DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Opinion for the Idaho Water Quality Standards for Numeric Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Opinion for the Idaho Water Quality Standards for Numeric Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 911NE11 th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97232-4181 In Reply Refer To: FWS/Rl/AES Dan Opalski, Director JUN 2 5 2015 Office of Water and Watersheds U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth A venue Seattle, Washington 98101 Dear Mr. Opalski: Enclosed are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Biological Opinion (Opinion) and concurrence determinations on the Idaho Water Quality Standards for Numeric Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants (proposed action). The Opinion addresses the effects of the proposed action on the following listed species and critical habitats: the endangered Snake River physa snail (Physa natricina), threatened Bliss Rapids snail (Taylorconcha serpenticola), endangered Banbury Springs lanx (Laroe sp.; undescribed), the endangered Bruneau hot springsnail (Pyrgulopsis bruneauensis), the threatened bull trout (Salvelinus confluenlus) and its critical habitat, and the endangered Kootenai River white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) and its critical habitat. The concurrence determinations address the following listed species: the threatened grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), endangered Southern Selkirk Mountains woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), threatened Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), threatened northern Idaho ground squirrel (Spermophilus brunneus brunneus), threatened MacFarlane's four-o'clock (Mirabilis macfarlanei), threatened water howellia (Howellia aquatilis), threatened Ute ladies' -tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis), threatened Spalding's catchfly (Silene spaldingii), and the proposed threatened slickspot peppergrass (Lepidium papilliferum). The Opinion concludes that the proposed action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Snake River physa snail, Bliss Rapids snail, Banbury Springs lanx, Bruneau hot springsnail, bull trout, and the Kootenai River white sturgeon. The Opinion also concludes that the proposed action is likely to adversely modify bull trout critical habitat and Kootenai River white sturgeon critical habitat for the reasons discussed in the enclosed Opinion. In accordance with regulation and in collaboration with your staff, the enclosed Opinion includes reasonable and prudent alternatives (RP As) to avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of listed species and destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat. The RP As reflect two components: (1) an interim alternative (while new criteria are being developed); and (2) a final alternative (involving the development of new protective criteria). Both components of the RP A are consistent with meeting section 7(a)(2) requirements, but may vary in their level of Dan Opalski, Director 2 protectiveness, the effort needed to implement them, and subsequent Endangered Species Act compliance processes. As identified in section 2.8.10 of the enclosed Opinion, the Service requests that you positively affirm your acceptance of the RP As and indicate if you intend to adopt the interim alternative as final or whether you intend to establish new criteria within the identified time frames set forth in the RP As. The enclosed Opinion was prepared in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and is based on information provided in the Environmental Protection Agency' s 1999 Biological Assessment (Assessment), as amended in 2000 and 2014, and other sources of information cited in the Opinion. A complete decision record of this consultation is on file at the Service's Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office in Boise, Idaho. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Michael Carrier, State Supervisor of our Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, at (208) 378-5243. Sincerely, Regional Director Enclosure cc: NOAA, Boise (D. Mabe) [email protected] FWS, Boise (M. Carrier) michael. [email protected] EPA, Seattle (L. Macchio) [email protected] IDEQ, Boise (D. Essig) [email protected] IOSC, Boise (D. Miller) [email protected] DOJ, Denver (J. Martin) j [email protected] SOL, Portland (E. Nagle) [email protected] NPT, Lapwai (M. Lopez) [email protected] SBT, Fort Hall (C. Colter) [email protected] BIOLOGICAL OPINION FOR THE IDAHO WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR NUMERIC WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR TOXIC POLLUT ANTS OlEIFW00-2014-F-0233 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IDAHO FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE BOISE, IDAHO Supervisor JUN 2 5 2015 Date ----------- Dan Opalski, Director 01EIFW00-2014-F-0233 Office of Water and Watersheds, EPA Idaho Water Quality Standards Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION ........................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Consultation History .................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Informal Consultation .................................................................................................................. 2 2. BIOLOGICAL OPINION ................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Description of the Proposed Action ............................................................................................. 4 2.1.1 Action Area ............................................................................................................................ 4 2.1.2 Proposed Action ..................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Analytical Framework for the Jeopardy and Adverse Modification Determinations ................ 11 2.2.1 Jeopardy Determination ........................................................................................................ 11 2.2.2 Adverse Modification Determination ................................................................................... 12 2.3 Status of the Species and Critical Habitat .................................................................................. 13 2.3.1 Snake River Physa Snail ....................................................................................................... 13 2.3.1.1 Listing Status .............................................................................................................. 13 2.3.1.2 Species Description .................................................................................................... 13 2.3.1.3 Life History ................................................................................................................ 14 2.3.1.4 Status and Distribution ............................................................................................... 18 2.3.1.5 Conservation Needs .................................................................................................... 20 2.3.2 Bliss Rapids Snail ................................................................................................................. 22 2.3.2.1 Listing Status .............................................................................................................. 22 2.3.2.2 Species Description .................................................................................................... 22 2.3.2.3 Life History ................................................................................................................ 22 2.3.2.4 Status and Distribution ............................................................................................... 24 2.3.2.5 Conservation Needs .................................................................................................... 26 2.3.3 Banbury Springs Lanx .......................................................................................................... 26 2.3.3.1 Listing Status .............................................................................................................. 26 2.3.3.2 Species Description .................................................................................................... 27 2.3.3.3 Life History ................................................................................................................ 27 2.3.3.4 Status and Distribution ............................................................................................... 27 2.3.3.5 Conservation Needs .................................................................................................... 30 i Dan Opalski, Director 01EIFW00-2014-F-0233 Office of Water and Watersheds, EPA Idaho Water Quality Standards 2.3.4 Bruneau Hot Springsnail ...................................................................................................... 31 2.3.4.1 Listing Status .............................................................................................................. 31 2.3.4.2 Species Description .................................................................................................... 31 2.3.4.3 Life History ................................................................................................................ 31 2.3.4.4 Status and Distribution ............................................................................................... 33 2.3.4.5 Conservation Needs .................................................................................................... 34 2.3.5
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 12. Owyhee Uplands Section
    12. Owyhee Uplands Section Section Description The Owyhee Uplands Section is part of the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion. The Idaho portion, the subject of this review, comprises southwestern Idaho from the lower Payette River valley in the northwest and the Camas Prairie in the northeast, south through the Hagerman Valley and Salmon Falls Creek Drainage (Fig. 12.1, Fig. 12.2). The Owyhee Uplands spans a 1,200 to 2,561 m (4,000 to 8,402 ft) elevation range. This arid region generally receives 18 to 25 cm (7 to 10 in) of annual precipitation at lower elevations. At higher elevations, precipitation falls predominantly during the winter and often as snow. The Owyhee Uplands has the largest human population of any region in Idaho, concentrated in a portion of the section north of the Snake River—the lower Boise and lower Payette River valleys, generally referred to as the Treasure Valley. This area is characterized by urban and suburban development as well as extensive areas devoted to agricultural production of crops for both human and livestock use. Among the conservation issues in the Owyhee Uplands include the ongoing conversion of agricultural lands to urban and suburban development, which limits wildlife habitat values. In addition, the conversion of grazing land used for ranching to development likewise threatens wildlife habitat. Accordingly, the maintenance of opportunity for economically viable Lower Deep Creek, Owyhee Uplands, Idaho © 2011 Will Whelan ranching operations is an important consideration in protecting open space. The aridity of this region requires water management programs, including water storage, delivery, and regulation for agriculture, commercial, and residential uses.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Usage by the Page Springsnail, Pyrgulopsis Morrisoni (Gastropoda: Hydrobiidae), from Central Arizona
    THE VELIGER ᭧ CMS, Inc., 2006 The Veliger 48(1):8–16 (June 30, 2006) Habitat Usage by the Page Springsnail, Pyrgulopsis morrisoni (Gastropoda: Hydrobiidae), from Central Arizona MICHAEL A. MARTINEZ* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2321 W. Royal Palm Rd., Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona 85021, USA (*Correspondent: mike࿞[email protected]) AND DARRIN M. THOME U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Rm. W-2605, Sacramento, California 95825, USA Abstract. We measured habitat variables and the occurrence and density of the Page springsnail, Pyrgulopsis mor- risoni (Hershler & Landye, 1988), in the Oak Creek Springs Complex of central Arizona during the spring and summer of 2001. Occurrence and high density of P. morrisoni were associated with gravel and pebble substrates, and absence and low density with silt and sand. Occurrence and high density were also associated with lower levels of dissolved oxygen and low conductivity. Occurrence was further associated with shallower water depths. Water velocity may play an important role in maintaining springsnail habitat by influencing substrate composition and other physico-chemical variables. Our study constitutes the first empirical effort to define P. morrisoni habitat and should be useful in assessing the relative suitability of spring environments for the species. The best approach to manage springsnail habitat is to maintain springs in their natural state. INTRODUCTION & Landye, 1988), is medium-sized relative to other con- geners, 1.8 to 2.9 mm in shell height, endemic to the The role that physico-chemical habitat variables play in Upper Verde River drainage of central Arizona (Williams determining the occurrence and density of aquatic micro- et al., 1985; Hershler & Landye, 1988; Hershler, 1994), invertebrates in spring ecosystems has been poorly stud- with all known populations existing within a complex of ied.
    [Show full text]
  • Mckern Presentation
    WHO KILLED THE SNAKE RIVER SALMON JuneCELILO 1 FALLS COMMERCIAL HARVEST – 1860s to 1970s PEAK HARVEST 43 MILLION POUNDS – 1886 -SPRING CHINOOK SECOND PEAK 1910 – 43 MILLION POUNDS - ALL SPECIES EAST BOAT BASIN - ASTORIA MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT - 1972 NOAA RECENT ESTIMATE 20 TO 40 % OF SPRING CHINOOK Gold Dredge at Sumpter, Oregon Dredged Powder River Valley Oregon LOGGING WATERSHED DAMAGE EROSION SPLASH DAMS WATER RETENTION ROAD CONSTRUCTION METHODS Mainstem Snake River Dams WITHOUT FISH PASSAGE Oxbow dam – 1961 Shoshone Falls Hells Canyon Dam – (Upper Limit) 1967 Upper Salmon Falls – 1937 WITH FISH PASSAGE Lower Salmon Falls - Lower Granite Dam – 1910 1975 Bliss Dam – 1950 Little Goose Dam 1970 C. J. Strike Dam - Lower Monumental Dam 1952 – 1969 Swan Falls Dam -1901 Ice Harbor Dam - 1962 Brownlee Dam – 1959 SHOSHONE FALLS Tributary Dams Owyhee River Powder River Wild Horse Dam – 1937 Thief Valley Dam – 1931 Owyhee Dam – 1932 Mason Dam - 1968 Boise River Salmon River Anderson Ranch Dam – 1950 Sunbeam Dam – 1909 – 1934 Arrowrock Dam – 1915 Wallowa River Boise R Diversion Dam – 1912 OFC Dam 1898 - 1914 Lucky Peak Dam - 1955 Clearwater River Barber Dam - 1906 Lewiston Dam – 1917 - 1973 Payette River Grangeville Dam – 1910 – 1963 Black Canyon Dam – 1924 Dworshak Dam - 1972 Deadwood Dam - 1929 Malheur River Warm Springs Dam – 1930 Agency Valley Dam – 1936 Bully Creek Dam – 1963 Sunbeam Dam – Salmon River 1909 to 1934 1909 to 1920s - no fish passage 1920s to 1934 - poor fish passage Channel around by IDF&G 1934 NOTE 3 PEOPLE IN RED CIRCLE
    [Show full text]
  • Kootenay System Operations
    Columbia River Treaty Review – Technical Studies Appendix C Kootenay System Operations Operation of the Kootenay River system is complicated as it is administered by several different jurisdictions and the hydroelectric facilities are owned by different agencies/companies. As shown in Figure 1, the Kootenay River originates in the Rocky Mountains not far from Field, BC. The river flows south, within a few km of the source of the Columbia River at Canal Flats, and then continues south into Koocanusa Reservoir, formed behind Libby Dam in Montana, United States. From Libby, the Kootenay River turns west and north, and re-enters British Columbia near the community of Creston, flowing into the south arm of Kootenay Lake. In the northern part of the Kootenay basin, the Duncan River is joined by the Lardeau River just downstream from Duncan Dam, and then flows into the north arm of Kootenay Lake. Water from the north and south arms of Kootenay Lake then flows through the west arm of the lake and past the Corra Linn Dam near Nelson (as well as other dams) en route to the Columbia–Kootenay confluence at Castlegar. The components of this system and various agreements/orders that regulate flows are described in this Appendix. November 29, 2013 1 Columbia River Treaty Review – Technical Studies Figure 1: Kootenay and Columbia Region November 29, 2013 2 Columbia River Treaty Review – Technical Studies 1.0 Coordination of Libby Operations Background Under the terms of the Columbia River Treaty, Canada permitted the U.S. to build the Libby Dam on the Kootenai River (U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Fish Passage in Idaho Power Company's
    A Review of Fish Passage Provisions in the License Application for the Hells Canyon Complex August 2003 Prepared For Idaho Rivers United And American Rivers By Ken Witty S.P. Cramer and Associates S.P. Cramer & Associates, Inc. 600 NW Fariss Road Gresham, OR 97030 www.spcramer.com S.P. Cramer & Associates, Inc. Hells Canyon Complex August 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. iii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 HISTORIC PROSPECTIVE ................................................................................................................. 1 PASSAGE AT THE HCC ................................................................................................................ 1 PROPOSED DOWNSTREAM DAMS ............................................................................................ 1 LOWER SNAKE RIVER DAMS .................................................................................................... 2 LOWER SNAKE RIVER COMPENSATION PLAN ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Kootenay Performance Measures
    Columbia River Treaty Review – Technical Report Appendix H Development of Kootenay Performance Measures Relative to the Columbia River, the Kootenay River system has not had as extensive a history of public planning processes to develop information about interests that may be affected by reservoir levels and flows. As a result, the project team undertook desktop studies to fill in some of the information gaps on the Kootenay system. Estimating how interests on the Kootenay River system might directly be affected by water management alternatives was undertaken using the following methods: Public consultative sessions in spring and fall of 2012; Discussions with individual First Nations; Feedback provided by communities to BC Hydro, FortisBC, and Columbia Power Corporation on operations over a number of years; Reviewing available reports prepared for other planning processes; Drawing parallels with similar situations in other areas of BC for which performance measures had already been developed; and The Fish and Wildlife Technical Committee had as a key focus to develop fish and aquatic ecosystem, and vegetation and wildlife performance measures for the Kootenay system. This appendix reviews the development of the new Kootenay performance measures covering the environmental performance measures reviewed by the Fish and Wildlife Technical Committee and social performance measures on interests that have been raised by basin residents. While detailed information on the Kootenay performance measures is provided in Appendix G, this appendix focuses on the interests that for various reasons did not have a performance measure developed. First Nations Culture and Archaeological Sites The linkages between aboriginal people and the Kootenay River system are long and enduring.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia River Treaty Review Technical Studies Report
    Columbia River Treaty Review Technical Studies Prepared by BC Hydro and Power Authority November 29, 2013 Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 5 1.1 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Approach to Treaty Strategic Decision ............................................................................................... 5 1.3 Process and Scope of Analysis ............................................................................................................ 7 1.3.1 Environmental Advisory Committee and Fish and Wildlife Technical Committee ............. 7 1.3.2 Water Use Plan and Structured Decision Making Process ................................................... 8 Chapter 2: Columbia and Kootenay Hydroelectric System Summary ............................................................. 9 2.1 Operations on the Columbia River - Relationship between Columbia River Treaty, Non Treaty Storage Agreement, and Water Use Plans ............................................................................................... 10 2.2 Operations on the Kootenay River - Relationship between Columbia River Treaty, Duncan Water Use Plan, International Joint Commission Order, and Canal Plant Agreement ...................................... 12 Chapter 3: Selection of Alternatives to Model .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • OUTFITTER/GUIDE RIVER BOATING APPLICATION TRAINING REQUIREMENTS (FOR OG-11) See Rules for Complete Requirements
    OG-5 (10/15) OUTFITTER/GUIDE RIVER BOATING APPLICATION TRAINING REQUIREMENTS (FOR OG-11) See Rules for complete requirements. Unclassified river section qualifications: To qualify as a float boat guide on unclassified rivers and streams, the applicant shall have had one (1) complete trip on each of the rivers applied for under the supervision of a float boat guide licensed for each of those rivers. A completed OG-11 Training Log shall be submitted giving dates, river section, and the signatures of the supervisor, trainee, and licensed outfitter. Classified river section qualifications: A float boat guide on a classified river shall be licensed as a boatman or a lead boatman according to his experience on that specific river. Each float boat trip on a classified river shall have a lead boat operated by a guide licensed as a lead boatman for that specific river and all other boats participating in that trip shall follow the lead boat and shall be operated by a guide licensed as a boatman or a lead boatman for that specific river. (See Rule 040.01) Each training trip means the total section of river as designated by the Board. (See Rules 040, 041, 042 and 059) An applicant for a float boatman license on classified rivers may qualify in one of three ways: a. The guide shall have had three (3) complete float boat trips on each of the classified rivers applied for, under the direct supervision of a float boatman licensed for that river or they shall have had one or more complete float boat trips on each of the classified rivers applied for under the direct supervision of a float boatman licensed for that river with the remaining trip(s) in a boat with no more than one other trainee following a licensed float boatman for that river but they must not have passengers in the boat; or, b.
    [Show full text]
  • White Paper on COLUMBIA RIVER POST-2024 FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE
    White Paper on COLUMBIA RIVER POST-2024 FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division September 2011 This page intentionally left blank PREFACE The Columbia River, the fourth largest river on the continent as measured by average annual flow, provides more hydropower than any other river in North America. While its headwaters originate in British Columbia, only about 15 percent of the 259,500 square miles of the river’s basin is located in Canada. Yet the Canadian water accounts for about 38 percent of the average annual flow volume, and up to 50 percent of the peak flood waters, that flow on the lower Columbia River between Oregon and Washington. In the 1940s, officials from the United States and Canada began a long process to seek a collaborative solution to reduce the risks of flooding caused by the Columbia River and to meet the postwar demand for energy. That effort resulted in the implementation of the Columbia River Treaty in 1964. This agreement between Canada and the United States called for the cooperative development of water resource regulation in the upper Columbia River Basin. The Columbia River Treaty has provided significant flood control (also termed flood risk management) and hydropower generation benefiting both countries. The Treaty, and subsequent Protocol, include provisions that both expire on September 16, 2024, 60 years after the Treaty’s ratification, and continue throughout the life of the associated facilities whether the Treaty continues or is terminated by either country. This white paper focuses on the flood risk management changes that will occur on that milestone date and satisfies the following purposes: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Brilliant Headpond Stewardship Initiative Draft
    DRAFT SCOPING STUDY WORKING COPY FOR VIEWING PURPOSES BRILLIANT ONLY HEADPOND STEWARDSHIP INITIATIVE KATARINA HARTWIG HEATHER LESCHIED MAY 2017 Scoping Study: Brilliant Headpond Stewardship Initiative Katarina Hartwig, Heather Leschied | May 2017 Design and Layout: Mandi McRobbie Cover Photo: Douglas Noblet, WildAir Photography ©2017 Living Lakes Canada All rights reserved. Permission is granted to reproduce all or part of this publication for non-commercial purposes, as long as you cite the source Living Lakes Canada Box 691 Invermere, BC V0A 1K0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Brilliant Headpond Stewardship Initiative Scoping Study is intended to be the first phase of a stewardship strategy for the Brilliant Headpond Reservoir. The Scoping Study is guided by the Brilliant Headpond Stewardship Initiative Steering Committee, which includes leaders from the Brilliant Headpond communities of Tarrys, Thrums, Glade, Shoreacres, and South Slocan, representatives of the Ktunaxa First Nation and Okanagan Nation Alliance, and Regional District of Central Kootenay (RDCK) Area I Director, Andy Davidoff, and RDCK Area H Director, Walter Popoff. The Brilliant Headpond Reservoir (“BHPR”) was created by the damming of the Kootenay River at the Brilliant Canyon for the completion of the West Kootenay Power Corps. Brilliant Dam hydroelectric project completed in 1944. The BHPR area extends from Columbia Power Corporation’s (current owner) Brilliant Dam and Brilliant Expansion Project (2007) upstream to the Slocan Pool area just below BC Hydro’s Kootenay Canal (1975) and FortisBC’s South Slocan (1928) dams. FortisBC owns and operates the four dams on the Lower Kootenay, upstream of Brilliant Dam, and FortisBC operates Brilliant Dam and Brilliant Expansion facilities on behalf of Columbia Power Corporation.
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River Flow Augmentation Impact Analysis Appendix
    SNAKE RIVER FLOW AUGMENTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla District’s Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Boise, Idaho February 1999 Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) 1427i A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with large drawdown of Reclamation reservoirs. 1427r A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with reservoir elevations maintained near current levels. BA Biological assessment BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis (U.S. Department of Commerce) BETTER Box Exchange Transport Temperature Ecology Reservoir (a water quality model) BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs BID Burley Irrigation District BIOP Biological opinion BLM Bureau of Land Management B.P. Before present BPA Bonneville Power Administration CES Conservation Extension Service cfs Cubic feet per second Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CRFMP Columbia River Fish Mitigation Program CRP Conservation Reserve Program CVPIA Central Valley Project Improvement Act CWA Clean Water Act DO Dissolved Oxygen Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) DREW Drawdown Regional Economic Workgroup DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane EIS Environmental Impact Statement EP Effective Precipitation EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ETAW Evapotranspiration of Applied Water FCRPS Federal Columbia River Power System FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FIRE Finance, investment, and real estate HCNRA Hells Canyon National Recreation Area HUC Hydrologic unit code I.C.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Meeting Minutes 2019 Annual Tour and Board Meeting
    Meeting Minutes 2019 Annual Tour and Board Meeting, International Kootenay Lake Board of Control (IKLBC) Thursday, September 19, 2019 Tour: 7:45 AM to 12:30 PM Board Meeting: 2:00 to 4:30 PM Visitor Information Centre, Nelson, British Columbia United States Canada Chair Colonel Mark Geraldi (Remote Attendee) Bruno Tassone (Host) Members Kyle Blasch Ted White Secretariat Kevin Shaffer Martin Suchy IJC Commissioners Lance Yohe IJC Advisors Mark Colosimo Wayne Jenkinson Guests Paul Allen (International Joint Commission, Canadian Section), Dale Ernst (Fortis BC), Caron DeMars (International Joint Commission, United States Section), Adam Greeley (International Joint Commission, United States Section), Dave Hutchinson (Environment and Climate Change Canada), Gillian Kong (BC Hydro), Felicia Minotti (Global Affairs Canada), Shannon Price (Fortis BC), Doug Walker (United States Department of State) IKLBC Board Tour Summary Board members visited the Fortis BC Operations Centre in Castlegar, British Columbia. The tour was led by Dale Ernst, System Operations Manager, and Wayne Gritchin, Power System Supervisor. The facility opened in 2017 and is utilized by Fortis BC to operate and monitor power generating facilities on the Kootenay and Pend Oreille Rivers. Transmission operators also control and monitor distribution ties with customers from the centre. Corra Linn Dam gates can be operated remotely from the centre, as well as at the dam site. Generation at Corra Linn Dam is dispatched under an operating agreement by BC Hydro, while Fortis BC makes decisions on flows and choice of generating units to meet the generation requests. The Kootenay Lake Operating Order specifies the Kootenay Lake Order of Approval and both Fortis BC and BC Hydro monitor dam operations for compliance with the Order.
    [Show full text]