DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Report ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT HOLT HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 2203 EXHIBIT E DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION Alabama Power Company Birmingham, Alabama Prepared by: July 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT HOLT HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 2203 EXHIBIT E DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION Alabama Power Company Birmingham, Alabama Prepared by: July 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT HOLT HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 2203 ALABAMA POWER COMPANY BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA EXHIBIT E DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................... VI 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 1.1 CONTENTS OF EXHIBIT E ..........................................................................................1 1.2 COMMONLY USED TERMS IN EXHIBIT E ...................................................................2 1.3 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE RIVER BASIN ...........................................................2 1.4 PROJECT FACILITIES..................................................................................................6 1.5 PROJECT LANDS AND WATERS ..................................................................................8 1.5.1 FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS ....................................................................12 1.6 SUMMARY OF PROJECT GENERATION AND OUTFLOW RECORDS .............................13 2.0 PROJECT CONSULTATION ...........................................................................................14 3.0 APPLICABLE LAWS .......................................................................................................16 3.1 SECTION 401 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT ...............................................................16 3.2 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT/NATIONAL BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................16 3.3 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT.......................................................................17 3.4 MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT .............17 3.5 NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT ..............................................................18 3.6 WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS AND WILDERNESS ACTS ...............................................18 4.0 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT..........................................................................................18 4.1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES .........................................18 4.1.1 EXHIBIT G MAP REVISIONS ........................................................................19 4.1.2 CONDUCT WATER QUALITY MONITORING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION ..................20 4.1.3 CONTINUE LIGHT MAINTENANCE OF THE OVERLOOK PARK AND CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS WITH USACE AND ADCNR................................21 4.1.4 MAINTENANCE OF THE TRANSMISSION LINE...............................................21 4.2 PME MEASURE TIMELINE ......................................................................................21 5.0 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ..................................................................................................22 5.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................22 5.2 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................25 - i - TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT’D.) 5.3 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................25 6.0 WATER RESOURCES .....................................................................................................26 6.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................26 6.2 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................31 6.3 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT ........................................................................................................40 6.4 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................41 7.0 FISH AND AQUATIC RESOURCES ..............................................................................41 7.1 FISH RESOURCES .....................................................................................................41 7.2 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................44 7.3 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................47 7.4 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT ........................................................................................................48 7.5 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................49 8.0 TERRESTRIAL RESOURCES .........................................................................................49 8.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................49 8.2 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................55 8.3 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT ........................................................................................................55 8.4 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................56 9.0 RARE, THREATENED, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES .............................................56 9.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................56 9.2 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................60 9.3 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT ........................................................................................................60 9.4 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................60 10.0 RECREATION RESOURCES ..........................................................................................60 10.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................60 10.2 RECREATION NEEDS IDENTIFIED IN MANAGEMENT PLANS .....................................66 10.2.1 ALABAMA STATEWIDE COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN 66 10.2.2 SPECIALLY DESIGNATED RECREATION AREAS ...........................................66 10.3 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................66 10.4 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT ........................................................................................................67 10.5 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................67 11.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES ..............................................................................................68 11.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................68 11.2 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................68 11.3 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT ........................................................................................................69 11.4 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................71 - ii - TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT’D.) 12.0 LAND USE AND AESTHETIC RESOURCES ...............................................................71 12.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................71 12.2 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................74 12.3 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT ........................................................................................................74 12.4 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................74 13.0 SOCIOECONOMIC RESOURCES ..................................................................................74 13.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................74 13.2 STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................76 13.3 EXISTING MEASURES TO BE CONTINUED AND NEW MEASURES PROPOSED BY APPLICANT ........................................................................................................76 13.4 CONTINUING IMPACTS ............................................................................................76 14.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................76 14.1 SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION .................................................................................76
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 4 Natural Resources and Environmental Constraints
    Chapter 4 Natural Resources and Environmental Constraints PERSONAL VISION STATEMENTS “I want to live in a city that cares about air quality and the environment.” “Keep Birmingham beautiful, especially the water ways.” 4.1 CITY OF BIRMINGHAM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PART II | CHAPTER 4 NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS GOALS POLICIES FOR DECISION MAKERS natural areas and conservation A comprehensive green infrastructure • Support the creation of an interconnected green infrastructure network that includes system provides access to and natural areas for passive recreation, stormwater management, and wildlife habitat. preserves natural areas and • Consider incentives for the conservation and enhancement of natural and urban environmentally sensitive areas. forests. Reinvestment in existing communities • Consider incentives for reinvestment in existing communities rather than conserves resources and sensitive “greenfields,” for new commercial, residential and institutional development. environments. • Consider incentives for development patterns and site design methods that help protect water quality, sensitive environmental features, and wildlife habitat. air and water quality The City makes every effort to • Support the development of cost-effective multimodal transportation systems that consistently meet clean air standards. reduce vehicle emissions. • Encourage use of clean fuels and emissions testing. • Emphasize recruitment of clean industry. • Consider incentives for industries to reduce emissions over time. • Promote the use of cost-effective energy efficient design, materials and equipment in existing and private development. The City makes every effort to • Encourage the Birmingham Water Works Board to protect water-supply sources consistently meet clean water located outside of the city to the extent possible. standards. • Consider incentives for development that protects the city’s water resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Interim Performance Report Endangered Species
    INTERIM PERFORMANCE REPORT ENDANGERED SPECIES PROGRAM GRANT NUMBER F17AP01052 WILDLIFE PROJECTS – ALABAMA PROJECT Reproductive Characteristics and Host Fish Determination of Canoe Creek Clubshell, Pleurobema athearni (Gangloff et al. 2006) in Big Canoe Creek drainage (Etowah and St. Clair Counties), Alabama October 1, 2018 - September 30, 2020 ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES WILDLIFE AND FRESHWATER FISHERIES DIVISION Prepared by: Todd B. Fobian Alabama Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries PROJECT Reproductive Characteristics and Host Fish Determination of Canoe Creek Clubshell, Pleurobema athearni (Gangloff et al. 2006) in the Big Canoe Creek drainage (Etowah and St. Clair Counties), Alabama Year 1 Interim Report State: Alabama Introduction Pleurobema athearni (Gangloff et al, 2006), Canoe Creek Clubshell is currently a candidate for federally threatened/endangered status by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). It is Coosa Basin endemic, with historical records only known from the Big Canoe Creek (BCC) system in Alabama (Gangloff et al. 2006, Williams et al. 2008). Recent surveys completed by ADCNR and USFWS established the species is extant at six localities in the basin, with two in Upper Little Canoe Creek (ULCC), one in Lower Little Canoe Creek (LLCC), and three in BCC proper. (Fobian et al. 2017). As culture methods improve, propagated P. athearni juveniles could soon be available to support reintroduction/augmentation efforts within historical range. Little is known about Pleurobema athearni reproduction, female brooding period, or glochidial hosts. Female P. athearni are presumed short term-brooders and likely gravid from late spring to early summer (Gangloff et al. 2006, Williams et al. 2008). Glochidial hosts are currently unknown although other Mobile River Basin Pleurobema species often utilize Cyprinidae (shiners) to complete metamorphosis (Haag and Warren 1997, 2003, Weaver et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Deeds, Wills, Administrations of Jefferson County, State of Alabama
    1 DEEDS – WILLS – ADMINISTRATIONS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA BOOK 2 Vol. V 1833 – 1837 Page 221 – 289 Vol. VI 1836 – 1839 Page 290 – 378 Vol. VII 1839 – 1840 Page 379 – 467 Vol. VII 1840 – 1844 Page 468 – 1844 Birmingham Public Library Birmingham, Alabama Works Progress Administration 1937 2 STATE OF ALABAMA – JEFFERSON COUNTY DEEDS – WILLS – ADMINISTRATIONS 1833 – 1837 Vol. 5 MORTGAGE DEED Page 1 & 2 REASON DUKE to PEYTON KING, trustee, both of Jeff. Co. Ala. Premisis. All corn now on hand and a black horse, cupboard, two tables, 4 chairs, 2 beds and their furniture, and two bed steads, his crop of corn and cotton now planted. Whereas, Jason Addington is security for Reason Duke, in three notes, Viz: One to Curtis Williams in the sum $120, one to Lightfoot Williams, in the sum of $13, and the other to John Martin, in the sum of $64. Reason Duke being willing to secure the payment of said debts, executes this deed of trust Dated Apr. 3, 1833. Ack. Before B. E. Grace Clk. of C.C. Apr. 3, 1833. Filed Apr. 3. Recorded Apr. 15, 1833. B. E. Grace, Clk. of C.C. MORTGAGE Page 2 & 3 DANIEL WATKINS TO BAYLIS E. GRACE, both of Jeff. Co. Ala. Premises. One sorrel mare with a blazed face, about eleven or twelve yrs. Old. Whereas, Watkins is indebted to Grace in the sum of $20.93 ¾, due by note payable to Grace & Kelly. And Watkins being willing to secure the payment of same, executes this mortgage. Wit. Abner Killough Dated Apr.
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Use at the Holt Project Holt Hydroelectric Project
    WATER USE AT THE HOLT PROJECT HOLT HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 2203 ALABAMA POWER COMPANY BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA Prepared by: OCTOBER 2011 WATER USE AT THE HOLT PROJECT HOLT HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 2203 ALABAMA POWER COMPANY BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT LOCATION, FACILITIES AND OPERATION .............2 2.1 LOCATION .................................................................................................................2 2.2 HOLT PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................7 2.3 USACE HOLT LOCK AND DAM DESCRIPTION ..........................................................7 2.4 PROJECT OPERATION ................................................................................................8 3.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................10 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 2-1 BLACK WARRIOR RIVER BASIN PROJECTS ................................................................3 LIST OF PHOTOS PHOTO 2-1 HOLT LOCK AND DAM AND HOLT PROJECT—POWERHOUSE VISIBLE ON OPPOSITE SIDE OF RIVER ..........................................................................................4 PHOTO 2-2 HOLT POWERHOUSE, LOOKING DOWNSTREAM .........................................................5 PHOTO 2-3 ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEER’S HOLT LOCK—VIEW LOOKING
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Survey of Alabama Calibration of The
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA Berry H. (Nick) Tew, Jr. State Geologist WATER INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM CALIBRATION OF THE INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY FOR THE SOUTHERN PLAINS ICHTHYOREGION IN ALABAMA OPEN-FILE REPORT 0908 by Patrick E. O'Neil and Thomas E. Shepard Prepared in cooperation with the Alabama Department of Environmental Management and the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Tuscaloosa, Alabama 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................ 1 Introduction.......................................................... 1 Acknowledgments .................................................... 6 Objectives........................................................... 7 Study area .......................................................... 7 Southern Plains ichthyoregion ...................................... 7 Methods ............................................................ 8 IBI sample collection ............................................. 8 Habitat measures............................................... 10 Habitat metrics ........................................... 12 The human disturbance gradient ................................... 15 IBI metrics and scoring criteria..................................... 19 Designation of guilds....................................... 20 Results and discussion................................................ 22 Sampling sites and collection results . 22 Selection and scoring of Southern Plains IBI metrics . 41 1. Number of native species ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Alabama Bass (Micropterus Henshalli) Ecological Risk Screening Summary
    1 Larry Hogan, Governor | Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio, Secretary Alabama Bass (Micropterus henshalli) Ecological Risk Screening Summary Joseph W. Love, October 2020 [Maryland Department of Natural Resources] 1. Background and Description Alabama bass (Micropterus henshalli) is one of at least twelve recognized temperate black basses indigenous to the freshwater rivers and lakes of North America. It is an aggressive species that generally does not grow as big as largemouth bass, can rapidly become abundant when introduced into an ecosystem, competes with other black bass for food, and can genetically pollute populations of smallmouth bass (M. dolomieu) and largemouth bass (M. salmoides), as well as other species of black bass (e.g., Shoal Bass, Spotted Bass). Because of its fighting ability, anglers from black bass fishing clubs have illegally introduced Alabama bass to Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia waters. It has been introduced by government agencies in Texas and California, and possibly abroad in South Africa. Where introduced, the species has not been eradicated, though harvest may be encouraged. Anglers have debated the merits of a control program dedicated to Alabama bass because some enjoy fishing for the species, while others recognize the problems it poses to other black bass species. Alabama bass has not been reported in Maryland but there is Photo: Image courtesy of concern anglers could introduce the species into Maryland. Matthew A. Williams, posted Additionally, out-of-state suppliers might unwittingly sell on iNaturalist. Alabama bass, which look similar to largemouth bass, to Marylanders. Alabama bass was a subspecies of spotted bass and was widely referred to as Alabama spotted bass.
    [Show full text]
  • COPEIA February 1
    2000, No. 1COPEIA February 1 Copeia, 2000(1), pp. 1±10 Phylogenetic Relationships in the North American Cyprinid Genus Cyprinella (Actinopterygii: Cyprinidae) Based on Sequences of the Mitochondrial ND2 and ND4L Genes RICHARD E. BROUGHTON AND JOHN R. GOLD Shiners of the cyprinid genus Cyprinella are abundant and broadly distributed in eastern and central North America. Thirty species are currently placed in the genus: these include six species restricted to Mexico and three barbeled forms formerly placed in different cyprinid genera (primarily Hybopsis). We conducted a molecular phylogenetic analysis of all species of Cyprinella found in the United States, using complete nucleotide sequences of the mitochondrial, protein-coding genes ND2 and ND4L. Maximum-parsimony analysis recovered a single most-parsimonious tree for Cyprinella. Among historically recognized, nonbarbeled Cyprinella, the mitochondrial (mt) DNA tree indicated that basal lineages in Cyprinella are comprised largely of species with linear breeding tubercles and that are endemic to Atlantic and/or Gulf slope drainages, whereas derived lineages are comprised of species broadly distrib- uted in the Mississippi basin and the American Southwest. The Alabama Shiner, C. callistia, was basal in the mtDNA tree, although a monophyletic Cyprinella that in- cluded C. callistia was not supported in more than 50% of bootstrap replicates. There was strong bootstrap support (89%) for a clade that included all species of nonbarbeled Cyprinella (except C. callistia) and two barbeled species, C. labrosa and C. zanema. The third barbeled species, C. monacha, fell outside of Cyprinella sister to a species of Hybopsis. Within Cyprinella were a series of well-supported species groups, although in some cases bootstrap support for relationships among groups was below 50%.
    [Show full text]
  • Top Scientists Join Our Opposition to the Proposed Shepherd Bend Mine
    Issue 23: 2014 Part 1 ® Top Scientists Join Our Opposition to the Proposed Shepherd Bend Mine IN THIS ISSUE The University of Alabama (UA) is the main owner of land and minerals at the proposed Shepherd Northern Beltline Update 2 Bend Mine site across from a major drinking water supply for the greater Birmingham area on the Mulberry Fork of the Black Warrior River. Therefore, we recently sent UA’s Trustees and campus leaders two new “Save Our Water” 3 letters from esteemed scientists who oppose this remarkably shortsighted coal mining proposal. Riverkeeper Patrol Notes 4-5 The 1,773-acre strip mine would discharge polluted water at 29 outfalls, including one that is 800 feet Board Member Bio: across the river from the Birmingham Water Works Board’s Mulberry Intake. Metals, sediment, and other 6 Professor Bill Andreen pollutants discharged from the mine would lead to decreased source water quality for 200,000 citizens served by that intake, and potentially increased water bills for 600,000 Birmingham Water Works Board customers. Fishing in the Black 6 Three preeminent researchers on water pollution from coal mines recently wrote the following in a Warrior River Watershed public letter highlighting the need to protect Birmingham’s drinking water from coal pollution: “Despite our Donation Form and 7 extensive collective experience regarding permit applications in the coalfields of West Virginia and Kentucky, “About us” the Shepherd’s Bend mine is the first mining permit application that we have seen immediately adjacent to a Interns and Accolades 8 public drinking water supply. Given the extensive literature linking surface coal mining to a variety of human health problems with enormous associated public health costs, such activity seems particularly ill advised.” Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States And
    t a AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY QL 614 .A43 V.2 .A 4-3 AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY Special Publication No. 2 A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes -^ ru from the United States m CD and Canada (SECOND EDITION) A/^Ssrf>* '-^\ —---^ Report of the Committee on Names of Fishes, Presented at the Ei^ty-ninth Annual Meeting, Clearwater, Florida, September 16-18, 1959 Reeve M. Bailey, Chairman Ernest A. Lachner, C. C. Lindsey, C. Richard Robins Phil M. Roedel, W. B. Scott, Loren P. Woods Ann Arbor, Michigan • 1960 Copies of this publication may be purchased for $1.00 each (paper cover) or $2.00 (cloth cover). Orders, accompanied by remittance payable to the American Fisheries Society, should be addressed to E. A. Seaman, Secretary-Treasurer, American Fisheries Society, Box 483, McLean, Virginia. Copyright 1960 American Fisheries Society Printed by Waverly Press, Inc. Baltimore, Maryland lutroduction This second list of the names of fishes of The shore fishes from Greenland, eastern the United States and Canada is not sim- Canada and the United States, and the ply a reprinting with corrections, but con- northern Gulf of Mexico to the mouth of stitutes a major revision and enlargement. the Rio Grande are included, but those The earlier list, published in 1948 as Special from Iceland, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Cuba Publication No. 1 of the American Fisheries and the other West Indian islands, and Society, has been widely used and has Mexico are excluded unless they occur also contributed substantially toward its goal of in the region covered. In the Pacific, the achieving uniformity and avoiding confusion area treated includes that part of the conti- in nomenclature.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-04-10 Draft Tande Species Desktop Assessment Report
    600 North 18th Street Hydro Services 16N-8180 Birmingham, AL 35203 205 257 2251 tel [email protected] April 10, 2020 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING Project No. 2628-065 R.L. Harris Hydroelectric Project Transmittal of the Draft Threatened and Endangered Species Desktop Assessment Ms. Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street N. Washington, DC 20426 Dear Secretary Bose, Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power) is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) licensee for the R.L. Harris Hydroelectric Project (Harris Project) (FERC No. 2628-065). On April 12, 2019, FERC issued its Study Plan Determination1 (SPD) for the Harris Project, approving Alabama Power’s ten relicensing studies with FERC modifications. On May 13, 2019, Alabama Power filed Final Study Plans to incorporate FERC’s modifications and posted the Final Study Plans on the Harris relicensing website at www.harrisrelicensing.com. In the Final Study Plans, Alabama Power proposed a schedule for each study that included filing a voluntary Progress Update in October 2019 and October 2020. Alabama Power filed the first of two Progress Updates on October 31, 2019.2 Pursuant to the Commission’s Integrated Licensing Process (ILP) and 18 CFR § 5.15(c), Alabama Power filed its Harris Project Initial Study Report (ISR) on April 10,2020. Concurrently, and consistent with FERC’s April 12, 2019 SPD, Alabama Power is filing the Draft Threatened and Endangered Species Desktop Assessment (Draft Assessment) (Attachment 1). This filing also includes the stakeholder consultation for this study beginning May 2019 through March 2020 (Attachment 2). Stakeholders have until June 11, 2020 to submit their comments to Alabama Power on the Draft Assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Survey of Alabama Calibration of The
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA Berry H. (Nick) Tew, Jr. State Geologist ECOSYSTEMS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM CALIBRATION OF THE INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY FOR THE SOUTHERN PLAINS ICHTHYOREGION IN ALABAMA OPEN-FILE REPORT 1210 by Patrick E. O'Neil and Thomas E. Shepard Prepared in cooperation with the Alabama Department of Environmental Management and the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Tuscaloosa, Alabama 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................ 1 Introduction.......................................................... 2 Acknowledgments .................................................... 6 Objectives........................................................... 7 Study area .......................................................... 7 Southern Plains ichthyoregion ...................................... 7 Methods ............................................................ 9 IBI sample collection ............................................. 9 Habitat measures............................................... 11 Habitat metrics ........................................... 12 The human disturbance gradient ................................... 16 IBI metrics and scoring criteria..................................... 20 Designation of guilds....................................... 21 Results and discussion................................................ 23 Sampling sites and collection results . 23 Selection and scoring of Southern Plains IBI metrics . 48 Metrics selected for the
    [Show full text]