions scenario in which greenhouse gas emissions increase gradually until stabilizing in the final decades of the twenty-first century. • RCP 8.5 represents a high scenario that assumes continued increases in emissions until the end of the century.

Global climate models produce output at a scale that covers many states and must be downscaled for the information to be relevant at a local scale such as the Icicle Creek subbasin. Depending on the dataset, statistical or dynamical downscaling techniques8 were applied to the global climate model meteorological output before using them as inputs to the Variable Infiltration Capacity hydrological model to project future changes in hydrological factors such as snowpack, soil saturation, runoff, and baseflow in Icicle Creek. Potential changes were shown for three time periods: the 2030s (2020−2049), 2050s (2040−2069), and 2080s (2070−2099). A summary of the five datasets used in the CIG analysis and the features of each dataset is provided in Appendix C. Uncertainties associated with the modeling are also discussed in the appendix.

While the magnitude of effects varied depending on the datasets used, the overall pattern of change indicated by the modeling outputs was consistent across datasets due to the expected reductions in

7Global climate models simulate processes in the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface, along with the interactions between each. Coordinated experiments are regularly conducted in which international modeling groups agree to produce climate simulations using the same sets of conditions. This allows for intercomparisons among models and more robust estimates of future changes in climate. These experiments are called Climate Modeling Intercomparison Projects (CIG 2017a, Section 2.2). 8Statistical approaches use empirical relationships derived by relating surface observations to coarse-scale global climate model fields. Dynamical approaches use a physical model that simulates the climate and weather processes occurring at the finer scales (CIG 2017a, Section 2.3). Two statistical methods (multivariate adaptive constructed analogs and bias correction and spatial disaggregation ) and one dynamical method (weather research and forecasting mesoscale climate model) were used (CIG 2017a, Table 2).

20 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

snowpack with warming. Warming elevates the snowline, increasing the proportion of precipitation that falls as rain and reducing snow accumulation in winter. The combination of reduced snowpack and higher temperatures results in an earlier and less pronounced spring peak in streamflow, along with lower flows throughout the melt season and summer. Each of the datasets shows the same changes in the seasonal cycle of streamflow: increased flow in winter, an earlier peak in streamflow, and decreased flow in summer (CIG 2017a).

As described in the Icicle Strategy (Chelan County and Ecology 2019), changes in climate are projected to have substantial impacts on streamflow in Icicle Creek. By 2030 under low and high greenhouse gas scenarios, higher average monthly flows are projected from December through April, with lower average monthly flows from May through November. Low flows are projected to be lower than what has been observed historically. Average peak flows are projected to occur in mid-April instead of in June, when the average peak flow has historically occurred.

These trends are expected to become more extreme in the second half of the century. In 2050, under a low greenhouse gas emission scenario average peak flows are projected to be reduced compared to the historical average peak flow, with a greater volume of flow projected to occur between October and May. Average minimum flows are projected to decrease by as much as 75 percent, while peak flows are projected to increase by 20 to nearly 60 percent. This indicates that systems may become flashier, with lower low flows and higher peak flows. Because runoff in Icicle Creek is projected to increase in the early part of the water year due to the warmer winters, less water would be available instream during critical low-flow months (Chelan County and Ecology 2019).

By 2080, the models indicate that this trend will be further exaggerated, with a much flatter hydrograph. Average monthly flows are projected to increase in the winter months (October to April) and be much lower from May to September. Under a high greenhouse gas scenario, these trends are similar, but accelerated and exaggerated (Chelan County and Ecology 2019).

The changes described above are illustrated in the figures in Appendix C, which show monthly average streamflow projections for Icicle Creek for the 2030s, 2050s, and 2080s under low and high greenhouse gas emission scenarios (CIG 2017b).

3.3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Greenhouse gas emissions are a concern because greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, warming the climate. Most studies indicate that the earth’s climate has warmed over the past century, due to increased emissions of greenhouse gases, and that human activities affecting emissions to the atmosphere are likely an important contributing factor. In the U.S., most greenhouse gas emissions are attributed to energy use. Such emissions result from the combustion of fossil fuels used for such needs as electricity generation, transportation, industry, and heating.

The primary greenhouse gases emitted through human activities are CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. The first three of these are the greenhouse gases evaluated in this analysis; this is because they would be produced through fuel combustion in on-road and off-road vehicles and equipment used during construction.

SWISP Project EIS 21 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 3. Affected Environment

Annual greenhouse gas emission estimates are available at the state, country, and global scales. The World Resource Institute’s Climate Watch tool provides data on greenhouse gas emissions from 186 countries and all 50 states. For 2016, the most recent year for which data are provided, global 9 emissions were 46,141 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) , U.S. emissions were 5,907 million metric tons CO2e, and Washington emissions were 98 million metric tons CO2e (Climate Watch 2020). A comparison of values reported in other sources, such as the EPA’s annual Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (EPA 2020f) show slight differences in annual emissions but are comparable in magnitude.

The EPA Facility Level Information on Greenhouse Gases Tool (FLIGHT; EPA 2020g) database reports annual greenhouse gas emissions from facilities emitting more than 25,000 metric tons of CO2e per year that are subject to the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program under 40 CFR 98. This includes emissions from most large, stationary sources of greenhouse gases (smaller emitters are not required to report) and emissions from most end uses of fossil fuels. Nationally, this reporting program accounts for 85 to 90 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions in the EPA’s Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks10 (EPA 2020f). The EPA FLIGHT database shows no reporting facilities in Chelan County in 2017 or 2018; however, one facility in Chelan County was subject to reporting requirements before this time: an aluminum processing facility in Malaga, Washington, that emitted 331,207 metric tons of CO2e in 2015 and 898 metric tons of CO2e in 2016 (EPA 2020g).

9 Carbon dioxide equivalency (CO2e) is a quantity that describes, for a given mixture and amount of greenhouse gas, the amount of CO2 that would have the same climate warming potential, when measured over a specified timescale. 10 Greenhouse gas “sinks” remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through the uptake of carbon and storage in forests, vegetation, and soils (EPA 2020f). Carbon sinks lower the concentration of CO2 from the atmosphere because more carbon is absorbed than released.

22 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Chapter 4. Environmental Consequences

4.1 Methods

4.1.1 Analysis Indicators Indicators for air quality are the following:

• Acres of surface disturbance and measures to reduce fugitive dust • Total vehicle miles traveled by on-road trucks and personal vehicles and tons of criteria pollutants resulting from their use • Total hours of operation of off-road vehicles and equipment and tons of criteria pollutants resulting from their use

The indicator for climate is the following:

• Tons of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from construction

4.1.2 Issue Statements Issue statements for air quality identified through scoping are the following:

• Commenters suggested that the EIS evaluate and disclose any air quality related impacts. Reclamation should consider identifying the measures and/or BMPs that may be needed to mitigate potential significant impacts. Such an evaluation is necessary to ensure compliance with state and federal air quality regulations, and to disclose the potential impacts from temporary and/or cumulative degradation of air quality. • Commenters requested that Reclamation consider sources of emissions and potential air pollutant sources related to the Project which may include, but are not limited to: operation of heavy machinery and equipment during construction that results in the emission of fossil fuel combustion from exhaust; and fugitive dust emissions from Project construction and movement of heavy equipment.

Issue statements for climate identified through scoping are the following:

• Commenters suggested that the climate analysis from the Icicle Strategy be incorporated into the EIS analysis for this resource (Chelan County and Ecology 2019).

4.1.3 Assumptions • Construction emissions estimates are based on preliminary design information for the action alternatives. Actual emissions may differ, based on final detailed construction plans. Assumptions used in the calculations are described in Appendix D.

SWISP Project EIS 23 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

• Operational and maintenance emissions under the action alternatives would be similar to or less than current conditions (no action) once construction is complete because personnel levels and emission sources are not anticipated to change. • Greenhouse gas emissions from construction are compared with the greenhouse gas reporting requirement threshold under 40 CFR 98 (25,000 metric tons of CO2e per year) to provide context for the scale of emissions. Fish hatchery operations are not a large source of emissions and therefore not one of the 41 source categories required to report greenhouse gas emissions under this program (EPA 2020h). • Odors were not identified as an issue of concern and are not analyzed. • The new surface water intake structure is being designed to provide fish passage and screening and to divert the same or less water than historical diversions (see SWISP Project EIS Water Resources Report). Because there would be no changes in diversions from Icicle Creek, none of the alternatives would impact the hydrological conditions of Icicle Creek and therefore not enhance any climate-induced hydrological changes.

4.2 Alternative A – No Action Alternative

4.2.1 Air Quality Under Alternative A, air pollutant emissions related to operation and maintenance of the LNFH would continue. These include emissions from vehicles and equipment, limited road dust from travel on unpaved portions of access roads, and emissions from periodic sediment removal operations.

4.2.2 Climate Under Alternative A, greenhouse gas emissions related to operation and maintenance of the Hatchery would continue. These emissions include vehicle and equipment operations associated with LNFH operations. Emissions would continue to be below 25,000 metric tons per year.

Historical climate projections showing increased warming and shifts in the seasonality of precipitation are projected to continue. Changes resulting from the movement of the Wenatchee River Watershed and the Icicle Creek subbasin from a snow-dominant watershed to a rain/snowmelt transient watershed would affect the timing and volume of runoff entering Icicle Creek and resultant instream conditions of Icicle Creek. As shown in Figure 3, below, monthly streamflow in Icicle Creek is projected to peak earlier in the water year under low (Figure 3a) and high (Figure 3b) greenhouse gas emission scenarios compared with historical conditions. In addition, the volume of average monthly flows is projected to be lower than historical conditions from May through September and higher than historical conditions from October to May. As shown in the figure, the projected changes in streamflow are similar under the low and high emission scenarios in the 2030s but become more pronounced under the high emission scenario in the 2050s and 2080s.

Projected climate-induced hydrological changes are not anticipated to affect Hatchery operations, as water needs would continue to be met through a combination of surface water and groundwater inputs, as well as storage rights from Nada and Snow Lakes. However, the timing of groundwater

24 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

inputs and storage water use may be affected based on instream flow and temperature conditions that differ from those found historically.

Under Alternative A, LNFH would continue to divert instream waters from Icicle Creek and draw on groundwater resources to support Hatchery operations at current rates. Because there would be no changes in diversions from Icicle Creek, Alternative A would not impact the hydrological conditions of Icicle Creek and therefore not enhance any climate-induced hydrological changes.

Figure 3a. Average Monthly Streamflow - Low Figure 3b. Average Monthly Streamflow - High Scenario Scenario 3500 3500 3000 3000 2500 2500 2000 2000 1500 1500 1000 1000 500 500 Streamflows (CFS) Streamflows (CFS) 0 0 Jul Jul Jan Jan Jun Jun Oct Oct Apr Apr Feb Feb Sep Sep Dec Dec Aug Aug Nov Nov Mar Mar May May

Month Month

Historical 2030s 2050s 2080s Historical 2030s 2050s 2080s

Figure 3. Average monthly streamflow for three time periods under low (Figure 3a) and high (Figure 3b) greenhouse gas emission scenarios using the ensemble average streamflow from the global climate model instances used in the bcMACA dataset (CIG 2017b). This figure is meant to highlight the changing timing and general volume of streamflow and not the absolute values, which varies based on the global climate model and dataset shown. See Appendix C for a discussion of datasets and figures showing both the ensemble average and the individual climate model outcomes for the bcMACA dataset.

4.3 Alternative B – Proposed Action

4.3.1 Air Quality Rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system under Alternative B would have a short-term impact on air quality from demolition activities and from constructing the new intake headworks and creek-width roughened channel, replacing and lining the surface water conveyance pipeline to the Hatchery, and modifying and extending the access road. These activities would generate fugitive dust during surface-disturbing activities and from travel on unpaved portions of access roads and staging areas. They would also emit criteria pollutants and hazardous pollutants through the combustion of fuel in commute vehicles, trucks, construction equipment, and pumps and generators.

SWISP Project EIS 25 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

Sources of temporary and localized fugitive dust emissions would be the following:

• Direct impacts from site grading to prepare the IO&MA and construct the intake access road, temporary access route to the gravity bypass outlet, covered conveyance pipeline, and roughened channel • Direct impacts from soil disturbance associated with demolition of the intake trashrack structure, gatehouse and fish ladder/sediment sluice and construction of the access road, intake facilities, roughened channel, , and cofferdams • Direct impacts from construction equipment, commute vehicles, delivery trucks, and water trucks on unpaved surfaces • Indirect impacts from wind erosion of disturbed surfaces • Indirect impacts from entrained dust caused by commute vehicles and delivery trucks on paved roads

The emissions of fugitive dust would be greatest during site grading activities, and emissions would vary over the course of construction based on the level of activity during each construction phase. Dust from travel on unpaved access roads and staging areas would occur over the duration of construction. The amount of fugitive dust emissions would depend on the type of activity, weight of equipment, area disturbed, vehicle speed, and wind speed. Emissions would be localized to the area surrounding any given construction activity and would cease when construction ends and any temporary disturbance areas are revegetated or water is returned to previously dewatered areas. Under Alternative B, approximately 0.84 acres would be disturbed temporarily. Most of the construction-related activities, including access roads and staging areas, would occur on already disturbed areas, limiting the creation of new areas of disturbance that would be subject to windblown dust impacts.

The following dust abatement BMPs and conservation measures would be implemented to minimize air quality impacts during construction:

• Provide dust control and abatement during performance of work • Prevent, control, and abate dust pollution on government rights-of-way • Place speed limits on unpaved access routes to minimize dust entrainment from vehicle movement • Provide labor, equipment, and materials, and use efficient methods wherever and whenever required to prevent dust nuisance or damage to persons, property, or activities • Provide means for eliminating atmospheric discharges of dust during mixing, handling, and storing of cement, pozzolan, and concrete aggregate

Implementing fugitive dust control measures would minimize impacts on local air quality and on the sensitive receptors described in Section 3.2.1, above. These measures would be further defined in construction contracts for rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system, construction permits, and stormwater pollution prevention and dust control plans.

26 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

In addition to fugitive dust, combustion of fuel in commute vehicles, trucks, construction equipment, and pumps and generators would emit criteria air pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act and small amounts of hazardous air pollutants (diesel particulate matter, acetaldehyde, benzene, and formaldehyde). These emissions would occur for the duration of construction. Sources of combustion emissions would include the following:

• Gas- and diesel-powered construction equipment and power tools • Generators and pumps • Delivery trucks and tractor trailers to bring in and move out materials and supplies • Water trucks for dust suppression • On-site light-duty trucks • Commute vehicles for construction personnel

Because of the limited road access in the area, traffic congestion may result in slightly elevated concentrations of pollutants on and adjacent to roadways at limited times and for limited periods during construction. These impacts would be avoided to the extent practicable by developing and implementing traffic control measures to minimize traffic congestion. See the SWISP Project EIS Transportation and Traffic Resource Report for more information on temporary changes in level of service on area roadways during construction.

An estimate of combustion-related emissions by construction element was prepared based on preliminary estimates of the number of commute and delivery trips and vehicle miles traveled for on-road (cars and trucks) equipment and the types of equipment and operational hours for non-road (construction) equipment and pumps and generators that would be required to construct the various components of the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system. These emission estimates are shown in Table 6, below. The estimates are based on a current understanding of equipment requirements for construction activities. Actual emissions may differ from those shown as more detailed construction plans are developed and finalized.

The following BMPs and conservation measures would be implemented to minimize combustion- related emissions:

• Use reasonably available methods and devices to prevent, control, and otherwise minimize atmospheric emissions or discharges of air contaminants. • Do not operate equipment and vehicles that show excessive exhaust gas emissions until corrective repairs or adjustments reduce such emissions to acceptable levels • Minimize interference with or congestion of local traffic

Emissions associated with operations and maintenance would be similar in nature to Alternative A but potentially reduced because the frequency and intensity of required maintenance activities would be reduced after the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system has been rehabilitated.

SWISP Project EIS 27 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

Table 6 Estimated Equipment-Related Emissions by Proposed Work Component, Alternative B (Tons)

GHGs (Metric Element Emission Criteria Pollutants (Tons) Tons) Timing Source VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2e Mobilization, Site On-road commute 0.235 2.387 0.134 0.001 0.027 0.010 116.23 Access, Cofferdam I On-road trucks Construction, 0.039 0.145 0.215 0.001 0.025 0.008 65.81 Gatehouse and Non-road 0.157 1.015 0.922 0.003 0.038 0.038 262.86 Intake Structure equipment Construction Pumps/Generators 0.068 0.510 0.556 0.001 0.025 0.025 113.41 Mar 2022-Sept 2023 Subtotal 0.499 4.058 1.827 0.006 0.114 0.081 558.32 Roughened Channel On-road commute 0.072 0.734 0.041 0.000 0.008 0.003 35.75 Construction On-road trucks 0.080 0.286 0.413 0.002 0.048 0.016 131.65 Jul-Oct 2023 Non-road 0.051 0.288 0.320 0.001 0.012 0.012 82.98 equipment Pumps/Generators 0.027 0.206 0.216 0.000 0.010 0.010 42.81 Subtotal 0.230 1.514 0.991 0.003 0.078 0.041 293.19 Conveyance Pipeline On-road commute 0.149 1.515 0.085 0.001 0.017 0.006 73.78 Replacement/ Rehabilitation On-road trucks 0.007 0.034 0.060 0.000 0.007 0.003 13.02 May 22-May 23; Apr- Non-road 0.235 1.990 1.529 0.005 0.068 0.068 459.98 May 24 equipment Pumps/Generators 0.096 0.728 0.761 0.002 0.035 0.035 149.75 Subtotal 0.331 2.718 2.290 0.007 0.104 0.104 609.73 Total Emissions (tons)1 1.060 8.291 5.109 0.016 0.296 0.226 1,461.24 % Comparison to 2017 NEI Emissions 0.029% 0.061% 0.233% 0.070% 0.066% 0.058% — % Comparison to the GHG Reporting — — — — — — 6% Rule 25,000-metric ton threshold Source: EMPSi staff analysis (see Appendix D) Notes: VOC = volatile organic compounds, CO = carbon monoxide, NOx = nitrogen oxides, SOx = sulfur oxides, PM = particulate matter, CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents, GHG = greenhouse gases, NEI = National Emissions Inventory 1 Construction activities will occur over a 2- to 3-year period; however, the analysis assumes that construction emissions will occur in the same year solely for the purposes of comparing project emissions to the NEI and GHG report rule comparison thresholds.

4.3.2 Climate Under Alternative B, rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system would result in short-term emissions of greenhouse gases (CO2, nitrous oxide, and methane) through the combustion of fuels in on-road and non-road equipment as described above under air quality. In addition to directly emitted greenhouse gas emissions, minor amounts of carbon in soils and vegetation would be released during surface-disturbing activities. Estimated combustion-related emissions, shown in Table 6, would be below 25,000 metric tons per year. BMPs and conservation measures that reduced combustion-related criteria pollutant emissions would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Greenhouse gas emissions associated with operations and maintenance would be similar in nature to those described for Alternative A. As described under air quality above, emissions may be less than

28 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

under Alternative A because the frequency and intensity of required activities would be reduced after the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system has been rehabilitated.

Under Alternative B, LNFH would continue to divert instream waters from Icicle Creek and draw on groundwater resources to support Hatchery operations. Rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system would not affect water usage requirements or rates compared with current conditions; the authorized diversion rate from Icicle Creek or groundwater or storage water rights would be the same as under Alternative A. Projected climate-induced hydrological changes would be the same as described for Alternative A.

4.4 Alternative C

4.4.1 Air Quality Rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system under Alternative C would have the same short-term impacts on air quality as described under Alternative B, and the same BMP and conservation methods would be employed to minimize these impacts. Emissions described in Table 6 would also occur under Alternative C, with the exception that fewer emissions from replacing or rehabilitating the conveyance pipeline would occur. This is because more of the pipeline would be lined in place rather than replaced with new piping, resulting in fewer fugitive dust and combustion- related emissions. Approximately 0.71 acres would be temporarily disturbed under Alternative C.

Emissions associated with operations and maintenance of the LNFH would be the same as described under Alternative B.

4.4.2 Climate Short-term sources of greenhouse gas emissions from rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system under Alternative C would be as described under Alternative B. Greenhouse gas emissions described in Table 6 would also occur under Alternative C, with the exception that fewer emissions from replacing or rehabilitating the conveyance pipeline would occur. The amount of soil and vegetation disturbed along the conveyance pipeline may also be reduced, resulting in less released carbon compared with Alternative B though this change would be small. Like Alternative B, estimated combustion-related emissions would be below 25,000 metric tons per year. BMPs and conservation measures that reduced combustion-related criteria pollutant emissions would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Greenhouse gas emissions associated with operations and maintenance of the LNFH would be the same as described under Alternative B.

Projected climate-induced hydrological changes and their effects on Hatchery operations would be the same as described for Alternative B.

SWISP Project EIS 29 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

4.5 Alternative D

4.5.1 Air Quality Rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system under Alternative D would have the same types of short-term impacts on air quality as described under Alternative B, and the same BMP and conservation methods would be employed to minimize these impacts. Compared with Alternative B, Phase I construction activities under Alternative D would be limited to workday hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and the in-water work window would be two weeks shorter. Because of these restrictions, the sequence of Phase I component construction would extend through two additional in-water work windows (i.e., in-water work would occur in two additional years when compared with Alternative B). In addition, the Hatchery’s surface water would need to be supplied by pumping from the spillway pool for a longer period of time (8 months compared with 10 days under Alternative B). This would result in greater emissions under Alternative D than described for Alternative B. Estimated emissions under Alternative D are shown in Table 7. The same number of acres (0.84) would be temporarily disturbed as under Alternative B.

Table 7 Estimated Equipment-Related Emissions by Proposed Work Component, Alternative D (Tons)

GHGs (Metric Element Criteria Pollutants (Tons) Tons) Timing Emission Source VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2e Mobilization, Site On-road commute 0.235 2.387 0.134 0.001 0.027 0.010 116.23 Access, Cofferdam I On-road trucks 0.042 0.159 0.240 0.001 0.027 0.010 71.08 Construction, Non-road equipment 0.214 1.370 1.260 0.004 0.051 0.051 358.47 Gatehouse and Pumps/Generators 0.293 2.235 2.287 0.005 0.108 0.108 442.18 Intake Structure Construction Subtotal 0.783 6.151 3.921 0.011 0.213 0.179 987.95 Mar 2022-Sept 2023 Roughened Channel On-road commute 0.072 0.734 0.041 0.000 0.008 0.003 35.75 Construction On-road trucks 0.081 0.290 0.419 0.002 0.048 0.016 133.48 Jul-Oct 2023 Non-road equipment 0.051 0.288 0.320 0.001 0.012 0.012 82.98 Pumps/Generators 0.027 0.206 0.216 0.000 0.010 0.010 42.81 Subtotal 0.231 1.518 0.997 0.003 0.079 0.042 295.01 Conveyance Pipeline On-road commute 0.149 1.515 0.085 0.001 0.017 0.006 73.78 Replacement/ On-road trucks 0.007 0.034 0.060 0.000 0.007 0.003 13.02 Rehabilitation Non-road equipment 0.235 1.990 1.529 0.005 0.068 0.068 459.98 May 22-May 23; Apr- Pumps/Generators 0.096 0.728 0.761 0.002 0.035 0.035 149.75 May 24 Subtotal 0.331 2.718 2.290 0.007 0.104 0.104 609.73 Total Emissions (tons)1 1.345 10.388 7.207 0.021 0.396 0.324 1,892.69 % Comparison to 2017 NEI Emissions 0.037% 0.076% 0.329% 0.092% 0.089% 0.084% — % Comparison to the GHG Reporting Rule — — — — — — 8% 25,000-metric ton threshold Source: EMPSi staff analysis (see Appendix D) Notes: VOC = volatile organic compounds, CO = carbon monoxide, NOx = nitrogen oxides, SOx = sulfur oxides, PM = particulate matter, CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents, GHG = greenhouse gases, NEI = National Emissions Inventory 1 Construction activities will occur over a 4- to 5-year period; however, the analysis assumes that construction emissions will occur in the same year solely for the purposes of comparing project emissions to the NEI and GHG report rule comparison thresholds.

30 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

Emissions associated with operations and maintenance of the LNFH would be the same as described under Alternative B.

4.5.2 Climate Sources of greenhouse gas emissions from rehabilitating the LNFH surface water intake and delivery system and the amount of soil and vegetation disturbed along the conveyance pipeline would be the same as described under Alternative B, though emissions would be greater due the extended work period and additional water pumping requirements described above. Like Alternative B, estimated combustion-related emissions would be below 25,000 metric tons per year (Table 7). BMPs and conservation measures that reduced combustion-related criteria pollutant emissions would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Greenhouse gas emissions associated with operations and maintenance of the LNFH would be the same as described under Alternative B.

Projected climate-induced hydrological changes and their effects on Hatchery operations would be the same as described for Alternative B.

4.6 Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity

As described in Sections 4.3 through 4.5, the action alternatives would have temporary impacts on air quality and climate through the emission of criteria and hazardous pollutants and greenhouse gases and the generation of fugitive dust during the construction phases. These emissions would end upon the completion of Project construction. Because there would be little to no change in operational or maintenance activities over the long term compared with current conditions, there would be no effect, positive or negative, on the long-term productivity of air quality or climate in the analysis area.

4.7 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts

Alternative A would have no unavoidable adverse effects. Alternatives B, C, and D would have temporary adverse impacts described in Sections 4.3 through 4.5. While these impacts would be minimized through BMPs and conservation measures, unavoidable adverse impacts would still occur over the duration of the construction period.

4.8 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources

There would be no irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources related to air quality or climate under any alternative.

SWISP Project EIS 31 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 4. Environmental Consequences

This page intentionally left blank.

32 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Chapter 5. Glossary

Climate—The collective typical weather conditions in a region averaged over a series of years.

Climate change—A change in global or regional climate patterns, in particular a change apparent from the mid- to late twentieth century onward, and attributed largely to the increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Climate normal—Three-decade averages of climatological variables, including temperature and precipitation.

Greenhouse gas sink— Any reservoir, natural or otherwise, that absorbs more carbon than it releases and thereby lowers the concentration of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Particulate matter (PM)—Tiny particles or liquid droplets suspended in the air that can contain a variety of chemical components. Larger particles are visible as smoke or dust and settle out relatively rapidly. The tiniest particles can be suspended in the air for long periods; they are the most harmful to human health because they can penetrate deep into the lungs. Some particles are directly emitted into the air. They come from a variety of sources, such as cars, trucks, buses, factories, construction sites, tilled fields, unpaved roads, stone crushing, and wood burning. Other particles are formed in the atmosphere by chemical reactions.

Pollutants (pollution)—Unwanted chemicals or other materials found in the environment. Pollutants can harm human health, the environment, and property. Air pollutants occur as gases, liquid droplets, and solids. Once released into the environment, many pollutants can persist, can travel long distances, and can move from one environmental medium—air, water, or land—to another11.

Visibility—The visual impact of haze on the ability of the eye to perceive scenery.

11 Source: http://www.epa.gov/oms/invntory/overview/definitions.htm, EPA Glossary for Mobile Source Emissions

SWISP Project EIS 33 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 5. Glossary

This page intentionally left blank.

34 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Chapter 6. References Cited Chelan County and Ecology (Chelan County and Washington State Department of Ecology). 2019. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Icicle Creek Water Resource Management Strategy. Internet website: https://www.co.chelan.wa.us/natural- resources/pages/environmental-review.

CIG (Climate Impacts Group). 2004. Physical Geography and Mean PNW Climate of the Twentieth Century. Internet website: http://www.cses.washington.edu/pnwimpacts/CDTheme.htm.

_____. 2009. The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment. M. McGuire Elsner, J. Littell, and L. Whitely Binder, editors. Center for Science in the Earth System, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Oceans, University of Washington, Seattle. Internet website: http://www.cses.washington.edu/db/pdf/wacciareport.

_____. 2017a. Changing Streamflow in Icicle, Peshastin, and Mission Creeks. Internet website: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/parts/1812016part7.pdf.

_____. 2017b. Changing Streamflow in Icicle, Peshastin, and Mission Creeks: An Interactive Tool. Internet website: https://cig.uw.edu/resources/analysis-tools/icicle_work_group_ projections/.

Climate Watch. 2020. Historical Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Internet website: https://www.climatewatchdata.org/ghg-emissions.

Ecology (Washington Department of Ecology). 2015. Washington State Implementation Plan Revisions, Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter—Addressing requirements for the 2006 24-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard. Olympia, Washington.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2015. 2011 National Emissions Inventory Data Internet website: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions- inventory-nei-data.

_____. 2016. Climate Change Indicators. Weather and Climate. https://www.epa.gov/climate- indicators/weather-climate.

_____. 2018. 2014 National Emissions Inventory Data. Internet website: https://www.epa.gov/air- emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data.

_____. 2020a. Washington Nonattainment/Maintenance Status for Each County by Year for All Criteria Pollutants. Internet website: https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/ anayo_wa.html.

SWISP Project EIS 35 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 6. References Cited

_____. 2020b. NAAQS Table. Environmental Protection Agency. Internet website: https://www .epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table.

_____. 2020c. Outdoor Air Quality Data, Monitor Values Report. Internet website: https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report.

_____. 2020d. Air Quality Index Report. Internet website: https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air- quality-data/air-quality-index-report.

_____. 2020e. 2017 National Emissions Inventory Data. Internet website: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2017-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data.

_____. 2020f. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gases and Sinks. Internet website: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks.

_____. 2020g. FLIGHT. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Large Facilities. Environmental Protection Agency. Internet website: https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do#.

_____. 2020h. Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). Internet website: https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/learn-about-greenhouse-gas-reporting-program-ghgrp.

Federal Land Managers Environmental Database. 2020. Visibility Status and Trends Following the Regional Haze Rule Metrics-Snoqualmie Pass. https://views.cira.colostate.edu/fed/Site Browser/Default.aspx?appkey=SBCF_VisSum.

Hall, S. A., J. C. Adam, M. Barik, J. Yoder, M. P. Brady, D. Haller, M. E. Barber, C. E. Kruger, and others. 2016. 2016 Washington State Legislative Report. Columbia River Basin Long-Term Water Supply and Demand Forecast. Publication No. 16-12-001. Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Hamlet, A. F., M. M. Elsner, G. S. Mauger, S. Y. Lee, I. Tohver, and R. A. Norheim. 2013. An overview of the Columbia Basin Climate Change Scenarios Project: Approach, methods, and summary of key results. Atmosphere-Ocean, 51(4), 392-415.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2013. Climate Change 2013. The Physical Science Basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland.

Mauger, G. S., S. Y. Lee, C. Bandaragoda, Y. Serra, and J. S. Won. 2016. Refined Estimates of Climate Change Affected Hydrology in the Chehalis Basin. Report prepared for Anchor EA, LLC. Climate Impacts Group, University of Washington, Seattle. doi:10.7915/CIG53F4MH.

Meehl, G. A., C. Covey, T. Delworth, M. Latif, B. McAvaney, J. F. B. Mitchell, R. J. Stouffer, and K. E. Taylor. 2007. The WCRP CMIP3 multi-model dataset: A new era in climate change research. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 88, 1383-1394.

36 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 6. References Cited

Montgomery Water Group. 2003. Wenatchee River Basin Watershed Assessment. Internet website: http://www.co.chelan.wa.us/files/natural- resources/documents/Planning/icicle_work_group/Basin_Wide_Studies/2003WatershedAs sessment.pdf.

Mote, P., and E. Salathé. 2010. Future Climate in the Pacific Northwest. Climatic Change. Internet website: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225379860_Future_Climate _in_the_Pacific_Northwest.

NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1997. Fish Screening Criteria for Anadromous Salmonids. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Region, Long Beach, California.

_____. 2011. Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design. National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon.

_____. 2017. Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7(a)(2) Biological Opinion and Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Consultation, Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery Spring Chinook Salmon Program (Reinitiation 2016). National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region, Portland, Oregon.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI). Climate Normals. Internet website: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data- access/land-based-station-data/land-based-datasets/climate- normals#:~:text=Climate%20Normals%20are%20three%2Ddecade,release%20of%20NCE I's%20Climate%20Normals.

Taylor, K. E., R. Stouffer, and G. Meehl. 2012. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 93(4), 485-498, doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1.

Tohver, I. 2016. “Impacts of climate change in the Columbia Basin and implications for recovery of aquatic habitats.” Presentation at the Upper Columbia Science Conference. Wenatchee, Washington.

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2011. Biological Assessment for the Operation and Maintenance of Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery. Leavenworth, Washington.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2020. National Hydrography, Watershed Boundary Dataset. Internet website: https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national- hydrography/watershed-boundary-dataset.

Salathé, E. P., L. R. Leung, Y. Qian, and Y. Zhang. 2010. Regional climate model projections for the State of Washington. Climatic Change, 102(1), 51-75.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2020. Monthly Climate Summary, Leavenworth S, Washington (454572). Internet website: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?wa4572.

SWISP Project EIS 37 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report 6. References Cited

This page intentionally left blank.

38 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Appendix A Maps

This page intentionally left blank.

Map A-1 Leavenworth To Project Area Overview HWY 2 ¤£2 To HWY 2 Potential Temporary Pipeline Rehabilitation Disturbance Area Construction Vehicle Turnaround Staging Temporary Access Routes To LNFH Temporary Pump Spillway Pool Icicle Rd E Leavenworth Rd

Road !F Trailhead LNFH Production Facilities LNFH Sand Settling Basin and and Associated Structures Inside and Outside Screen Chambers < < ofl w

Land Ownership Icicle Rd Chelan-Douglas Fish and Wildlife Private Land Trust Service E Leavenworth Rd Fishing Forest Icicle Irrigation City of Access Rd Service District Leavenworth

Chelan C r e e k

County I c i c l e Fish Hatchery Rd Leavenworth Spillway Pool National Fish Hatchery Structure 5

Icicle Creek Rd

Hatchery Channel

CyoRd

Intake

H si to r Facilities I c i c l e n e l C r e e k i c a l Structure 2 C h a n

Forest Service f l o w > > Icicle Creek Rd Wilderness k Source: Reclamation GIS 2020 Area Kiosk C r e e U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation I c i c l e Columbia Cascades Area Office November 11, 2020 L_SWISP_RRpts_overview.mxd Snow Lakes No warranty is made by Reclamation as 0 500 1,000 to the accuracy, reliability or completeness Trailhead of the data herein. This product was compiled from the best available data Feet and is presented as visual aide only and does not represent actual survey data. < < ofl w Map A-2

Alternative A: No Action Icicle Rd

E Leavenworth Rd Existing Intake Facilities Spillway Pool F ish ing Ac c es !F Trailhead Vehicle Parking s Rd Road Conveyance Pipeline e k LNFH Production Facilities LNFH Sand Settling Basin and C r e and Associated Structures Inside and Outside Screen Chambers I c i c l e

Spillway Fish Hatchery Rd Leavenworth Pool National Fish Structure 5 Hatchery

Section of Worst Condition Pipeline (8 feet)

Icicle Creek Rd

Cyo Rd Hatchery Channel

H si to ri Structure 2 n e l I c i c l e C r e e k

c a l C h a n

Section of Worst f l o w > > Rd e Creek Condition Pipeline (6 feet); Icicl Forest Service at Bifurcation Point k Wilderness C r e e Source: Reclamation GIS 2020 Area Kiosk U.S. Department of the Interior I c i c l e Bureau of Reclamation Columbia Cascades Area Office November 11, 2020 L_SWISP_RRpts_AltAnoAction.mxd No warranty is made by Reclamation as Snow Lakes 0 250 500 to the accuracy, reliability or completeness Trailhead of the data herein. This product was compiled from the best available data Feet and is presented as visual aide only and does not represent actual survey data. Map A-3 Alternative A: No Action (Intake)

Conveyance Pipeline Stairs

Intake Trashrack Structure Icicle Creek Rd Intake Access Channel Road Gatehouse

f l o w > >

Outlet Channel

Fish Ladder/ Icicle Creek Sediment Sluice Low-Head Diversion Dam

f l o w > >

Source: Reclamation GIS 2020 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Columbia Cascades Area Office November 11, 2020 L_SWISP_RRpts_AltAnoActionIntake.mxd No warranty is made by Reclamation as 0 50 100 to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the data herein. This product was compiled from the best available data Feet and is presented as visual aide only and does not represent actual survey data. Map A-4 Conceptual Drawing of the Proposed Intake Facilities for the Action Alternatives

- Map A-5 < < ofl w Alternative B (Proposed Action) and Alternative D Icicle Rd Phase I E Leavenworth Rd

Intake Facilities Temporary Access Route F ishing Ac Phase II cess Rd Construction Area Conveyance Pipeline lined C r e e k Contractor Use Area with Cure-in-Place Pipe (CUA) (approximately 4,000 feet) I c i c l e Spillway Temporary Pump and Pipeline Pipeline Replacement Fish Hatchery Rd Leavenworth Pool Temporary Access Route Access Routes National Fish Structure 5 Phase I and II Hatchery Staging and Storage Site for Construction Vehicle Construction Equipment and Materials, Turnaround/ Vehicle Parking and Construction Staff Administration Control Road LNFH Production Facilities Valve Vault Spillway Pool and Associated Structures Icicle Creek Rd !F Trailhead LNFH Sand Settling Basin and Inside and Outside Screen Chambers 5

4

Cyo Rd Hatchery Channel

3

Intake Facilities *See Map 2-5 for H si to ri Structure 2 n e l Additional Details I c i c l e C r e e k 1 c a l C h a n

2

f l o w > > Rd e Creek Icicl Forest Service k Wilderness C r e e Source: Reclamation GIS 2020 Area Kiosk U.S. Department of the Interior I c i c l e Bureau of Reclamation Columbia Cascades Area Office November 11, 2020 L_SWISP_RRpts_AltBproposed.mxd No warranty is made by Reclamation as Snow Lakes 0 250 500 to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the data herein. This product was Trailhead compiled from the best available data Feet and is presented as visual aide only and does not represent actual survey data. Map A-6 Alternative B (Proposed Action) and Alternative D: Intake

Phase I Phase II Intake Facilities Conveyance Pipeline lined with Cure-in-Place Pipe Gravity Bypass Outlet Gravity Bypass Pipeline Pipeline Replacement Temporary Access Route Construction Area Contractor Use Area (CUA)

Icicle Creek Rd 1

f l o w > >

Icicle Creek

f l o w > >

Source: Reclamation GIS 2020 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Columbia Cascades Area Office November 11, 2020 L_SWISP_RRpts_AltBproposedIntake.mxd No warranty is made by Reclamation as 0 50 100 to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the data herein. This product was compiled from the best available data Feet and is presented as visual aide only and does not represent actual survey data. < < ofl w Map A-7

Alternative C Icicle Rd

Phase I E Leavenworth Rd

Intake Facilities Temporary Access Route F ishing Ac Phase II cess Rd Construction Area Conveyance Pipeline lined C r e e k Contractor Use Area with Cure-in-Place Pipe (CUA) (approximately 4,520 feet) I c i c l e Spillway Temporary Pump and Pipeline Pipeline Replacement Fish Hatchery Rd Leavenworth Pool Temporary Access Route Access Routes National Fish Structure 5 Phase I and II Hatchery Staging and Storage Site for Construction Vehicle Construction Equipment and Materials, Turnaround/ Vehicle Parking and Construction Staff Administration Control Road LNFH Production Facilities Valve Vault Spillway Pool and Associated Structures Icicle Creek Rd !F Trailhead LNFH Sand Settling Basin and Inside and Outside Screen Chambers 5

4

Cyo Rd Hatchery Channel

3

Intake Facilities *See Map 2-7 for H si to ri Structure 2 n e l Additional Details I c i c l e C r e e k

c a l C h a n

2

f l o w > > Rd e Creek Icicl Forest Service k Wilderness C r e e Source: Reclamation GIS 2020 Area Kiosk U.S. Department of the Interior I c i c l e Bureau of Reclamation Columbia Cascades Area Office November 11, 2020 L_SWISP_RRpts_AltC.mxd No warranty is made by Reclamation as Snow Lakes 0 250 500 to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the data herein. This product was Trailhead compiled from the best available data Feet and is presented as visual aide only and does not represent actual survey data. Map A-8 Alternative C (Intake)

Phase I Phase II Intake Facilities Conveyance Pipeline lined with Cure-in-Place Pipe Gravity Bypass Outlet Gravity Bypass Pipeline Temporary Access Route

Icicle Creek Rd

f l o w > >

Icicle Creek

f l o w > >

Source: Reclamation GIS 2020 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Columbia Cascades Area Office November 11, 2020 L_SWISP_RRpts_AltCproposedIntake.mxd No warranty is made by Reclamation as 0 50 100 to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the data herein. This product was compiled from the best available data Feet and is presented as visual aide only and does not represent actual survey data. Map A-9 Air and Climate Analysis Area SS k k a a g g i i t t SkagitSkagit CountyCounty CC o o u u n n t t y y Air and Climate Analysis Area ! SWISP Project

County Highway OO k k a a n n o o g g a a n n CC o o u u n n t t y y

SS n n o o h h o o m m i i s s h h II s s l l a a n n d d CC o o u u n n t t y y CC o o u u n n t t y y ¤£97

SS n n o o h h o o m m i i s s h h CC o o u u n n t t y y ¨¦§5 ChelanChelan CountyCounty ¤£2

DD o o u u g g l l a a s s 97A ¤£ CC o o u u n n t t y y Seattle City of KingKing CountyCounty Leavenworth

SWISP Project ¨¦§405

¨¦§90 Wenatchee

KK i i t t t t i i t t a a s s Source: Reclamation GIS 2020 U.S. Department of the Interior CC o o u u n n t t y y Bureau of Reclamation Columbia Cascades Area Office November 11, 2020 L_SWISP_RRpts_AirClimate.mxd No warranty is made by Reclamation as 0 5 10 to the accuracy, reliability or completeness GrantGrant CountyCounty of the data herein. This product was compiled from the best available data and is presented as visual aide only and Miles does not represent actual survey data. PiercePierce CountyCounty This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix B Best Management Practices

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix B. Best Management Practices

B.1 Best Management Practices

To minimize impacts on resources from the Proposed Action, the Best Management Practices (BMPs) described in Table B-1 would be implemented. BMPs are drawn from the following sources:

• Biological opinions for LNFH operations, issued by the USFWS (addressing threatened Bull Trout; USFWS 2011) and by the NMFS (addressing endangered spring Chinook Salmon and threatened Steelhead; NMFS 2015, NMFS 2017a). • General Conservation Measures (GCMs) for ESA-listed salmonids in the programmatic biological opinion for USACE permitting of fish passage and restoration actions in Washington State (FPRPIII; NMFS 2017a). • GCMs for Bull Trout and other ESA-listed salmonids in the programmatic biological opinion for the Washington State fish passage and habitat enhancement and restoration program (NMFS and USFWS 2008)1. • Measures described in the construction specifications, including measures associated with site layout, temporary access, staging and stockpile areas, equipment use, erosion control, dust abatement, timing of in-water work and worksite isolation, and spill prevention and control.

Reclamation would also obtain required regulatory permits and implement terms and conditions contained therein. If permit requirements, BMPs, or other measures contradict each other, the contract specification requires that the contractor abide by the most stringent of requirements. A list of general, applicable permit conditions is included following Table B-1.

1 This combined agency programmatic biological opinion expired on December 31, 2013. The USACE and NMFS reinitiated consultation and NMFS has issued subsequent biological opinions for the nationwide permit program. However, the USACE has been operating under consultation extensions from USFWS, with the most recent extension expiring June 30, 2020. Reclamation anticipates that ESA Section 7 consultation with the USFWS for the SWISP Project will result in similar conservation measures as those contained in the expired programmatic biological opinion.

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-1 B. Best Management Practices

Table B-1. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice General • Heavy equipment use will be limited to that with the least adverse effects on the environment (e.g. minimally-sized, low ground pressure equipment, use of matting, etc.; NMFS 2017a). • Conduct operations to prevent unnecessary destruction, scarring, or defacing of natural surroundings in the vicinity of the work. Air Quality and Climate • Dust control and abatement measures will be implemented during construction. • Vehicle traffic on unpaved surfaces would be limited to 10 miles per hour to minimize dust generation. • Vehicle traffic on government rights-of-way, dirt roads, and paved roads through LNFH property would be limited to 10 miles per hour. • Prevent, control, and abate dust pollution on government rights-of-way. • Provide labor, equipment, and materials, and use efficient methods wherever and whenever required to prevent dust nuisance or damage to persons, property, or activities. • Provide means for eliminating atmospheric discharges of dust during mixing, handling, and storing of cement, pozzolan, and concrete aggregate. • Use reasonably available methods and devices to prevent, control, and otherwise minimize atmospheric emissions or discharges of air contaminants. • Do not operate equipment and vehicles that show excessive exhaust gas emissions until corrective repairs or adjustments reduce such emissions to acceptable levels. Geology and Soils • The number of temporary access roads will be minimized, and roads will be designed to avoid adverse effects like creating excessive erosion (NMFS 2017a). • Temporary roads and trails across slopes greater than 30 percent will be avoided when feasible (NMFS 2017a). • Existing roadways or travel paths will be used whenever possible (NMFS 2017a). Water Resources • Coffer dam placement will maintain natural stream flow, minus the 40 cfs diversion to the hatchery, (Stream Conditions) within the greatest amount of natural streambed width as possible. • Additional flow outage shall require the prior written approval of the COR, and of appropriate Federal and State water quality control agencies.

B-2 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Water Resources General (Water Quality) • Perform construction activities by methods that will prevent entrance, or accidental spillage, of solid matter, contaminants, debris, or other pollutants or wastes into streams, flowing or dry watercourses, lakes, wetlands, reservoirs, or underground water sources. • Measures shall be taken to ensure that no petroleum products, hydraulic fluid, fresh cement, sediments, sediment-laden water, chemicals, or any other toxic or deleterious materials are allowed to enter or leach into waters of the U.S. (NMFS 2017a). • The use of acids for cleaning or preparing concrete surfaces for repair will not be permitted. In-water work • Prepare a Work Area Isolation Plan for all work below the bankfull elevation requiring flow diversion or isolation. Include the sequencing and schedule of dewatering and rewatering activities, plan view of all isolation elements, as well as a list of equipment and materials to adequately provide appropriate redundancy of all key plan functions (e.g., an operational, properly sized backup pump and/or generator) (NMFS 2017a). • Use of rapidly deployable prefabricated cofferdam systems would minimize impacts to subgrade and surrounding water. • When conducting in-water or bank work, machine hydraulic lines will be filled with vegetable oil for the duration of the Project to minimize impacts of potential spills and leaks. • Spill prevention and clean-up kits will be on site when heavy equipment is operating within 25 feet of the water (NMFS 2017a). • To the extent feasible, work requiring use of heavy equipment will be completed by working from the top of the bank (i.e. landward of the OHWM or extreme high tide line) (NMFS 2017a). • Equipment shall be checked daily for leaks and any necessary repairs shall be completed prior to commencing work activities around the water (NMFS 2017a). • Equipment will cross the stream in-water only under the following conditions: (NMFS 2017a). o A. Equipment is free of external petroleum-based products, soil and debris has been removed from the drive mechanisms and undercarriage; and o B. The substrate is bedrock or coarse rock and gravel; or o C. Mats or logs are used in soft bottom situations to minimize compaction while driving across streams; and

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-3 B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Water Resources o D. Stream crossings will be performed at right angles (90 degrees) to the bank if possible; and (Water Quality, continued) o E. No stream crossings will be performed at spawning sites when spawners of ESA listed fishes are present or eggs or juvenile fish could be in the gravel; and o F. The number of crossings will be minimized. • Project operations will cease under high flow conditions that could inundate the Project Area, except as necessary to avoid or minimize resource damage (NMFS 2017a). • If high flow or high tide conditions that may cause siltation are encountered during the Project, work shall stop until the flow subsides or the tide falls (NMFS 2017a). • Where practicable, a turbidity and/or debris containment device shall be installed prior to commencing in-water work (NMFS 2017a). • When working in-water, some turbidity monitoring may be required, subject to the Corps permit requirements or CWA section 401 certification. Turbidity monitoring generally is required when working in streams with more than 40 percent fines (silt/clay) in the substrate. Turbidity will be monitored only when turbidity generating work takes place, for example, installation of coffer dams, pulling the culvert in-water, reintroducing water. The applicant will measure the duration and extent of the turbidity plume (visible turbidity above background) generated. The data will be submitted to the Corps, NMFS, and the USFWS immediately following Project construction. Turbidity measurements will be taken in NTUs and are used by project proponents to develop procedures to minimize turbidity and estimate take for future projects (NMFS 2017a). • Equipment used in the instream channel will have containment methods to address possible fuel and oil leaks. Erosion and spill prevention and control • A Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control plan and a Spill Prevention Control and Containment plan, commensurate with the size of the Project, must be prepared and carried out to prevent pollution caused by surveying or construction operations (NMFS 2017a). • A Spill Prevention, Control, and Clean-Up plan will be prepared prior to construction for every project that utilizes motorized equipment or vehicles (NMFS 2017a). • A spill prevention and countermeasures plan (SPCC) in accordance with 40 CFR, Part 112 is required where release of oil and oil products could reasonably be expected to enter into or upon navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines in quantities that may be harmful (40 CFR, Part 110), and aggregate on site oil storage capacity is over 1,320 gallons. Only containers with capacity of 55 gallons and greater are included in determining on site aggregate storage capacity.

B-4 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Water Resources Erosion and spill prevention and control, continued (Water Quality, continued) o Prevent, stop, and control spills or leaks during construction activities: o Stop source of spill or leak. o Stop migration of spill or leak. o Place berm of sorbent material around perimeter of spill. o Solidify free standing oil. • A supply of emergency erosion control materials will be on hand and temporary erosion controls will be installed and maintained in place until site restoration is complete (NMFS 2017a). • Landward erosion control methods shall be used to prevent silt-laden water from entering waters of the U.S. These may include, but are not limited to, filter fabric, temporary sediment ponds, check dams of pea gravel-filled burlap bags or other material, and/or immediate mulching of exposed areas (NMFS 2017a). • Control pollutants by use of sediment and erosion controls, wastewater and stormwater management controls, construction site management practices, and other controls including State and local control requirements. • Sediment and Erosion Controls: o Establish methods for controlling sediment and erosion which address vegetative practices, structural control, silt fences, straw dikes, sediment controls, and operator controls as appropriate. o Institute stormwater management measures as required, including velocity dissipators, and solid waste controls which address controls for building materials and offsite tracking of sediment. • Pollution Prevention Measures: o Use methods of dewatering, unwatering, excavating, or stockpiling earth and rock materials which include prevention measures to control silting and erosion, and which will intercept and settle any runoff of sediment-laden waters. o Prevent wastewater from general construction activities such as drainwater collection, aggregate processing, concrete batching, drilling, grouting, or other construction operations, from entering flowing or dry watercourses without the use of approved turbidity control methods. o Divert stormwater runoff from upslope areas away from disturbed areas.

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-5 B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Water Resources Erosion and spill prevention and control, continued (Water Quality, continued) • Turbidity Prevention Measures: o Use methods for prevention of excess turbidity which include, but are not restricted to, intercepting ditches, settling ponds, gravel filter entrapment dikes, flocculating processes, recirculation, combinations thereof, or other approved methods that are not harmful to aquatic life. o Wastewaters discharged into surface waters shall meet conditions of Clean Water Act section 402, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. o Do not operate mechanized equipment in waterbodies without having first obtained a Clean Water Act section 404 permit, and then only as necessary to construct crossings or perform the required construction. • Clean up spills or leaks in a manner that complies with applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations. • Dispose of spilled or leaked materials: o Handle and dispose of spilled or leaked materials contaminated with 50 ppm or greater polychlorinated biphenyls. o Handle and dispose of spilled or leaked materials not contaminated or contaminated with less than 50 ppm polychlorinated biphenyls in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. Discharge water and wastes • All discharge water created by construction (e.g. concrete washout, pumping for work area isolation, vehicle wash water, drilling fluids) will be treated to avoid negative water quality and quantity impacts. Removal of fines may be accomplished with bioswales; concrete washout water with an altered pH, may be infiltrated (NMFS 2017a). • Wastewater from Project activities and water removed from within the work area shall be routed to an upland disposal site (landward of the OHWM or extreme high tide line) to allow removal of fine sediment and other contaminants prior to being discharged to the waters of the U.S. (NMFS 2017a). • All waste material such as construction debris, silt, excess dirt or overburden resulting from the Project will generally be deposited above the limits of flood water in an upland disposal site. However, material from pushup dikes may be used to restore microtopography (e.g., filling drainage channels) (NMFS 2017a).

B-6 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Water Resources Storage and staging (Water Quality, continued) • When not in use, vehicles and equipment containing oil, fuel, and/or chemicals will be stored in a staging area located at least 150 feet from the Corps’ jurisdictional boundary of wetlands and waterbodies. If possible, staging will be located at least 300 feet away from the Corps’ jurisdictional boundary of wetlands and waterbodies, and on impervious surfaces to prevent spills from reaching ground water. If moving equipment between the staging area and the worksite would create unacceptable levels of disturbance (for example, requiring multiple stream crossings, multiple passes over sensitive vegetation), a closer staging location with an adequate spill prevention plan may be proposed (NMFS 2017a). • Equipment will not be stored overnight in the instream channel. • Do not stockpile or deposit excavated materials or other construction materials, near or on, stream banks, lake shorelines, or other watercourse perimeters where they can be washed away by high water or storm runoff or can in any way encroach upon the watercourse. • Petroleum Product Storage Tanks Management. o Place oil or other petroleum product storage tanks at least 20 feet from streams, flowing or dry watercourses, lakes, wetlands, reservoirs, and any other water source. o Do not use underground storage tanks. o Construct storage area dikes at least 12 inches high or graded and sloped to permit safe containment of leaks and spills equal to storage tank capacity located in the area plus sufficient freeboard to contain the 25-year rainstorm. Line diked areas with an impermeable barrier at least 50 mils thick. o Areas for refueling operations: Lined with impermeable barrier at least 40 mils thick covered with 2 to 4 inches of soil. Reclamation of temporary disturbance • All temporary access will be removed (including gravel surfaces) and planted after Project completion (NMFS 2017a). • Within 7 calendar days from Project completion, any disturbed bank and riparian areas shall be protected using native vegetation or other erosion control measures as appropriate. For erosion control, sterile grasses may be used in lieu of native seed mixes. Alternative methods (e.g. spreading timber harvest slash) may be used for erosion control if approved by the Corps (NMFS 2017a).

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-7 B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Water Resources (Water Rights) • A total of 40 cfs shall be continuously provided to the LNFH during Phase I construction. • A total of 20 cfs shall be continuously provided to the LNFH during Phase II construction activities taking place from April 17 to May 20. Biological Resources • Preserve natural landscape and preserve and protect existing vegetation not required or otherwise (Vegetation) authorized to be removed. • Protect vegetation from damage or injury caused by construction operations, personnel, or equipment by the use of protective barriers or other approved methods. • Minimize, to the greatest extent practicable, clearings and cuts through vegetation. • Do not use trees for anchorages except in emergency cases or as approved by Reclamation. Where approved, wrap the trunk with a sufficient thickness of approved protective material before rope, cable, or wire is placed. • Use safety ropes where tree climbing is necessary; do not use climbing spurs. • Before bringing construction equipment on site, clean it to remove dirt, vegetation, and other organic material to prevent introduction of noxious weeds, and invasive plant and animal species. • Contractor cleaning procedures shall result in equipment being cleaned as well or better than the procedures described in Reclamation Cleaning Manual (Reclamation 2010). Reclamation will inspect construction equipment following procedures described in Reclamation Cleaning Manual before allowing the equipment onsite. • Restore contractor use areas to pre-construction condition. • Areas of temporary disturbance must be re-seeded according to a revegetation plan.

B-8 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Biological Resources Riparian areas (Fisheries and Aquatic • The removal of riparian vegetation for access will be minimized (NMFS 2017a). Ecosystems) • All native, non-invasive organic material (large and small wood) cleared from the action area for access will remain on site (NMFS 2017a). • Boundaries of clearing limits associated with site access and construction will be marked to avoid or minimize disturbance of riparian vegetation, wetlands, and other sensitive sites (NMFS 2017a). • If native riparian vegetation is disturbed it will be replanted with native herbaceous and/or woody vegetation after Project completion. Planting will be completed between October 1 and April 15 of the year following construction. Plantings will be maintained as necessary for 3 years to ensure 50 percent herbaceous and/or 70 percent woody cover in year 3, whatever is applicable. For riparian impact areas greater than 0.5 of an acre, a final monitoring report will be submitted to the Corps in year 3. Failure to achieve the 50 percent herbaceous and 70 percent woody cover in year 3 will require the permittee to submit a plan with contingency measures to achieve standards or reasons to modify standards (NMFS 2017a). • Per NWP 27, post-planting monitoring may be required for up to 10 years in order to ensure an 80 percent planting survival rate is met. • Fencing will be installed as necessary to prevent access to revegetated sites by livestock, beavers or unauthorized persons. Beaver fencing will be installed around individual plants where necessary (NMFS 2017a).

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-9 B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Biological Resources Fisheries and aquatic wildlife (Fisheries and Aquatic • Instream work is limited to July 1 through November 15. Ecosystems, continued) • A minimum depth of 0.8 ft shall be maintained within the greatest amount of the natural stream channel width at all times with placement of cofferdams to facilitate fish passage. Fish passage criteria in Icicle Creek Fish Passage Evaluation for the Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery (Anglin et al. 2013, p. 26-28) should be consulted for minimum depth and maximum velocity criteria. The maximum velocity criteria on pages 26-28 are conservative, but attempts should be made to provide fish passage to the greatest extent practical across the natural stream channel width and hydrograph. • Work site dewatering will follow the Dewatering and Fish Capture Protocol in Appendix D (NMFS and USFWS 2008). Fish removal from dewatered work sites would be overseen by a fisheries biologist. Electrofishing for fish relocation/work area isolation must follow the most recent NMFS guidelines (NMFS 2017a). Record all incidents of listed fish being observed, captured, handled, and released (USFWS 2011). • Re-watering of the construction site occurs at such a rate as to minimize loss of surface water downstream as the construction site streambed absorbs water (NMFS and USFWS 2008). • The design of passage structures will follow the appropriate design standards in the most current version of the NMFS Anadromous Salmonid Fish Facility Design manual (NMFS and USFWS 2008). • Roughened channels will be designed to standards contained in the most current version of the NMFS Anadromous Salmonid Fish Facility Design manual (NMFS and USFWS 2008). • Post-construction monitoring of the low-flow fishway would be done to ensure effectiveness. • Boulder weirs will be low in relation to channel dimensions so that they are completely overtopped during channel-forming, bankfull flow events. Boulder weirs will be placed diagonally across the channel or in more traditional upstream pointing "V" or "U" configurations with the apex oriented upstream (NMFS and USFWS 2008). • Boulder weirs will be constructed to allow upstream and downstream passage of all native listed fish species and life stages that occur in the stream at all flows (NMFS and USFWS 2008). • Boulder weirs shall be designed and inspected by a multidisciplinary team (including a salmon or trout biologist) that has experience with these types of structures (NMFS and USFWS 2008).

B-10 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Biological Resources • Screens, including screens installed in temporary pump intakes, will be designed to meet standards (Fisheries and Aquatic in the most current version of the NMFS Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design manual Ecosystems, continued) (NMFS and USFWS 2008). • Pumps used to dewater the work isolation area or supply temporary hatchery water during construction, will have a fish screen installed, operated and maintained according to NMFS' fish screen criteria (NMFS 2017a). • All fish screens will be sized to match the water users documented or estimated historic water use or legal water right, whichever is less. Water diversion rates shall not exceed the design capacity of the screen, as calculated by following NMFS Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design manual (NMFS and USFWS 2008). • Irrigation diversion intake and return points will be designed (to the greatest degree possible) to prevent all native fish life stages from swimming or being entrained into the irrigation system (NMFS and USFWS 2008). • Do not use jackhammers in excess of 30 pounds without Reclamation approval. Blasting is not permitted. • Monitor, capture, and release listed fish species in the sand settling basin in accordance with applicable protocol in NMFS (2017a), USFWS (2011), and as identified through consultation for the Project’s Biological Assessment. • Schedule annual intake maintenance to avoid the Bull Trout upstream migration period (USFWS 2011). • Disturbing natural-origin spawning salmon and Steelhead during hatchery maintenance activities of diversions and instream structures shall be avoided, as shall disturbing salmon and Steelhead redds (NMFS 2017b).

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-11 B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Biological Resources • Schedule all necessary vegetation removal, trimming, and grading of vegetated areas outside of the (Terrestrial Wildlife) bird breeding season (generally March 1 to August 31) to the maximum extent practicable. • Avoid construction activities during the bird breeding season to the extent practicable. When Project activities cannot occur outside the bird nesting season (March 1 to August 31), conduct surveys prior to scheduled activity to determine if active nests are present within the Wildlife Analysis Area and buffer any active nesting locations found during surveys. Surveys should be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than seven days prior to disturbance activities. If active nests are detected during these surveys a no-activity buffer zone around the nest will be established by a qualified biologist based on species, Project disturbance level, topography, existing disturbance levels, and habitat type until fledging has occurred. During ongoing Project activities if a bird establishes a new nest the nest vegetation will not be removed or modified but no buffer zone will be required. If there is a pause in Project activities greater than seven days an additional nesting bird survey would be needed. • Reclamation would minimize the highest construction noise disturbance to avoid or minimize impacts on mule deer and mountain goat during sensitive periods to the extent practicable. This is between mid-spring to early fall (May 1-September 30). Cultural Resources • As required by the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer, the Plan and Procedures for the Inadvertent Discovery of Cultural Resources and Human Remains (Inadvertent Discovery Plan) will be followed in the case of inadvertent discovery of cultural resources or human remains during construction. • A professional archaeological monitor will be present during ground-disturbing activities. Land Use • Restore contractor use areas to pre-construction condition.

B-12 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Transportation • Perform work on rights-of-way established by the government as necessary to construct and maintain any roads, bridges, or drainage structures required for establishment and use of haul routes for construction operations. • Use existing available public highways, roads, or bridges as haul routes subject to applicable local regulations. • Minimize interference with or congestion of local traffic. • Provide barricades, flaggers, and other necessary precautions for safety of the public where haul routes cross public highways or roads. • Maintain roadways, parking areas, and haul routes in a sound, smooth condition. • Promptly repair ruts, broken pavement, potholes, low areas with standing water, and other deficiencies to maintain road surfacing and drainage in original or specified condition. • Meet requirements of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, Part 6 (Temporary traffic control; https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/) and WAC 296-155-305 (Signaling and flaggers). • Provide cones, delineators, concrete safety barriers, barricades, flasher lights, danger signals, signs, and other temporary traffic control devices as required to protect work and public safety. • Provide flaggers and guards as required to prevent accidents and damage or injury to passing traffic. • Do not begin work along public or private roads until traffic control devices for warning, channeling, and protecting motorists are in place in accordance with approved traffic control plan. • Provide unobstructed, smooth, and dustless passageway for one lane of traffic through construction operations except at times when vehicles will be turning around at the USFS kiosk or backing onto the Intake Access Road. • Provide unobstructed, smooth, and dustless passageway for one lane of traffic through construction operations. • Maintain convenient access to driveways and buildings along line of work. • Protect roads closed to traffic with effective barricades and warning signs. Illuminate barricades and obstructions from sunset to sunrise. • Remove traffic control devices when no longer needed. Noise • Do not use jackhammers in excess of 30 pounds without Reclamation approval. Blasting is not permitted. Recreation • There are no construction activities (such as parking, storage, or vehicle turnaround) allowed in the Forest Service Snow Lakes Trailhead parking lot.

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-13 B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Visual Resources • Minimize, to the greatest extent practicable, clearings and cuts through vegetation. Irregularly shape authorized clearings and cuts to soften undesirable aesthetic impacts. Socioeconomics and • Reclamation policy is to avoid impacts on Indian sacred sites whenever possible. Continued Environmental Justice coordination with affected Tribes may result in future identification of sacred sites. If this occurs, Reclamation would further evaluate impacts on these resources. Consultation with the Yakama Nation and Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation would identify how to protect sacred sites if they were identified and how to provide continued access if any such sites were affected by Project construction. • In-water work would not occur in the spillway pool during the Tribal fishing preparations or season. Utilities • A locate for underground utilities would be coordinated with the Washington Utility Notification Center (http://www.callbeforeyoudig.org/washington/index.asp) prior to construction. Hazardous Materials and Public • Vehicle traffic on government rights-of-way, dirt roads, and paved roads through LNFH property Health and Safety would be limited to 10 miles per hour. • Nuisance flows from seepage and leakage through the cofferdams will be managed to maintain a safe working environment. • Hazardous Waste Disposal: o Dispose by removal from jobsite. o Recycle hazardous waste whenever possible. o Dispose of hazardous waste materials that are not recycled at appropriately permitted treatment or disposal facilities. o Transport hazardous waste in accordance with 49 CFR 171-179. • Provide protection for personnel and existing facilities from harm due to demolition activities. • Arrange protective installations to permit operation of existing equipment and facilities by the government while work is in progress. • Inadvertent discovery of hazardous wastes or materials will be reported to Reclamation and Ecology within 24 hours of discovery. Construction in the vicinity of the discovery would cease until the appropriate disposal procedures were identified and carried out in coordination with Reclamation and Ecology.

B-14 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

Resource Topic Best Management Practice Tribal Interests • Reclamation policy is to avoid impacts on Indian sacred sites whenever possible. Continued coordination with affected Tribes may result in future identification of sacred sites. If this occurs, Reclamation would further evaluate impacts on these resources. Consultation with the Yakama Nation and Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation would identify how to protect sacred sites if they were identified and how to provide continued access if any such sites were affected by Project construction. Sources: As noted in table.

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-15 B. Best Management Practices

B.2 Regulatory Permit Terms and Conditions

Reclamation will obtain required regulatory permits and comply with the general, regional, and permit-specific terms and conditions contained therein. A general list of anticipated terms and conditions is included below. Regulating agencies may also impose additional conditions on a project-by-project basis.

B.1.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Nationwide Permits

USACE General Conditions for all NWPs • Aquatic Life Movements. All permanent and temporary crossings of waterbodies shall be suitably culverted, bridged, or otherwise designed and constructed to maintain low flows to sustain the movement of those aquatic species. • Spawning Areas. Activities in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. • Suitable Material. Material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts. • Fills Within 100-Year Floodplains. The activity must comply with applicable FEMA- approved state or local floodplain management requirements. • Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. Appropriate soil erosion and sediment controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills, as well as any work below the ordinary high water mark or high tide line, must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. Permittees are encouraged to perform work within waters of the United States during periods of low-flow or no-flow. • Removal of Temporary Fills. Temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to pre-construction elevations. The affected areas must be revegetated, as appropriate. • Proper Maintenance. Any authorized structure or fill shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety and compliance with applicable NWP general conditions, as well as any activity-specific conditions added by the district engineer to an NWP authorization. • Tribal Rights. No NWP activity may cause more than minimal adverse effects on tribal rights (including treaty rights), protected tribal resources, or tribal lands. • Endangered Species. (a) No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to directly or indirectly jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which will directly or indirectly destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species. No activity is authorized under any NWP which “may affect” a listed species or critical habitat, unless ESA section 7 consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been completed. • Endangered Species. (d) As a result of formal or informal consultation with the FWS or NMFS the district engineer may add species-specific permit conditions to the NWPs.

B-16 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

• Migratory Birds and Bald and Golden Eagles. The permittee is responsible for ensuring their action complies with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. • Historic Properties. (a) In cases where the district engineer determines that the activity may have the potential to cause effects to properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places, the activity is not authorized, until the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) have been satisfied. • Discovery of Previously Unknown Remains and Artifacts. If you discover any previously unknown historic, cultural or archeological remains and artifacts while accomplishing the activity authorized by this permit, you must immediately notify the district engineer of what you have found, and to the maximum extent practicable, avoid construction activities that may affect the remains and artifacts until the required coordination has been completed. • Water Quality. Where States and authorized Tribes, or EPA where applicable, have not previously certified compliance of an NWP with CWA section 401, individual 401 Water Quality Certification must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). • Regional and Case-By-Case Conditions. The activity must comply with any regional conditions that may have been added by the Division Engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and with any case specific conditions added by the Corps or by the state, Indian Tribe, or U.S. EPA in its section 401 Water Quality Certification.

USACE Seattle District NWP Regional Conditions • Construction Boundaries: Permittees must clearly mark all construction area boundaries before beginning work on projects that involve grading or placement of fill. Boundary markers and/or construction fencing must be maintained and clearly visible for the duration of construction. Permittees should avoid and minimize removal of native vegetation (including submerged aquatic vegetation) to the maximum extent possible. • Temporary Impacts and Site Restoration: Native soils removed from waters of the U.S. for project construction should be stockpiled and used for site restoration. Restoration of temporarily disturbed areas must include returning the area to pre-project ground surface contours. If native soil is not available from the project site for restoration, suitable clean soil of the same textural class may be used. The permittee must revegetate disturbed areas with native plant species sufficient in number, spacing, and diversity to restore affected functions. Revegetation must begin as soon as site conditions allow within the same growing season as the disturbance. Temporary erosion and sediment control measures must be removed as soon as the area has established vegetation sufficient to control erosion and sediment.

NWP 27 (Aquatic Habitat Restoration, Enhancement, and Establishment Activities) Conditions • Only native plant species should be planted at the site.

NWP 33 (Temporary Construction, Access, and Dewatering) Conditions • Appropriate measures must be taken to maintain near normal downstream flows and to minimize flooding. • Fill must consist of materials, and be placed in a manner, that will not be eroded by expected high flows.

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-17 B. Best Management Practices

• The use of dredged material may be allowed if the district engineer determines that it will not cause more than minimal adverse environmental effects. Following completion of construction, temporary fill must be entirely removed to an area that has no waters of the United States, dredged material must be returned to its original location, and the affected areas must be restored to pre-construction elevations. The affected areas must also be revegetated, as appropriate.

B.1.2 Ecology Section 401 Water Quality Certification

General Conditions • Stormwater pollution prevention: All projects that involve land disturbance or impervious surfaces must implement stormwater pollution prevention or control measures to avoid discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff to waters of the State. – For land disturbances during construction, the applicant must obtain and implement permits (e.g., Construction Stormwater General Permit) where required and follow Ecology’s current stormwater manual. – Following construction, prevention or treatment of on-going stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces shall be provided.

B.3 Potential Contractor Plan Submittals

The list of plans that would need to be prepared before Project construction could begin may include, but are not limited to the following:

• Land Use and Landscape Rehabilitation Plan • Traffic Control Plan • Pollution Prevention Plan • Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan • Tree and Plant Protection Plan • Waste Production and Disposal Plan • Waste Handling and Disposal Plan • Demolition Plan • Concrete Removal and Disposal Plan • Water Control Plan • Cofferdam Construction Plan • Seeding Plan • Work Area Isolation Plan • Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Inadvertent Discovery Plan

B-18 Appendix B- Best Management Practices B. Best Management Practices

B.4 References

Anglin, D. R., J. J. Skalicky, D. Hines, and N. Jones. 2013. Icicle Creek Fish Passage Evaluation for The Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia River Fisheries Program Office, Vancouver, Washington.

NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2015. Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7(a)(2) Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Consultation; Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery spring Chinook Salmon Program. National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region, Portland, Oregon.

_____. 2017a. Programmatic Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Biological Opinion, and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Response for the Seattle District Corps of Engineers Permitting of Fish Passage and Restoration Action in Washington State (FPRP III). West Coast Region, Portland, Oregon.

_____. 2017b. Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7(a)(2) Biological Opinion and Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Consultation, Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery Spring Chinook Salmon Program (Reinitiation 2016). National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region, Portland, Oregon.

NMFS and USFWS (National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2008. Endangered Species Act Section 7 Formal Consultation and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation for the Washington State Fish Passage and Habitat Enhancement Restoration Programmatic. NMFS Tracking No. 2008/03598, USFWS No. 13410-2008-FWS#F-0209. Lacey, Washington.

Reclamation (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation). 2010. Technical Memorandum No. 86-68220-07-05: Inspection and Cleaning Manual for Equipment and Vehicles to Prevent the Spread of Invasive Species, 2010 Edition. Denver, Colorado.

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2011. Biological Opinion for the operations and maintenance (O&M) of the LNFH and effects on the threatened bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) and its designated critical habitat. USFWS Reference No. 13260-2011-F-0048 and 13260-2011-P-0002. Wenatchee, Washington.

Appendix B- Best Management Practices B-19 B. Best Management Practices

This page intentionally left blank.

B-20 Appendix B- Best Management Practices

Appendix C Predicted Streamflows in Icicle Creek

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix C. Predicted Streamflows in Icicle Creek Modeling was performed for the Changing Streamflow in Icicle, Peshastin, and Mission Creeks report (CIG 2017a) to aid in evaluating alternative ways to manage water in Icicle Creek. This modeling used five datasets, summarized in Table C-1, below, to show the range of potential climate-adjusted hydrology on Icicle Creek.

Table C-1 Summary of Dataset Features

Greenhouse Climate Down- Hydrologic Years Gas Scenario Model1 scaling Model

2049) 2069) 2099)

(2020 - (2040 - (2070 -

CropSyst v2.0 -

Dataset Citation Low (RCP 4.5) Moderate (A1B) High (RCP 8.5) New (CMIP5) Old (CMIP3) Statistical Dynamical VIC v4.07 VIC v4.1.2 VIC 2030s 2050s 2080s MACA Mote et al. 2014 ü ü 10 ü ü ü ü ü bcMACA Mauger et al. 2016 ü ü 10 ü ü ü ü ü (modified version of MACA WSU Hall et al. 2016 ü ü 5 ü ü ü HB2860 Hamlet et al 2013 ü 7 ü ü ü ü ü bcWRF Salathé et al. 2010 ü 2 ü ü ü ü Source: CIG 2017a, Table 3 RCP: representative concentration pathway 1Number of global climate model projections included.

Information on the emission scenarios representing low, moderate, and high emission pathways are described in Table C-2.

Table C-2 Summary of Greenhouse Gas Scenarios

Greenhouse Gas Scenario Description Scenario Characteristics RCP 4.5 Low A low scenario in which greenhouse gas emissions stabilize by mid-century and fall sharply thereafter. Used in the CMIP5 global climate model. A1B Moderate A medium scenario in which greenhouse gas emissions increase gradually until stabilizing in the final decades of the 21st century. Used in the CMIP3 global climate model. RCP 8.5 High A high scenario that assumes continued increases in greenhouse gas emissions until the end of the 21st century. Used in the CMIP5 global climate model. Source: CIG 2017a, Table 1

SWISP Project EIS C-1 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report C. Predicted Streamflows in Icicle Creek

Uncertainties in modeling under all datasets are described in Section 5 of the Changing Streamflow in Icicle, Peshastin, and Mission Creeks report (CIG 2017a) as follows:

• Because the datasets were developed for use in other projects, model inputs (climate, soil, and vegetation patterns) were not optimized to best represent the conditions found in Icicle Creek and were not calibrated to ensure that streamflow estimates match observed flows. However, the models are expected to capture the seasonal cycle of flows (i.e., relative changes in flows from month to month), even if the absolute flows do not match the observations. Projected monthly average flows are likely more accurate than daily streamflow estimates. • In addition to temperature and precipitation, streamflow is influenced by changes in soils and vegetation. The hydrologic model runs assumed land cover and soil characteristics would remain the same throughout the simulations. If these conditions changed due to events such as landslides and wildfires, changes in streamflow could be greater than projections imply. • The average projection for each dataset was used in reporting results. This is just one approach to synthesizing the results and may not be the best approach for every application. In general, averaging across models is not recommended because it suppresses the range among model projections, which may be important in some planning contexts. Averaging was deemed appropriate for this study because modeling was intended as a screening-level analysis and because none of the models were calibrated for the watersheds analyzed, as described above.

As reported in the Changing Streamflow in Icicle, Peshastin, and Mission Creeks report (CIG 2017a, Section 4.2), the magnitude of projected change in monthly average streamflow in Icicle Creek differed substantially from one dataset to the next. This reflects the uncertainties associated with representing changes in local climate and hydrology; this uncertainty would likely be reduced with careful calibration and improvements to model inputs (climate, soil, and vegetation). Conversely, the overall pattern of change was remarkably consistent across datasets, reflecting the expected reductions in snowpack with warming.

The figures below show monthly streamflow projections for Icicle Creek in the 2030s, 2050s, and 2080s, under low and high greenhouse gas emission scenarios (CIG 2017b) using the bcMACA dataset. These figures were selected for inclusion because the dataset on which they were based (Mauger et al. 2016) included high and low greenhouse gas emission scenarios and projections for all three time periods (2030s, 2050s, and 2080s). Three of the other datasets—WSU, HB2860, and bcWRF—included only some of these parameters (Table C-1). The bcMACA dataset included all of these parameters, and it is a more recent modification to the MACA dataset (CIG 2017a).

Streamflow projections under other datasets may be viewed using the interactive tool at https://cig.uw.edu/resources/analysis-tools/icicle_work_group_projections/.

C-2 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report C. Predicted Streamflows in Icicle Creek

Icicle Creek Modeled 2030 Flows (Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions)

Icicle Creek Modeled 2030 Flows (High Greenhouse Gas Emissions)

SWISP Project EIS C-3 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report C. Predicted Streamflows in Icicle Creek

Icicle Creek Modeled 2050 Flows (Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions)

Icicle Creek Modeled 2050 Flows (High Greenhouse Gas Emissions)

C-4 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report C. Predicted Streamflows in Icicle Creek

Icicle Creek Modeled 2080 Flows (Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions)

Icicle Creek Modeled 2080 Flows (High Greenhouse Gas Emissions)

SWISP Project EIS C-5 Air Quality and Climate Resource Report C. Predicted Streamflows in Icicle Creek

This page intentionally left blank.

C-6 SWISP Project EIS Air Quality and Climate Resource Report

Appendix D Emission Calculations

This page intentionally left blank.

Summary of Emissions-Alternative B

GHGs Element Criteria Pollutants (Tons) Emission Source (Metric Tons) (Timing) VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2e On-road commute 0.235 2.387 0.134 0.001 0.027 0.010 116.23 Mobilization, Site Access, Cofferdam I Construction, On-road trucks 0.039 0.145 0.215 0.001 0.025 0.008 65.81 Gatehouse and Intake Non-road equipment 0.157 1.015 0.922 0.003 0.038 0.038 262.86 Structure Construction Pumps/Generators 0.068 0.510 0.556 0.001 0.025 0.025 113.41

Mar 2022-Sept 2023 Subtotal 0.499 4.058 1.827 0.006 0.114 0.081 558.32

On-road commute 0.072 0.734 0.041 0.000 0.008 0.003 35.75

Roughened Channel On-road trucks 0.080 0.286 0.413 0.002 0.048 0.016 131.65

Construction Non-road equipment 0.051 0.288 0.320 0.001 0.012 0.012 82.98 Pumps/Generators 0.027 0.206 0.216 0.000 0.010 0.010 42.81 Jul-Oct 2023 Subtotal 0.230 1.514 0.991 0.003 0.078 0.041 293.19

On-road commute 0.149 1.515 0.085 0.001 0.017 0.006 73.78

Conveyance Pipeline On-road trucks 0.007 0.034 0.060 0.000 0.007 0.003 13.02 Replacement/ Rehabilitation Non-road equipment 0.235 1.990 1.529 0.005 0.068 0.068 459.98 Pumps/Generators 0.096 0.728 0.761 0.002 0.035 0.035 149.75

May 22-May 23; Apr-May 24 Subtotal 0.331 2.718 2.290 0.007 0.104 0.104 609.73 Total Emissions (tons) 1.060 8.291 5.109 0.016 0.296 0.226 1461.24 % Comparison to 2017 NEI Stationary and 0.029% 0.061% 0.233% 0.070% 0.066% 0.058% — MobileEmissions % Comparison to the GHG Reporting Rule 25,000- — — — — — — 6% metric ton threshold On-Road Commute Vehicles Emissions-Alternative B

Calculation Method: The emission factors for on-road equipment are given in lb/miles Emissions (tons) = [Emission Factor (lb/travel mile)] X [travel mile/2000 (lb/U.S. ton)]

Assumptions: Emission factors derived from EPA's MOVES 2014 model, on-road emissions, 2020 Assumed an average driving distance of 20 miles one-way for commute traffic 1 crew is 15 people in Phase I and 10 people in Phase II 2 Reclamation inspectors per day in Phase I, 1 per day in Phase 2 traveling 40 miles per day

miles/ Total Emission Factors (lb/mile) Emissions (tons) Description Personnel Days day VMT VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Project Mobilization and Intake Construction Site Access 5-day (I crew per day) 15 20 40 12,000 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0093 0.0939 0.0053 0.0000 0.0011 0.0004 4.5686 0.0001 0.00000 4.57 24/6 (3 crews per day) 45 0 40 0 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 0.00 Reclamation inspector trip 2 25 40 2,000 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0015 0.0157 0.0009 0.0000 0.0002 0.0001 0.7614 0.0000 0.00000 0.76 Subtotal 14,000 0.011 0.110 0.006 0.000 0.001 0.000 5.330 0.000 0.00000 5.34 Intake Cofferdam I/ Gravity Bypass Water Supply Construction/Gatehouse Demo 5-day (I crew per day) 15 9 40 5,400 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0042 0.0423 0.0024 0.0000 0.0005 0.0002 2.0559 0.0001 0.00000 2.06 24/6 (3 crews per day) 45 51 40 91,800 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0708 0.7185 0.0405 0.0003 0.0081 0.0030 34.9499 0.0010 0.00002 34.98 Reclamation inspector trip 2 60 40 4,800 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0037 0.0376 0.0021 0.0000 0.0004 0.0002 1.8274 0.0001 0.00000 1.83 Subtotal 102,000 0.079 0.798 0.045 0.000 0.009 0.003 38.833 0.001 0.00002 38.87 Intake Structure Construction 5-day (I crew per day) 15 106 40 63,600 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0491 0.4978 0.0280 0.0002 0.0056 0.0021 24.2137 0.0007 0.00001 24.24 24/6 (3 crews per day) 45 69 40 124,200 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0958 0.9720 0.0548 0.0004 0.0110 0.0041 47.2852 0.0014 0.00003 47.33 Reclamation inspector trip 2 15 40 1,200 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0009 0.0094 0.0005 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.4569 0.0000 0.00000 0.46 Subtotal 189,000 0.1458 1.4792 0.0833 0.0006 0.0167 0.0063 71.9558 0.0021 0.00004 72.03 Intake Total 0.235 2.387 0.134 0.001 0.027 0.010 116.119 0.003 0.00007 116.23 Roughened Channel Construction 5-day (I crew per day) 15 52 40 31,200 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0241 0.2442 0.0138 0.0001 0.0028 0.0010 11.8784 0.0003 0.00001 11.89 24/6 (3 crews per day) 45 31 40 55,800 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0431 0.4367 0.0246 0.0002 0.0049 0.0018 21.2441 0.0006 0.00001 21.26 Reclamation inspector trip 2 85 40 6,800 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0052 0.0532 0.0030 0.0000 0.0006 0.0002 2.5889 0.0001 0.00000 2.59 Subtotal 93,800 0.072 0.734 0.041 0.000 0.008 0.003 35.711 0.001 0.00002 35.75 Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation 12/7 (2 crews per day) 10 440 40 176,000 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.136 1.377 0.078 0.001 0.016 0.006 67.006 0.002 0.00004 67.07 Reclamation inspector trip 1 440 40 17,600 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0136 0.1377 0.0078 0.0001 0.0016 0.0006 6.7006 0.0002 0.00000 6.71 Subtotal 193,600 0.149 1.515 0.085 0.001 0.017 0.006 73.707 0.002 0.00004 73.78 *CO2e equals the GHG times global warming potential ([CO2 * 1] + [CH4 * 28]+[N2O*265]); GWPs taken from IPPC 5th Assessment Report (IPCC 2014) On-Road Non-Commute Vehicle Emissions-Alternative B

Calculation Method: The emission factors for on-road equipment are given in lb/miles Emissions (tons) = [Emission Factor (lb/travel mile)] X [travel mile/2000 (lb/U.S. ton)]

Assumptions: EMFAC On-Road Emission Factor for 2021 for truck mix (trucks > 8,500 pounds such as water trucks, tractor trailers, dump trucks, cement trucks)

Total Emission Factors (lb/mile) Emissions (tons) Element VMT VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Phase I Intake Construction Material Delivery/Haul 66,355 0.00110232 0.00396834 0.00573205 0.00002205 0.00066139 0.00022046 1.82292379 0.00006614 0.00000088 0.037 0.132 0.190 0.001 0.022 0.007 60.480 0.002 0.000 60.55 Tractor-Trailer 5,000 0.00110232 0.00551159 0.00992085 0.00004409 0.00110232 0.00044093 2.10181000 0.00006614 0.00000882 0.003 0.014 0.025 0.000 0.003 0.001 5.255 0.000 0.000 5.26 Total 71,355 0.039 0.145 0.215 0.001 0.025 0.008 65.735 0.002 0.000 65.81 Roughened Channel Construction Material Delivery/Haul 144,276 0.00110232 0.00396834 0.00573205 0.00002205 0.00066139 0.00022046 1.82292379 0.00006614 0.00000088 0.080 0.286 0.413 0.002 0.048 0.016 131.502 0.005 0.000 131.65 Tractor-Trailer 0 0.00110232 0.00551159 0.00992085 0.00004409 0.00110232 0.00044093 2.10181000 0.00006614 0.00000882 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 144,276 0.080 0.286 0.413 0.002 0.048 0.016 131.502 0.005 0.000 131.65 Phase II Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation Material Delivery/Haul 1,140 0.00110232 0.00396834 0.00573205 0.00002205 0.00066139 0.00022046 1.82292379 0.00006614 0.00000088 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.039 0.000 0.000 1.04 Tractor-Trailer 11,375 0.00110232 0.00551159 0.00992085 0.00004409 0.00110232 0.00044093 2.10181000 0.00006614 0.00000882 0.006 0.031 0.056 0.000 0.006 0.003 11.954 0.000 0.000 11.98 Total 12,515 0.007 0.034 0.060 0.000 0.007 0.003 12.993 0.000 0.0001 13.02 Alternative B

Miles/ No. No. Trips/ Total Water Trucks No. Trucks Weeks Total VMT Mobilization/Demobilization Miles/ trip Week Trucks truck VMT

Project Mobilization and Intake Construction Site Access Intake Construction Total Off-site (fill truck) 1 4 5 20 Mobilization 25 1 100 2,500 On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 4 14 56 Demobilization 25 1 100 2,500 Total 76 Total 5,000 Intake Cofferdam I/ Gravity Bypass Water Supply Construction/Gatehouse Demo Roughened Channel Construction* Off-site (fill truck) 1 15 5 75 Mobilization 10 1 100 1,000 On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 15 14 210 Demobilization 10 1 100 1,000 Total 285 Total 2,000 Intake Structure Construction Conveyance Pipeline Off-site (fill truck) 1 60 5 300 Mobilization 2022 15 1 100 1,500 On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 60 14 840 Demobilization 2022 15 1 100 1,500 Total 1,140 Mobilization 2023 10 1 100 1,000 Intake Construction Totals 1,501 Demobilization 2023 10 1 100 1,000 Roughened Channel Construction* Mobilization 2024 10 1 100 1,000 Off-site (fill truck) 1 2 5 10 Demobilization 2024 10 1 100 1,000 On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 2 14 28 Total 7,000 Total Assume 25 truck hauls to mobilize/demobilize for Phase I and 15 truck hauls for pipe 38 replacement/10 for CIPP lining in Phase II Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation *Assume no separate mobilization/demobilization for this part of Phase I Off-site (fill truck) 1 60 5 300 Assume average distance of 100 miles On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 60 14 840 Total 1,140 * Overlaps with Intake Structure Construction period Assumes water trucks filled on-site truck operates 2 miles per day on-site (14 miles/week) for dust control Assumes one 2,000 gal water truck per week for Phases I and II (Phase I is 81 weeks [March 15, 2022 to October 5, 2023]; Phase II is 60 weeks [May 2022 to May 2023 and Apr-May 2024]) Alternative B

Total Haul Debris Haul Demolition Hauls LB/CY Weight Distance Total VMT (CY) Loads (tons) (mi) Intake Construction Removal (Reinforced Concrete, Existing Weir, Sluiceway, and Trashrack) 147 2,025 149 7 100 744 Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 1, Stream Bed Preparation) 210 2,025 213 11 100 1,063 Removal (Reinforced Concrete, Gatehouse) 72 2,025 73 4 100 365 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 1, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 1,890 3,375 3,189 159 100 15,947 Total 181 18,119 Roughened Channel Construction* Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 2, Stream Bed Preparation) 210 2,025 213 11 100 1,063 Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 3, Stream Bed Preparation) 189 2,025 191 10 100 957 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 2, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 2,142 3,375 3,615 181 100 18,073 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 3, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 1,890 3,375 3,189 159 100 15,947 Total 360 36,040 Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation N/A N/A Haul miles for demolition debris: assume hauled to Wenatchee landfill (100-mile roundtrip) Assume concrete weight per CY (broken up): 2,025 lbs and 20-ton weight limit per dump track For cofferdams, assume 3/4 gravel: Dry weight/CY is 2,565 lb; wet is 3,375 lb (https://downeastermfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Cubic_Yardage_Chart-D.pdf)

Haul Material Haul Concrete/Delivery Truck Hauls CY/Truck Distance Total VMT (CY) Loads (mi) Intake Construction Fill (Reinforced Concrete, Fish Screen Structure) 410 12 34 120 4,100 Fill (CLSM, Intake Pipeline) 30 12 3 120 300 Fill (CLSM, Intake Pipeline) 43 12 4 120 430 Rebar/Formwork Delivery N/A N/A 4 120 480 Total 44 4,830 Roughened Channel Construction* Fill (Concrete for Grouted Riprap Areas, Roughened Channel) 290 12 24 120 2,900 Total 2,900 Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation N/A N/A Haul miles for construction materials: assume concrete and earthern materials sourced from Ellensburg, WA (120-mile round trip per load) Assume 12 CY concrete trucks Alternative B

Total Material Haul Haul Earthen Material and Gravel LB/CY Weight Total VMT (CY) Loads Distance (mi) (tons) Intake Construction Fill (Earthen Material, Fish Screen Structure) 1,733 2,700 2,340 117 120 14,037 Fill (Earthen Material and Gravel, Intake Pipeline) 938 2,700 1,266 63 120 7,598 Fill (Earthen Material and Gravel, Access Road and Intake Pipeline) 707 2,700 954 48 120 5,727 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 1, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 1,890 2,565 2,424 121 120 14,544 Total 349 41,905 Roughened Channel Construction* 6.9-12 inch rock 250 4,725 591 30 120 3,544 5.7-6.9 inch rock 250 2,800 350 18 120 2,100 3.7-5.2 inch rock 300 3,200 480 24 120 2,880 Class II 220 4,725 520 26 120 3,119 Class V 1,150 4,725 2,717 136 120 16,301 Class IX 3,500 4,725 8,269 413 120 49,613 8-foot boulders 27 Boulders 27 120 3,240 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 2, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 2,142 2,565 2,747 137 120 16,483 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 3, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 1,890 2,565 2,424 121 120 14,544 Total 932 103,298 Haul miles for demolition debris: assume hauled to Wenatchee landfill (100-mile roundtrip) For cofferdams, assume 3/4 gravel: Dry weight/CY is 2,565 lb; wet is 3,375 lb (https://downeastermfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Cubic_Yardage_Chart-D.pdf) Granite boulder is 175 lb/CF Assume 20-ton limit per dump truck

Haul Loads/ Haul Total Conveyance Pipeline Equipment Distance VMT Tips (mi) Truck trips for 42" HDPE 20 125 2,500 CIPP Deliveries 5 125 625 CIPP Installation Truck Trips 10 125 1,250 Total 4,375 Assume installation trucks come from Wenatchee (40-mile roundtrip) Assume delivery trucks distance of 125 miles (based on average distance from HDPE manufacters around Leavenworth) 2,380 LF of 42-inch pipe, 3 pipes/truckload: https://www.edgenmurray.com/userfiles/Pipe%20Load%20Chart%20Guide.pdf 1 delivery per construction season 2 trucks per segment, 5 segments, arrive at the beginning of construction and depart at the end of construction Off-Road Equipment Emissions-Alternative B

Calculation Method: The emission factors for off-road equipment are given in lb/hr Emissions (tons) = [Emission Factor (lb/hr)] X [hours/2000 (lb/U.S. ton)]

Assumptions: EMFAC Off-Road Emission Factor for 2021; composite emission factor for each equipment type used Types, number, and days of use obtained from Reclamation Construction that is not 24-hr: Assume 8 hr/day equipment use Construction that is 24-hr/day: Assume 12 hr/day equipment use

Non-Road (Other than Pumps and Generators) Non-Road (Pumps and Generators) Criteria Pollutant Emissions (tons) GHG (tons) Criteria Pollutant Emissions (tons) GHG (tons) Description Description PM2.5 PM2.5 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 CO2 CH4 CO2e VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 CO2 CH4 CO2e Intake Construction Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 0.02 0.16 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.01 37.15 0.00 37.21 Site Clearing/Access Road 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.66 0.00 3.67 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0.04 0.26 0.24 0.00 0.01 0.01 69.16 0.00 69.26 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0.02 0.16 0.17 0.00 0.01 0.01 34.59 0.00 34.64 Gatehouse Demolition 0.02 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.30 0.00 26.34 Gatehouse Demolition 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.49 0.00 5.50 Intake Structure 0.07 0.49 0.43 0.00 0.02 0.02 126.20 0.01 126.39 Intake Structure 0.04 0.30 0.33 0.00 0.01 0.01 67.09 0.00 67.19 Transition to Intake Structure 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.66 0.00 3.67 Transition to Intake Structure 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.41 0.00 2.41 Total 0.16 1.02 0.92 0.00 0.04 0.04 262.47 0.0141 262.86 Total 0.07 0.51 0.56 0.00 0.02 0.02 113.24 0.0062 113.41 Roughened Channel Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.01 42.73 0.00 42.80 Cofferam II 0.01 0.11 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.01 22.84 0.00 22.87 Cofferdam III 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.01 40.12 0.00 40.18 Cofferdam III 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.91 0.00 19.94 Total 0.05 0.29 0.32 0.00 0.01 0.01 82.85 0.0046 82.98 Total 0.03 0.21 0.22 0.00 0.01 0.01 42.74 0.0025 42.81 Conveyance Pipeline Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0.22 1.89 1.46 0.00 0.07 0.07 433.18 0.02 433.83 Pipe Replacement 0.03 0.26 0.29 0.00 0.01 0.01 58.55 0.00 58.64 CIPP Lining 0.01 0.10 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.11 0.00 26.15 CIPP Lining 0.06 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.02 0.02 90.95 0.01 91.11 Total 0.23 1.99 1.53 0.01 0.07 0.07 459.29 0.0247 459.98 Total 0.10 0.73 0.76 0.00 0.04 0.04 149.50 0.0087 149.75 Alternative B

Earth Mover/Dozer Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0052 0.0345 0.0313 0.0001 0.0015 0.0015 7.9646 0.00047 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 1 8 5 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0017 0.0115 0.0104 0.0000 0.0005 0.0005 2.6549 0.00016 Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Excavator Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0041 0.0307 0.0215 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 7.1748 0.00037 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 1 12 30 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0124 0.0920 0.0644 0.0002 0.0029 0.0029 21.5243 0.00112 Gatehouse Demolition 1 8 15 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0041 0.0307 0.0215 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 7.1748 0.00037 Intake Structure 1 8 30 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0082 0.0614 0.0429 0.0002 0.0019 0.0019 14.3495 0.00074 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 1 12 10 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0041 0.0307 0.0215 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 7.1748 0.00037 Cofferdam III 1 12 10 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0041 0.0307 0.0215 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 7.1748 0.00037 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 1 12 200 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0825 0.6135 0.4292 0.0016 0.0190 0.0190 143.4953 0.00744 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Motor Grader Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0052 0.0345 0.0313 0.0001 0.0015 0.0015 7.9646 0.00047 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Intake Structure 1 8 10 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0034 0.0230 0.0209 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 5.3097 0.00031 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Alternative B

Compactor Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0003 0.0016 0.0019 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0.2588 0.00003 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 1 8 50 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0010 0.0053 0.0063 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002 0.8628 0.00009 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Backhoe Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0024 0.0216 0.0150 0.0000 0.0007 0.0007 4.0079 0.00022 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Intake Structure 1 8 40 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0065 0.0577 0.0401 0.0001 0.0018 0.0018 10.6878 0.00059 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0489 0.4327 0.3007 0.0009 0.0135 0.0135 80.1587 0.00441 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Crane Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 0 0 0 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 1 12 30 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0152 0.0696 0.1086 0.0002 0.0041 0.0041 23.1537 0.00137 Gatehouse Demolition 1 12 15 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0076 0.0348 0.0543 0.0001 0.0021 0.0021 11.5768 0.00069 Intake Structure 1 8 70 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0237 0.1082 0.1689 0.0004 0.0064 0.0064 36.0168 0.00214 Transition to Intake Structure 1 8 5 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0017 0.0077 0.0121 0.0000 0.0005 0.0005 2.5726 0.00015 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 1 12 30 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0152 0.0696 0.1086 0.0002 0.0041 0.0041 23.1537 0.00137 Cofferdam III 1 12 30 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0152 0.0696 0.1086 0.0002 0.0041 0.0041 23.1537 0.00137 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0 0 0 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Alternative B

Wheeled Loader Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0042 0.0263 0.0256 0.0001 0.0012 0.0012 6.5167 0.00038 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 1 12 200 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0846 0.5257 0.5130 0.0014 0.0248 0.0248 130.3331 0.00763 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Forklift Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0018 0.0129 0.0088 0.0000 0.0003 0.0003 3.2637 0.00016 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 1 12 75 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0132 0.0967 0.0657 0.0003 0.0025 0.0025 24.4781 0.00119 Gatehouse Demolition 1 12 15 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0026 0.0193 0.0131 0.0001 0.0005 0.0005 4.8956 0.00024 Intake Structure 1 8 275 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0323 0.2363 0.1605 0.0007 0.0062 0.0062 59.8353 0.00292 Transition to Intake Structure 1 8 5 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0006 0.0043 0.0029 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 1.0879 0.00005 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 1 12 38 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0067 0.0490 0.0333 0.0001 0.0013 0.0013 12.4022 0.00060 Cofferdam III 1 12 30 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0053 0.0387 0.0263 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 9.7912 0.00048 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 1 12 240 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0035 0.3094 0.2101 0.0009 0.0081 0.0081 78.3299 0.00382 CIPP Lining 1 12 80 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0141 0.1031 0.0700 0.0003 0.0027 0.0027 26.1100 0.00127 Alternative B

Generator Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 CO2e Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.66 0.00020 3.67 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 1 12 75 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.02 0.12 0.13 0.00 0.01 0.01 27.45 0.00147 27.49 Gatehouse Demolition 1 12 15 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.49 0.00029 5.50 Intake Structure 1 8 275 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.04 0.30 0.33 0.00 0.01 0.01 67.09 0.00360 67.19 Transition to Intake Structure 1 8 5 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.22 0.00007 1.22 Roughened Channel 0.06 0.47 0.51 0.00 0.02 0.02 104.91 0.01 105.07 Cofferam II 1 12 38 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.91 0.00075 13.93 Cofferdam III 1 12 30 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.98 0.00059 11.00 Conveyance Pipeline 0.01 0.11 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.01 24.89 0.00 24.92 Pipe Replacement 1 8 240 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.03 0.26 0.29 0.00 0.01 0.01 58.55 0.00314 58.64 CIPP Lining 1 8 80 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.52 0.00105 19.55 0.05 0.35 0.38 0.00 0.02 0.02 78.07 0.00 78.19 Pump Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 CO2e Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 0 0 0 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 1 24 12 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00045 7.16 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 Transition to Intake Structure 1 24 2 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.19 0.00007 1.19 Roughened Channel 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.33 0.00 8.35 Cofferam II 1 24 15 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.93 0.00056 8.94 Cofferdam III 1 24 15 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.93 0.00056 8.94 Conveyance Pipeline 0.01 0.10 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.86 0.00 17.89 Pipe Replacement 0 0 0 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 CIPP Lining 1 24 120 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.05 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.02 0.02 71.43 0.00447 71.56 Summary of Emissions-Alternative D

GHGs Element Criteria Pollutants (Tons) Emission Source (Metric Tons) (Timing) VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2e On-road commute 0.235 2.387 0.134 0.001 0.027 0.010 116.23 Mobilization, Site Access, Cofferdam I Construction, On-road trucks 0.042 0.159 0.240 0.001 0.027 0.010 71.08 Gatehouse and Intake Non-road equipment 0.214 1.370 1.260 0.004 0.051 0.051 358.47 Structure Construction Pumps/Generators 0.293 2.235 2.287 0.005 0.108 0.108 442.18

Mar 2022-Sept 2023 Subtotal 0.783 6.151 3.921 0.011 0.213 0.179 987.95

On-road commute 0.072 0.734 0.041 0.000 0.008 0.003 35.75

Roughened Channel On-road trucks 0.081 0.290 0.419 0.002 0.048 0.016 133.48

Construction Non-road equipment 0.051 0.288 0.320 0.001 0.012 0.012 82.98 Pumps/Generators 0.027 0.206 0.216 0.000 0.010 0.010 42.81 Jul-Oct 2023 Subtotal 0.231 1.518 0.997 0.003 0.079 0.042 295.01

On-road commute 0.149 1.515 0.085 0.001 0.017 0.006 73.78

Conveyance Pipeline On-road trucks 0.007 0.034 0.060 0.000 0.007 0.003 13.02 Replacement/ Rehabilitation Non-road equipment 0.235 1.990 1.529 0.005 0.068 0.068 459.98 Pumps/Generators 0.096 0.728 0.761 0.002 0.035 0.035 149.75

May 22-May 23; Apr-May 24 Subtotal 0.331 2.718 2.290 0.007 0.104 0.104 609.73 Total Emissions (tons) 1.345 10.388 7.207 0.021 0.396 0.324 1,892.69 % Comparison to 2017 NEI Stationary and 0.037% 0.076% 0.329% 0.092% 0.089% 0.084% — MobileEmissions % Comparison to the GHG Reporting Rule 25,000- — — — — — — 8% metric ton threshold On-Road Commute Vehicles Emissions-Alternative D

Calculation Method: The emission factors for on-road equipment are given in lb/miles Emissions (tons) = [Emission Factor (lb/travel mile)] X [travel mile/2000 (lb/U.S. ton)]

Assumptions: Emission factors derived from EPA's MOVES 2014 model, on-road emissions, 2020 Assumed an average driving distance of 20 miles one-way for commute traffic 1 crew is 15 people in Phase I and 10 people in Phase II 2 Reclamation inspectors per day in Phase I, 1 per day in Phase 2 traveling 40 miles per day

miles/ Total Emission Factors (lb/mile) Emissions (tons) Description Personnel Days day VMT VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Project Mobilization and Intake Construction Site Access 5-day (I crew per day) 15 20 40 12,000 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0093 0.0939 0.0053 0.0000 0.0011 0.0004 4.5686 0.0001 0.00000 4.57 24/6 (3 crews per day) 45 0 40 0 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 0.00 Reclamation inspector trip 2 25 40 2,000 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0015 0.0157 0.0009 0.0000 0.0002 0.0001 0.7614 0.0000 0.00000 0.76 Subtotal 14,000 0.011 0.110 0.006 0.000 0.001 0.000 5.330 0.000 0.00000 5.34 Intake Cofferdam I/ Gravity Bypass Water Supply Construction/Gatehouse Demo 5-day (I crew per day) 15 9 40 5,400 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0042 0.0423 0.0024 0.0000 0.0005 0.0002 2.0559 0.0001 0.00000 2.06 24/6 (3 crews per day) 45 51 40 91,800 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0708 0.7185 0.0405 0.0003 0.0081 0.0030 34.9499 0.0010 0.00002 34.98 Reclamation inspector trip 2 60 40 4,800 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0037 0.0376 0.0021 0.0000 0.0004 0.0002 1.8274 0.0001 0.00000 1.83 Subtotal 102,000 0.079 0.798 0.045 0.000 0.009 0.003 38.833 0.001 0.00002 38.87 Intake Structure Construction 5-day (I crew per day) 15 106 40 63,600 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0491 0.4978 0.0280 0.0002 0.0056 0.0021 24.2137 0.0007 0.00001 24.24 24/6 (3 crews per day) 45 69 40 124,200 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0958 0.9720 0.0548 0.0004 0.0110 0.0041 47.2852 0.0014 0.00003 47.33 Reclamation inspector trip 2 15 40 1,200 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0009 0.0094 0.0005 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.4569 0.0000 0.00000 0.46 Subtotal 189,000 0.1458 1.4792 0.0833 0.0006 0.0167 0.0063 71.9558 0.0021 0.00004 72.03 Intake Total 0.235 2.387 0.134 0.001 0.027 0.010 116.119 0.003 0.00007 116.23 Roughened Channel Construction 5-day (I crew per day) 15 52 40 31,200 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0241 0.2442 0.0138 0.0001 0.0028 0.0010 11.8784 0.0003 0.00001 11.89 24/6 (3 crews per day) 45 31 40 55,800 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0431 0.4367 0.0246 0.0002 0.0049 0.0018 21.2441 0.0006 0.00001 21.26 Reclamation inspector trip 2 85 40 6,800 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0052 0.0532 0.0030 0.0000 0.0006 0.0002 2.5889 0.0001 0.00000 2.59 Subtotal 93,800 0.072 0.734 0.041 0.000 0.008 0.003 35.711 0.001 0.00002 35.75 Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation 12/7 (2 crews per day) 10 440 40 176,000 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.136 1.377 0.078 0.001 0.016 0.006 67.006 0.002 0.00004 67.07 Reclamation inspector trip 1 440 40 17,600 0.0015432 0.0156529 0.0008819 0.0000066 0.0001764 0.0000661 0.7614365 0.0000220 0.0000004 0.0136 0.1377 0.0078 0.0001 0.0016 0.0006 6.7006 0.0002 0.00000 6.71 Subtotal 193,600 0.149 1.515 0.085 0.001 0.017 0.006 73.707 0.002 0.00004 73.78 *CO2e equals the GHG times global warming potential ([CO2 * 1] + [CH4 * 28]+[N2O*265]); GWPs taken from IPPC 5th Assessment Report (IPCC 2014) On-Road Non-Commute Vehicle Emissions-Alternative D

Calculation Method: The emission factors for on-road equipment are given in lb/miles Emissions (tons) = [Emission Factor (lb/travel mile)] X [travel mile/2000 (lb/U.S. ton)]

Assumptions: EMFAC On-Road Emission Factor for 2021 for truck mix (trucks > 8,500 pounds such as water trucks, tractor trailers, dump trucks, cement trucks)

Total Emission Factors (lb/mile) Emissions (tons) Element VMT VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Phase I Intake Construction Material Delivery/Haul 66,355 0.00110232 0.00396834 0.00573205 0.00002205 0.00066139 0.00022046 1.82292379 0.00006614 0.00000088 0.037 0.132 0.190 0.001 0.022 0.007 60.480 0.002 0.000 60.55 Tractor-Trailer 10,000 0.00110232 0.00551159 0.00992085 0.00004409 0.00110232 0.00044093 2.10181000 0.00006614 0.00000882 0.006 0.028 0.050 0.000 0.006 0.002 10.509 0.000 0.000 10.53 Total 76,355 0.042 0.159 0.240 0.001 0.027 0.010 70.989 0.003 0.000 71.08 Roughened Channel Construction Material Delivery/Haul 146,276 0.00110232 0.00396834 0.00573205 0.00002205 0.00066139 0.00022046 1.82292379 0.00006614 0.00000088 0.081 0.290 0.419 0.002 0.048 0.016 133.325 0.005 0.000 133.48 Tractor-Trailer 0 0.00110232 0.00551159 0.00992085 0.00004409 0.00110232 0.00044093 2.10181000 0.00006614 0.00000882 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 146,276 0.081 0.290 0.419 0.002 0.048 0.016 133.325 0.005 0.000 133.48 Phase II Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation Material Delivery/Haul 1,140 0.00110232 0.00396834 0.00573205 0.00002205 0.00066139 0.00022046 1.82292379 0.00006614 0.00000088 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.039 0.000 0.000 1.04 Tractor-Trailer 11,375 0.00110232 0.00551159 0.00992085 0.00004409 0.00110232 0.00044093 2.10181000 0.00006614 0.00000882 0.006 0.031 0.056 0.000 0.006 0.003 11.954 0.000 0.000 11.98 Total 12,515 0.007 0.034 0.060 0.000 0.007 0.003 12.993 0.000 0.0001 13.02 Alternative D

Miles/ No. No. Trips/ Total Water Trucks No. Trucks Weeks Total VMT Mobilization/Demobilization Miles/ trip Week Trucks truck VMT

Project Mobilization and Intake Construction Site Access Intake Construction Total Off-site (fill truck) 1 4 5 20 Mobilization 25 1 100 5,000 On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 4 14 56 Demobilization 25 1 100 5,000 Total 76 Total 10,000 Intake Cofferdam I/ Gravity Bypass Water Supply Construction/Gatehouse Demo Roughened Channel Construction* Off-site (fill truck) 1 15 5 75 Mobilization 10 1 100 2,000 On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 15 14 210 Demobilization 10 1 100 2,000 Total 285 Total 4,000 Intake Structure Construction Conveyance Pipeline Off-site (fill truck) 1 60 5 300 Mobilization 2022 15 1 100 1,500 On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 60 14 840 Demobilization 2022 15 1 100 1,500 Total 1,140 Mobilization 2023 10 1 100 1,000 Intake Construction Totals 1,501 Demobilization 2023 10 1 100 1,000 Roughened Channel Construction* Mobilization 2024 10 1 100 1,000 Off-site (fill truck) 1 2 5 10 Demobilization 2024 10 1 100 1,000 On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 2 14 28 Total 7,000 Total Assume 25 truck hauls to mobilize/demobilize for Phase I and 15 truck hauls for pipe 38 replacement/10 for CIPP lining in Phase II Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation *Assume no separate mobilization/demobilization for this part of Phase I Off-site (fill truck) 1 60 5 300 Assume average distance of 100 miles On-site (fugitive dust control) 1 60 14 840 Total 1,140 * Overlaps with Intake Structure Construction period Assumes water trucks filled on-site truck operates 2 miles per day on-site (14 miles/week) for dust control Assumes one 2,000 gal water truck per week for Phases I and II (Phase I is 81 weeks [March 15, 2022 to October 5, 2023]; Phase II is 60 weeks [May 2022 to May 2023 and Apr-May 2024]) Alternative D

Total Haul Debris Haul Demolition Hauls LB/CY Weight Distance Total VMT (CY) Loads (tons) (mi) Intake Construction Removal (Reinforced Concrete, Existing Weir, Sluiceway, and Trashrack) 147 2,025 149 7 100 744 Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 1, Stream Bed Preparation) 210 2,025 213 11 100 1,063 Removal (Reinforced Concrete, Gatehouse) 72 2,025 73 4 100 365 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 1, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 1,890 3,375 3,189 159 100 15,947 Total 181 18,119 Roughened Channel Construction* Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 2, Stream Bed Preparation) 210 2,025 213 11 100 1,063 Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 3, Stream Bed Preparation) 189 2,025 191 10 100 957 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 2, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 2,142 3,375 3,615 181 100 18,073 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 3, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 1,890 3,375 3,189 159 100 15,947 Total 360 36,040 Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation N/A N/A Haul miles for demolition debris: assume hauled to Wenatchee landfill (100-mile roundtrip) Assume concrete weight per CY (broken up): 2,025 lbs and 20-ton weight limit per dump track For cofferdams, assume 3/4 gravel: Dry weight/CY is 2,565 lb; wet is 3,375 lb (https://downeastermfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Cubic_Yardage_Chart-D.pdf)

Haul Material Haul Concrete/Delivery Truck Hauls CY/Truck Distance Total VMT (CY) Loads (mi) Intake Construction Fill (Reinforced Concrete, Fish Screen Structure) 410 12 34 120 4,100 Fill (CLSM, Intake Pipeline) 30 12 3 120 300 Fill (CLSM, Intake Pipeline) 43 12 4 120 430 Rebar/Formwork Delivery N/A N/A 4 120 480 Total 44 4,830 Roughened Channel Construction* Fill (Concrete for Grouted Riprap Areas, Roughened Channel) 290 12 24 120 2,900 Total 2,900 Conveyance Pipeline Replacement/ Rehabilitation N/A N/A Haul miles for construction materials: assume concrete and earthern materials sourced from Ellensburg, WA (120-mile round trip per load) Assume 12 CY concrete trucks Alternative D

Total Material Haul Haul Earthen Material and Gravel LB/CY Weight Total VMT (CY) Loads Distance (mi) (tons) Intake Construction Fill (Earthen Material, Fish Screen Structure) 1,733 2,700 2,340 117 120 14,037 Fill (Earthen Material and Gravel, Intake Pipeline) 938 2,700 1,266 63 120 7,598 Fill (Earthen Material and Gravel, Access Road and Intake Pipeline) 707 2,700 954 48 120 5,727 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 1, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 1,890 2,565 2,424 121 120 14,544 Total 349 41,905 Roughened Channel Construction* 6.9-12 inch rock 250 4,725 591 30 120 3,544 5.7-6.9 inch rock 250 2,800 350 18 120 2,100 3.7-5.2 inch rock 300 3,200 480 24 120 2,880 Class II 220 4,725 520 26 120 3,119 Class V 1,150 4,725 2,717 136 120 16,301 Class IX 3,500 4,725 8,269 413 120 49,613 8-foot boulders 27 Boulders 27 120 3,240 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 2, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 2,142 2,565 2,747 137 120 16,483 Fill/Removal (Cofferdam, Phase 3, Super Sacks, Sand and Gravel) 1,890 2,565 2,424 121 120 14,544 Total 932 103,298 Haul miles for demolition debris: assume hauled to Wenatchee landfill (100-mile roundtrip) For cofferdams, assume 3/4 gravel: Dry weight/CY is 2,565 lb; wet is 3,375 lb (https://downeastermfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Cubic_Yardage_Chart-D.pdf) Granite boulder is 175 lb/CF Assume 20-ton limit per dump truck

Haul Loads/ Haul Total Conveyance Pipeline Equipment Distance VMT Tips (mi) Truck trips for 42" HDPE 20 125 2,500 CIPP Deliveries 5 125 625 CIPP Installation Truck Trips 10 125 1,250 Total 4,375 Assume installation trucks come from Wenatchee (40-mile roundtrip) Assume delivery trucks distance of 125 miles (based on average distance from HDPE manufacters around Leavenworth) 2,380 LF of 42-inch pipe, 3 pipes/truckload: https://www.edgenmurray.com/userfiles/Pipe%20Load%20Chart%20Guide.pdf 1 delivery per construction season 2 trucks per segment, 5 segments, arrive at the beginning of construction and depart at the end of construction Off-Road Equipment Emissions-Alternative D

Calculation Method: The emission factors for off-road equipment are given in lb/hr Emissions (tons) = [Emission Factor (lb/hr)] X [hours/2000 (lb/U.S. ton)]

Assumptions: EMFAC Off-Road Emission Factor for 2021; composite emission factor for each equipment type used Types, number, and days of use obtained from Reclamation Construction that is not 24-hr: Assume 8 hr/day equipment use Construction that is 24-hr/day: Assume 12 hr/day equipment use

Non-Road (Other than Pumps and Generators) Non-Road (Pumps and Generators) Criteria Pollutant Emissions (tons) GHG (tons) Criteria Pollutant Emissions (tons) GHG (tons) Description Description PM2.5 PM2.5 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 CO2 CH4 CO2e VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 CO2 CH4 CO2e Intake Construction Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 0.02 0.16 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.01 37.15 0.00 37.21 Site Clearing/Access Road 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.66 0.00 3.67 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0.08 0.52 0.48 0.00 0.02 0.02 138.31 0.01 138.52 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0.04 0.32 0.34 0.00 0.02 0.02 69.18 0.00 69.29 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0.02 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.30 0.00 26.34 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0.20 1.56 1.55 0.00 0.08 0.08 292.41 0.02 292.93 Gatehouse Demolition 0.02 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.30 0.00 26.34 Gatehouse Demolition 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.49 0.00 5.50 Intake Structure 0.07 0.49 0.43 0.00 0.02 0.02 126.20 0.01 126.39 Intake Structure 0.04 0.30 0.33 0.00 0.01 0.01 67.09 0.00 67.19 Transition to Intake Structure 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.66 0.00 3.67 Transition to Intake Structure 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.60 0.00 3.61 Total 0.21 1.37 1.26 0.00 0.05 0.05 357.93 0.0193 358.47 Total 0.29 2.23 2.29 0.01 0.11 0.11 441.44 0.0264 442.18 Roughened Channel Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.01 42.73 0.00 42.80 Cofferam II 0.01 0.11 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.01 22.84 0.00 22.87 Cofferdam III 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.01 40.12 0.00 40.18 Cofferdam III 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.91 0.00 19.94 Total 0.05 0.29 0.32 0.00 0.01 0.01 82.85 0.0046 82.98 Total 0.03 0.21 0.22 0.00 0.01 0.01 42.74 0.0025 42.81 Conveyance Pipeline Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0.22 1.89 1.46 0.00 0.07 0.07 433.18 0.02 433.83 Pipe Replacement 0.03 0.26 0.29 0.00 0.01 0.01 58.55 0.00 58.64 CIPP Lining 0.01 0.10 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.11 0.00 26.15 CIPP Lining 0.06 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.02 0.02 90.95 0.01 91.11 Total 0.23 1.99 1.53 0.01 0.07 0.07 459.29 0.0247 459.98 Total 0.10 0.73 0.76 0.00 0.04 0.04 149.50 0.0087 149.75 Alternative D

Earth Mover/Dozer Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0052 0.0345 0.0313 0.0001 0.0015 0.0015 7.9646 0.00047 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 1 8 5 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0017 0.0115 0.0104 0.0000 0.0005 0.0005 2.6549 0.00016 Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Excavator Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0041 0.0307 0.0215 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 7.1748 0.00037 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 2 12 30 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0247 0.1841 0.1288 0.0005 0.0057 0.0057 43.0486 0.00223 Gatehouse Demolition 1 8 15 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0041 0.0307 0.0215 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 7.1748 0.00037 Intake Structure 1 8 30 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0082 0.0614 0.0429 0.0002 0.0019 0.0019 14.3495 0.00074 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 1 12 10 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0041 0.0307 0.0215 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 7.1748 0.00037 Cofferdam III 1 12 10 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0041 0.0307 0.0215 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 7.1748 0.00037 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 1 12 200 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0825 0.6135 0.4292 0.0016 0.0190 0.0190 143.4953 0.00744 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.06872114 0.51126091 0.35768419 0.00131537 0.01584336 0.01584336 119.57939939 0.00620060 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Motor Grader Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0052 0.0345 0.0313 0.0001 0.0015 0.0015 7.9646 0.00047 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Intake Structure 1 8 10 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0034 0.0230 0.0209 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 5.3097 0.00031 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.08607769 0.57471999 0.52129966 0.00149607 0.02474608 0.02474608 132.74298021 0.00776665 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Alternative D

Compactor Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0003 0.0016 0.0019 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0.2588 0.00003 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 1 8 50 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0010 0.0053 0.0063 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002 0.8628 0.00009 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.00502150 0.02633978 0.03144651 0.00006713 0.00122878 0.00122878 4.31380379 0.00045308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Backhoe Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0024 0.0216 0.0150 0.0000 0.0007 0.0007 4.0079 0.00022 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Intake Structure 1 8 40 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0065 0.0577 0.0401 0.0001 0.0018 0.0018 10.6878 0.00059 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0489 0.4327 0.3007 0.0009 0.0135 0.0135 80.1587 0.00441 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.04070845 0.36060463 0.25058538 0.00077505 0.01128920 0.01128920 66.79890395 0.00367306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Crane Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 0 0 0 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 2 12 30 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0305 0.1391 0.2172 0.0005 0.0082 0.0082 46.3074 0.00275 Gatehouse Demolition 1 12 15 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0076 0.0348 0.0543 0.0001 0.0021 0.0021 11.5768 0.00069 Intake Structure 1 8 70 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0237 0.1082 0.1689 0.0004 0.0064 0.0064 36.0168 0.00214 Transition to Intake Structure 1 8 5 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0017 0.0077 0.0121 0.0000 0.0005 0.0005 2.5726 0.00015 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 1 12 30 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0152 0.0696 0.1086 0.0002 0.0041 0.0041 23.1537 0.00137 Cofferdam III 1 12 30 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0152 0.0696 0.1086 0.0002 0.0041 0.0041 23.1537 0.00137 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 0 0 0 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.08459185 0.38651453 0.60333815 0.00137684 0.02285117 0.02285117 128.63160112 0.00763259 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Alternative D

Wheeled Loader Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0042 0.0263 0.0256 0.0001 0.0012 0.0012 6.5167 0.00038 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Transition to Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Cofferdam III 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 1 12 200 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0846 0.5257 0.5130 0.0014 0.0248 0.0248 130.3331 0.00763 CIPP Lining 0 0 0 0.07050211 0.43809635 0.42749832 0.00120062 0.02063045 0.02063045 108.61093297 0.00636129 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000

Forklift Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0018 0.0129 0.0088 0.0000 0.0003 0.0003 3.2637 0.00016 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 2 12 75 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0264 0.1933 0.1313 0.0005 0.0050 0.0050 48.9562 0.00239 Gatehouse Demolition 1 12 15 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0026 0.0193 0.0131 0.0001 0.0005 0.0005 4.8956 0.00024 Intake Structure 1 8 275 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0323 0.2363 0.1605 0.0007 0.0062 0.0062 59.8353 0.00292 Transition to Intake Structure 1 8 5 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0006 0.0043 0.0029 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 1.0879 0.00005 Roughened Channel Cofferam II 1 12 38 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0067 0.0490 0.0333 0.0001 0.0013 0.0013 12.4022 0.00060 Cofferdam III 1 12 30 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0053 0.0387 0.0263 0.0001 0.0010 0.0010 9.7912 0.00048 Conveyance Pipeline Pipe Replacement 1 12 240 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0035 0.3094 0.2101 0.0009 0.0081 0.0081 78.3299 0.00382 CIPP Lining 1 12 80 0.02937788 0.21482835 0.14589131 0.00060284 0.00560175 0.00560175 54.39576012 0.00265072 0.0141 0.1031 0.0700 0.0003 0.0027 0.0027 26.1100 0.00127 Alternative D

Generator Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 CO2e Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 1 8 15 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.66 0.00020 3.67 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 2 12 75 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.03 0.24 0.27 0.00 0.01 0.01 54.89 0.00295 54.98 Gatehouse Demolition 1 12 15 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.49 0.00029 5.50 Intake Structure 1 8 275 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.04 0.30 0.33 0.00 0.01 0.01 67.09 0.00360 67.19 Transition to Intake Structure 1 8 5 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.22 0.00007 1.22 Roughened Channel 0.08 0.59 0.65 0.00 0.03 0.03 132.35 0.01 132.55 Cofferam II 1 12 38 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.91 0.00075 13.93 Cofferdam III 1 12 30 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.98 0.00059 11.00 Conveyance Pipeline 0.01 0.11 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.01 24.89 0.00 24.92 Pipe Replacement 1 8 240 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.03 0.26 0.29 0.00 0.01 0.01 58.55 0.00314 58.64 CIPP Lining 1 8 80 0.03628038 0.27078407 0.29775603 0.00069799 0.01309426 0.01309426 60.99268581 0.00327352 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.52 0.00105 19.55 0.05 0.35 0.38 0.00 0.02 0.02 78.07 0.00 78.19 Pump Emission Factors (lb/hr) Emissions (tons)

No. hr/day Days VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 CO2e Intake Construction Site Clearing/Access Road 0 0 0 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 2 24 12 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.29 0.00089 14.31 Cofferdam I/Gravity Bypass 2 24 241 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.20 1.53 1.53 0.00 0.07 0.07 286.92 0.01795 287.43 Gatehouse Demolition 0 0 0 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 Intake Structure 0 0 0 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 Transition to Intake Structure 2 24 2 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.38 0.00015 2.39 Roughened Channel 0.21 1.62 1.61 0.00 0.08 0.08 303.59 0.02 304.12 Cofferam II 1 24 15 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.93 0.00056 8.94 Cofferdam III 1 24 15 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.93 0.00056 8.94 Conveyance Pipeline 0.01 0.10 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.86 0.00 17.89 Pipe Replacement 0 0 0 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 CIPP Lining 1 24 120 0.03440165 0.26518580 0.26369206 0.00059046 0.01280753 0.01280753 49.60664631 0.00310401 0.05 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.02 0.02 71.43 0.00447 71.56