ORIGINAL Portland General Electric Company \/ 12I SW ..Calnw'astreet • Portland, Oregon 97204 November 12, 2002 ~ ~Ro ,,*R

$ORIGINAL Portland General Electric Company \/ 12I SW ..Calnw'astreet • Portland, Oregon 97204 November 12, 2002 ~ ~Ro ,,*R$

Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

ORIGINAL Portland General Electric Company \/ 12I SW ..Calnw'aStreet • Portland, Oregon 97204 November 12, 2002 ~ ~ro ,,*r

Honorable Magalie Roman Salas ro Secretary Federul Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, NE Washington, DC 2O426

Re: Project No. 477 - Bull Run Hydroeleetric Project AppHcaton to ~¢nd and Surrendfr License

Dear Secretary Salas:

On October 24, 2002, Portland General Electric Company ("POE"), licensee for Project No. 477, the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project, and 22 other parties, including the State of Oregon and 9 state, federal, and local agencies, as well as 12 non-governmental organizations, signed an historic settlement agreement that provides for the orderly decommissioning and removal of Project No. 477.

Accordingly, enclosed for filing with the Commission on behalfofPGE and the parties to the Settlement Agreement, are an original and eight copies of the filing package comprising PGE's application to amend and surrender the license for Project No. 477. This applicationconsists of the following documents:

I. Application for Non-Capacity Amendment of License; 2. Application for Surrender of License; 3. Joint Explanatory Statement in Support of Decommissioning Settlement Agreement; 4. Settlement Agreement Concerning the Removal of the Bull Run HydroelecUic Project;including

a) Exhibit A: Decommissioning Plan; b) Exhibit B: Authorized Representatives of the Parties; c) Appendix A: Application for Amendment of License; Appendix B: Application for Surrender of License; e) Appendix C: DraR Environmental Assessment; f) Appendix D: Draft Biological Evaluation; g) Appendix E: Preliminary Determination Pursuant to Wild and Scenic Rivers Act; h) Appendix F: ODSL Easement; i) Appendix G: Joint Explanatory Statement

Connecting People, Power and Possibilities 0 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

November 12, 2002 Honorable Magalie Roman Salas Application to Amend and Sunender License

j) Appendix H: Draft Memorandum of Agreement Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; k) Appendix I: Section 106 Preliminary Finding of Effect; and 1) Appendix J: Agreement for In.stream Conversion.

5. Time-stamped letter, dated November 7, 2002, requesting water quafity certification from the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 6. A draft notice of the tendering of this filing suitable for publication in the Federal Register.

Because the Settlement Agreement contemplates the immediate initiation of mitigation measures as well as a complex chain of events leading to Project removal, the Parties respectfully request that the Commission approve the Settlement, and the accompanying documents being filed today with the Commission, on an expedited basis.

Also enclosed is one additional copy of the complete filing. Please time-stamp and ~urn it to me in the enclosed stamped, self-addressed enveloped envelope. If you have any questions, please contact me at the number indicated below.

~y submitted,

Portland Gcnezal Elcctric Company Tel: 503--464-8864

S:~R FILING LETFER 11/12/2002 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

United States of America

Before the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission %~~

Portland General ) Project No. 477 ~ Ln. Electric Company ) )

Appfication for Non-Capacity Amendment of License

. In a related filing, Portland General Electric Company ("PGE"), licensee for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 477, today applied for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("Commission") approval to surrender the license of and decon-anission the Project. In this filing, PGE apples to the Commission for an amendment of the license for Project No. 477 to facilitate the surrender and decommissioning of the Project by (i) extending the term of the license to November 16, 2017; (ii) authorizing continued generation until removal of the Little Sandy Dam (in 2008 as provided in the Decommissioning Plan for Project No 477 filed with the Commission today), (ih') implementing a program of geomorphological and water quality monitoring continuing until Marmot Dam removal; (iv) requiring continued operation of the fish ladder and sorting facility at Maro~t Dam until Marmot Dam removal; and (v) modifying the operation of the diversion canal at Marmot Dam to provide protection of threatened fish species from November 2004 until November 2007.

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland Genial Electric Company FERC No. 477 Appliccaionfor Amendment of License I Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

2. The exact name, business address, and telephone number of the applicant are:

Portland General Electric Company 121 SW Salmon Street, 3WTC-BRHL Portland, OR 97204 Tel: (503) 464-8864 Fax: (503) 464-2944 Atta: Julie A. Keil, Director, Hydro Licensing

. The appficant is a domestic corporation, licensee for the water power project designated as Project No. 477 in the records of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued on May 23, 1980. Portland General Electric Comvanv. 11 FERC tl 62,145 (1980).

. PGE has entered into a Settlement Agreement with 22 other Parties pursuant to which PGE will decommission the Project starting in 2007 and surrender the Project license after the decommissioning and post-removal monitoring is completed, which is expected to occur between 2012 and 2017. A copy of the Settlement Agreement, which includes the Decommissioning Plan, has been filedwith the Commission today. As discussed in greater detailin the Joint Explanatory Statement, BiologicalEvaluation and Draft Environmental Assessment accompanying thisapplication, the amendment of license proposed, and the reasons why the proposed changes are necessary are as follows:

(i) Extending License Term to November 16, 2017:

The current license for the Project was issued in 1980, with a thirty-year term, effective in 1974 and expiring in 2004. PGE proposes to extend the term of the license to 2017 to provide protection for listed salmonid species in the Sandy River until the Project is removed, and to provide for a sure and effective means of enforcing the Settlement Agreement that will govern Project removal.

The Sandy River is the home to a number of fish species, including fall chinook salmon, spring chinook salmon, steelhead, and bull trout, which have been listed under the ESA as threatened species. The Sandy River also supports an active sports fishery, which, due to the listed status of the basin's wild salmonids, nmst focus on hatchery fish. However, NMFS requires that the number of hatchery fish be strictly limited, and that adult hatchery fish be excluded from wild fish sanctuaries. The fish ladder at Marmot Dam has been used to separate hatchery

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Poctland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Application for Amendment of License 2 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

and natural fish, providing the necessary sanctuary above Marmot Dam. Its presence has been an essential component of the fisheries management program of the Oregon Department of Fisheries and Wildlife (ODFW) in the Sandy River basin.

Following PGE's announcement of its intent to decommission the Project and remove Marmot Dam, ODFW amended its management plan for the Sandy River to remove the reliance on Marmot Dam as a sorting facility. However, the last of the out-of-basin hatchery fish will not return to the Sandy River until 2007, necessitating the continuing presence of Marmot Dam to sort the out-of-basin hatchery stock from the wild stock until that time. Keeping Marmot Dam in place until 2007 is critical to the continued sports fishery in the Sandy, to the protection of ESA listed salmonids, and to an orderly transition to a fish management approach that does not rely on a sorting facility.

In addition, the Settlement Agreement provides for a number of actions, discussed in iterm (ii) - (v) below, necessary to implement Project removal in a manner protective of the resources of the Sandy River. PGE, and the other Parties to the Settlement Agreement, believe that the surest method of providing for effective enforcement of these measures is to extend and amend the Project license so that the Commission can enforce the Settlement Agreement. As the Commission itself noted in Arizona Public Service Company, 97 FERC Cl 61,315 (2001), "if the Commission approves a surrender that involves removing a project over several years, the license would have to remain in effect until the process is complete." Moreover, since the term of prior license was less than the statutory maximum of 50 years, the Commission has the authority to extend the prior license's term to provide the necessary Commission authorization and enforcement mechanism. Id. at fn 38. See County of Antrim, Michigan, 88 FERC cl 62,158 (1999). As the Commission noted in connection with the Condit Project, the statutory 50-year maximum for license terms would not be a bar to an extension of the Bull Run Project's 30-year license term, because the 13-year extension would result in a new term of 43 years. PacifiCorp, 97 FERC Cl 61,348 (2001).

(li) Authorlzing Continued Generatlon unal Removal of ~ Sandy Dam:

All Patties to the Settlement Agreement have agreed that since the entire Project must remain in place until November 2007, and since removal of the Project's two diversion dams must take place in successive years, it is appropriate that generation continue until Little Sandy Dam is removed in 2008, as provided in the Decommissioning Plan. This will maximize the utilization of the resource, and provide the maximum financial resources to enable PGE to decommission and remove the Project. It will also facilitate the removal process. Cessation of

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Applicationfor Amendmem of License 3 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

generation prior to removal of the Little Sandy Dam would serve no useful purpose and would, in fact, complicate the removal of Marmot Dam, since the canal system is needed to divert water from the Marmot construction site and all agencies agree that the Little Sandy River should not be used to convey this flow below Little Sandy Dam. Therefore, the canals must be used through removal of Marmot Dam, and the flume must remain in place until Little Sandy Dam is removed.

(Hi) Implementing Geomorphological and Water Quality Monitoring:

Prior to removing Marmot Darn, PGE will conduct a two-part program of geomorphological monitoring, which will occur over three years, and a two-year program of water quality monitoring. These studies are essential to determining - and minimizing - the impacts both of Project removal activities and of the post- removal adjustment of the Sandy River to the removal of the Project. The geomorphological monitoring, in particular, is an essential component of minimizing impacts on listed species as required under the ESA. As noted above, the Parties to the Settlement Agreement believe that inclusion of these studies in the Project license will enable the Commission to ensure that they are carried out in a timely and complete manner as contemplated by the Settlement Agreement, and as required pursuant to the ESA.

(iv) Continuing Operation of Marmot Dam Fish Facilities:

As noted above, the Marmot Dam fish ladder and fish sorting facilities must be operated until the removal of Marmot Dam to ensure that hatchery fish do not reach the wild fish sanctuary in the Sandy River above Marmot Dam. Under the tern~ of the existing license, PGE is required to operate and maintain the fish ladder. PGE also currently funds the trapping and sorting operation pursuant to an agreement with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) that will terminate when the current license expires on November 16, 2004. Inclusion of this obligation in the amended license will ensure that the Commission can enforce it in a timely manner.

(v) Modifying Operation of the Marmot Dam Diversion Canal:

Salmon fry impingement on the existing vertical rotating screen at the Marmot intake has been identified as a source of mortality and injury. The Commission previously amended the Project license to limit the operation of the Marmot Dam diversion canal in order to protect downstream migrating smolts. Working with NMFS, USFWS, and ODFW, PGE has determined that additional protection would be provided if operation of the canal were further limited as follows:

Bull Run HydxcelectricProject P~'tland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Application for Amendment of License 4 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

• From February 15 until March 15, PGE shall operate the Project so as to limit the canal level to 4.7 feet. • From March 15 and continuing for 8 weeks, PGE shall operate the project with canal levels at 4.2 feet for 8 hours beginning daily at dusk. The canal will be operated at no more than 4.7 feet all other hours during this period. The initiation of the 8 week period may be adjusted (but not extended) at the request of NMFS and ODF'W based on the infornmtion regarding when juvenile downstream migrating arrive at Marmot darn. • After May 31, the above canal levels will no apply, although all other existing license conditions will continue to apply. All Parties to the Settlement Agreement have agreed that these provisions are necessary to protect the threatened species in the Sandy River. NMFS and USFWS have indicated that they are likely to determine that these provisions are necessary to minimize incidental take as required by Section 7 of the ESA~ Accordingly, inclusion in the Project license is both necessary and appropriate.

. (a) The statutory or regulatory requirements of the State in which the Project is located and that affect the Project as proposed, with respect to bed and banks and to the appropriation, diversion, and use of water for power purposes, and with respect to the right to engage in the business of developing, transmitting, and distributing power and in any other business necessary to accomplish the purposes of the license under the Federal Power Act are:

Chapter 757 eL seq., Oregon Revised Statutes, defines public utilities and regulates the business of retail distribution of electricity by the Public Utility Commission of Oregon.

Chapters 273 and 274, Oregon Revised Statutes, governs the use and occupancy of State lands, including the bed and banks of streams determined to be navigable waters.

Chapter 468B, Oregon Revised Statutes, governs the issuance by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality of the water quality certification requir~ for federally-ficensed hydroelectric projects under Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §1341 (§ 401).

Chapter 539, Oregon Revised Statutes, governs appropriation, diversion and use of waters of,/mer a//a, the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers.

Co) The steps which PGE has taken or plans to take to comply with each of the laws cited above are:

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Application for Amendment of Licer~e 5 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

PGE is an electlic utility organized under the laws of the State of Oregon in good standing with the Oregon Secretary of State's Office.

PGE filed a Surface Water Registration Claim on December 29, 1992 (SWR No. 389), which claim is supported by Power Claim 117. The SWR Claim preserves PGE's claim to the use of up to 800 cfs of water fi'om the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers.

Although Water Quality Certification is not required for this Amendment Application standing alone, as required by the Settlement Agreement, PGE has submitted, with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, an application for Section 401 Water Quality Certification of the Application for Surrender of License for and Decommissioning of Major Project that accompanies this application.

As required by ORS Chapters 273 and 274, PGE has applied for an easement authorizing the occupancy of the portion of the bed and banks of the Sandy River occupied by the Marmot Dam of which the State of Oregon Claims ownership.

SUBSCRIPTION AND VERIFICATION

This Application for Amendment of License is executed in the

STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

By ~al,'eA. ga;I , me u o~ro~J4~0 of Portland General Electric Company, 121 S. W. Salmon Street, Portland, OR 97204, being truly sworn, deposes and says that the contents of this appfication are role to the best of his/her knowledge or belief. The undersigned applicant has signed this application this ~n~day of ~tg~ , 2002. PORTLAN D GENERAL ~I~COMP, A.~Y

Julie A. Keil Director, Hydro Licensing

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a Notary Public of the State of Oregon, this ~_..~4k dayo.f Odol..., ,2002. coL4A-~ q km,~- NOTARY PUBLIC/" My Commission Expires:

/4~.t. 2'-/. ~ oo,f

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Application for Amendment of Licen,te 6 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ~

,,,~ FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION r'l ,:t ) .J Portland General Electric ) Project No. 477 Company ) )

Joint Explanatory Statement and Request for Approval of Decommissioning Settlement Agreement

Portland General Electric Company (PGE) is seeking Commission approval to surrender the license for, and decommission, the 22 MW Bull Run Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 477), located on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers in Oregon. PGE and 22 other parties have entered into a Settlement Agreement providing for the removal of the Project. The Settlement Agreement, and the supporting documents which make up PGE's application to surrender the license for the Bull Run Project, are the product of an intense ten-month negotiation among the major stakeholders with interests in the resources affected by the Project. The Settlement Agreement represents a delicate balancing of the often-competing interests of the stakeholders. As discussed below, it represents the agreement of ten governmental and thirteen non-governmental parties. All Parties have agreed that the Settlement Agreement is fair and reasonable and in the public interest.

The Parties hereby request that the Commission accept without material modification the Settlement Agreement. including the Decommissioning Plan, on an expedited basis so that they can begin to implement the steps to return the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers to a free flowing condition.

This Joint Explanatory Statement presents the history of the settlement and explains the rationale behind the elements of the settlement. It demonstrates that these elements form a unified package that serves the public interest, and provides reasons for the Commission to grant expedited consideration to PGE's application. It also explains how the key components were developed and why the parties to the Settlement Agreement believe that these components represent the best attainable balance of cost and environmental protection.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany Project No. 477 Page 1 of 19 Joint E~lanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Parties to the Settlement

There are, in addition to PGE, ten governmental and twelve nongovernmental parties to the Settlement Agre~mem. The Governmental Parties are US Forest Service CUSDA- FS"); US Fish and Wildlife Service CFWS"); Bureau of Land Managemem ("BLM"); National Marine Fisheries Service CNMFS"); the State of Oregon; Oregon Department of Environmental Quality ("ODEQ"); Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife ('g)DFW"); Oregon Water Resources Department ("OWRD"), Oregon Division of State Lands ("ODSL"); and the City of Sandy, Oregon. The non-governmental parties, other than PGE, are: Western Rivers Conservancy; Sandy River Basin Watershed Council; Association of NW Steelheaders; Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association; Alder Creek Kayak Supply, Inc., American Whitewater, WaterWatch of Oregon, American Rivers, Oregon Trout, The Native Fish Society, Trout Unlimited, and Oregon Council of Trout Unlimited. Together, these parties represent the major stakeholders with interests affected by the decommissioning of the Bull Run Project. Project Description

The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project is located in north central Oregon on the west side of Mt. Hood in Clackamas County, about 35 miles east of Portland. The Project is located on the Sandy, Little Sandy, and Bull Run Rivers. The Project is located in the Sandy River Basin, which includes the Bull Run and Little Sandy sub-basins. This basin provides multiple public benefits, including highly valued natural resources and recreational opportunities. The Bull Run watershed has been the main source of water for the City of Portland and surrounding communities since 1895. Portions of the Sandy River are designated as a National Wild and Scenic River and a State Scenic Waterway. There are numerous fish and wildlife species present in the basin, including the following species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act CESA"): spring and fall chinook salmon, winter steelhead, bald eagle, and spotted owl. The Sandy Basin is heavily used for recreation, including boating, angling, and other outdoor activities.

The Project works include Marmot Dam, located at River Mile 30 on the Sandy River, a 3.1 mile series of canals and tunnels leading from Marmot Dam to the Little Sandy River just upstream of the Little Sandy Diversion Dam, the Little Sandy Diversion Dam, located at RM 1.7 on the Little Sandy River, a 2.8 mile box flume leading from the Little Sandy Diversion Dam to the manmade forebay, Roslyn Lake, two 1,200 foot penstocks, and a powerhouse containing four generators with a total capacity of 22 MW. The powerhouse discharges to the Bull Run River 1.5 miles above its confluence with the Sandy River at RM 18.4.

Marmot Dam is equipped with a fish ladder to pass upstream migrating fish, and a traveling screen and bypass facility to pass downstream migrating fsh. Little Sandy Dam has no facilities for upstream or downstream fish passage and blocks anadromous fish access to approximately 6.5 miles of upstream habitat.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland C.,(mcralEleclric Company Project No. 477 Page 2 of 19 Jo/m E.xp/anatoryStaten~nt Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

PGE holds a water right that authorizes it to use up to 800 cfs of combined flow from the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. Little Sandy River flow, up to 800 cfs, is diverted first into Roslyn Lake via the flume. When Little Sandy flow is less than 800 cfs, which occurs throughout most of the year, Sandy River flow is diverted at Marmot Dam to supplement the Little Sandy River flow into Roslyn Lake.

Minimum flow requirements below Marmot Dam limit the amount of Sandy River water available to be diverted. Since 1976, PGE has been required under its current license to provide the following minimum flows below Marmot Dam: 200 cfs from June 16 through October 15; 400 cfs from October 16 through October 31; and 460 cfs from November 1 through June 15. Additionally, the canal level is restricted to 4.7 feet (maximum canal level is 5.8 feet) from March 1 to May 31 by FERC Order dated August 19, 1997, to protect fry during movement downstream- | There is no minimum flow release below the Little Sandy Dam Spill is minimized to avoid stranding fish below the Little Sandy Dam.

At full generation, the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project draws approximately 900 cfs of flow from Roslyn Lake. The project's average annual generation for the period 1995-99 was 110,979 MWH.

Background of the Settlement

The initial minor part license for the Project was issued by the Federal Power Commission on November 17, 1924, with an expiration date of November 16, 1974. On May 23, 1980, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued a new license, for the entire Project, with an effective date of November 17, 1974, and an expiration date of November 16, 2004. Accordingly, in 1998 PGE initiated an alternative licensing process to relicense the Project. However, early in that process PGE determined that the likely cost of environmental protection, mitigation, and enhancement measures associated with the relicensing would make continued operation of the Project uneconomicaL Accordingly, on November 12, 1999, PGE filed a notice of its intent not to seek a new license for the Project.

On March 2, 2000, the FERC issued a public notice of PGE's filing, in which FERC stated: "If the licensee does not, by two years prior to the expiration of the current license, file an application to surrender the current license, the Commission will apply the relicense competition procedures set forth in its regulations at 18 CF~ 16.25 (1999)."

At that time, PGE intended to undertake Project decommissioning and removal on an expedited basis that would have led to Project removal by the time the license expired.

A traveling-screen bypasses downstream migrating fish beck into the Sandy River approximately 700 feet below Marmot Darn. In its August 1997 Order, the Commission determined that mortality was reduced if flows throngh the canal were limited.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany Project No. 477 Page 3 of 19 Joint Explanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

PGE continued the alternative process that it had been using to relicense the Project. During this process, various removal methodologies were analyzed and a draft decommissioning plan was prepared. During discussions with stakeholders, PGE determined that the project could not be removed on the proposed schedule and abandoned its efforts to remove the Project on an expedited basis.

In December 2001, however, at the request of key state and federal agencies, PGE convened a meeting of stakeholders to determine if it would be possible to reach agreement on the terms by which the Project could he decommissioned. Such an agreement would enable PGE to meet the deadline established by the Commission's March 2000 Notice, and so eliminate the possibility that the Commission would consider the Project to he an "orphan" as provided in 18 C.F.R § 16.25. This meeting, which was attended by 22 other parties, led PGE to retain a mediator to structure a process by which an agreement to decommission the Project could he reached.

The parties established a Decommissioning Working Group ("DWG"), and numerous issue-oriented subgroups, which met and negotiated almost continuously from January until October 2002 in order to develop a mutually acceptable settlement agreement and decommissioning plan, as well as the documents that the Commission would require in support of such a filing. These negotiations were designed to address the concerns of all interested parties. This effort was successful and the resuR is the Surrender Application that PGE has filed with the Commission today.

Elements of the Surrender Application

1. Settlement Agreement

The Settlement Agreement describes the legal and regulatory obligations of each of the parties to it. It specifically establishes PGE's obligation to file with FERC an application to surrender the Project license and, upon receipt of Commission approval, to decommission and remove the Project according to an agreed-upon methodology at its own cost. It is the key component of PGE's Surrender Application and embodies the agreement of the parties that the proposal to surrender the project license and decommission the Project, on the schedule and in the manner proposed in the Decommissioning Plan, is in the public interest.

2. Application for Surrender of License

As required by 18 C.F.R. Part 6, the Application for Surrender of License seeks Commission approval for PGE to surrender the Project license and decommission the Project works as provided in the Decommissioning Plan. It provides a detailed description of the Project works and operation, as well as a summary of the cost and method of removal.

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland C.eneral Electric Company Proje~ No. 477 Page 4 of 19 Jo/nt E~/anawry Statemen/ Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

3. Application to Amend License

The Settlement Agreement contemplates that the Project will continue to operate - with certain modifications - until early summer of 2008, in order to protect the fish resources of the Sandy River and to provide for a logical sequencing of Project removal activities starting in 2007. Since the current Project license was issued in 1980, with a term of 30 years, the Parties believe that the most effective way to accomplish this is to amend the current license to extend its term (by 13 years) to 2017, and to incorporate the necessary fish protection measures from the expiration date of the current license. This will eliminate the need for annual lice~ and ensure that all protective measures are fully enforceable by the Commission.

4. m commt on Ptan

The Decommissioning Plan describes the detailed methodology and schedule by which the Project works will be removed. It also describes the pre- and post-removal monitoring that PGE will undertake, the disposition of PGE's lands and the conversion of PGE's water fights to instream rights. The Decommissioning Plan is attached to the Settlement Agreement as Exhibit A and made a part thereof.

5. Joint Explanatory Statement

This Joint Explanatory Statement presents the history of the settlement and explains the rationale behind the elements of the settlement. It demonstrates that the settlement serves the public interest, and explains how the key components were developed. The Joint Explanatory Statement also explains why the parties to the Settlement Agreement believe that these components represent the best attainable balance of cost and environmental protection, and, therefore, why the Settlement Agreement and all accompanying filings should be approved by the Commission

6. Draft Environmental Assessment

Preparation of the DraR Environmental Assessment (DEA) began during PGE's alternative decommissioning process to evaluate the natural resource be.net'as, economic costs, and environmental impacts associated with the proposed decommissioning of the Bull Run Project. It descn'bes the alternative decommissioning methodologies that were considered and explains the methodology proposed to be implemented in the Decommissioning Plan.

7. Biological Evaluation

The Biological Evaluation will serve as a draft biological assessment for the Commission to use in consultation with NMFS and FWS, as required by Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act CESA"), with respect to threatened and endangered species affected by the Project. The Biological Evaluation attached to the Settlement Agreement

Bull Run Hych'oeleclricProject PortlandGeneral ElectricCompany ProjectNo. 477 Page 5 of 19 Joint E.~lanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

was developed during the negotiations of the DWG and in informal consultation with NMFS and USFWS.

8. Preliminary Determination Pursuant to Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

Because reaches of the Sandy River and tributaries above and below the Project are protected pursuant to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the Forest Service and BLM most make a determination under section 7(a) that removal of the Project, pursuant to this Agreement, the Decommissioning Plan and the FERC Order, developed consistently with this Agreement, will not "invade or unreasonably diminish the scenic, recreational, and fish and wildlife values" present in the river corridor at the date of its designation. The USDA-FS and BLM's preliminary determination is attached to the Settlement Agreement.

9. Form of Easement from Oregon Division of State I.ands

Because Marmot Dam is located on lands both administered by the BLM and claimed to be owned by the State of Oregon, pursuant to the State l.,and Board's determination of the Sandy River's navigability title on February 5, 2002, ODSL will grant PGE an easement to allow the occupancy of submerged and submersible lands by the Marmot Dam until removal.

10. Draft Memorandum of Agreement Pursuant to National Historic Preservation Act

FERC is expected to execute and implement a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), which evidences compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. As spelled out in the proposed MOA attached to the Settlement Agreement, FERC most consider the potential impacts of the proposed license surrender on historic properties, including the Bull Run Project itself, which is considered eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. In this case, it has been determined that the license surrender will have an adverse effect on such historic properties. Accordingly, FERC, as the lead federal agency, most spell out how these adverse effects will be resolved or accepted in the public interest.

11. Section 106 Preliminary F~mding of Effect.

Because the Bull Run Project is considered eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and because it is anticipated that the proposed license surrender will adversely affect such historic properties through application of the Criterion of Adverse Effect, pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, PGE has filed a Section 106 Preliminary Finding of Effect with the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (Appendix I to the Settlement Agreement).

Bull Ran HydroelectricProject Portland General EIeclricCompany Project No. 477 Page 6 of 19 Joint Explanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Action Sought from the Commission

Implementation of the Settlement Agreement depends upon Commission approval of the Settlement Agreement and the accompanying Decommissioning Plan, PGE's application to amend the Project license, and PGE's application to surrender the Project license. The actions requested of the Commission and outlined in the Settlement Agreement are necessarily intertwined; implementation of a/l of them is essential if the shared goals of the Parties are to be realized. For this reason, the Parties respectfully request that, to the maximum extent possible, the Commission adopt language identical to or consistent with the language of the Settlement Agreemont and Decommissioning Plan. If the final Commission Order in this proceeding is inconsistent with these documents, the Settlement Agreement may become null and void.

Key Elements of Project Surrender and Removal

The Settlement Agreement and supporting documents commit the Parties to implementation of a comprehensive package of measures to remove the Project, restore the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers to free flowing status, protect the instream benef'~ that will occur as a result of decommissioning the Project, and protect as broad a range as possible of the resources of the Sandy River Basin.

Specifically, PGE proposes to remove the Project starting in July 2007. In order to minimize aquatic impacts, Marmot Dam will he removed in one in-water season starting in July 2007. The other Project works will be removed over the next two years. The site of the Project will he restored and revagetated with native species. PGE's water fight will be transferred to the State to become an in-stream right that will protect aquatic and recreational resources. All lands, both Project and non-Project lands, owned by PGE in the Bull Run area of the Sandy River basin, except for the lands associated with Roslyn Lake, will he donated to a non-profit conservation group to help establish conservation corridors on both the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers. Impacts of removal will he monitored until the possibility of adverse effects on key resources has reached an acceptably low level.

A. Project Removal

PGE's Decommissioning Plan includes all engineering, environmental assessment, permitting, construction, monitoring, and mitigation activities associated with the removal of the Bull Run Project and tlm restorationof tlm properties in accordance with the Settlement Agreement. The Decommissioning Plan also includes monitoring of environmental impacts during and aRer Project removal, as well as a contingency plan to respond to defined events during tlm monitoring phase. It is the Company's goal to remove the dams and ancillary structures safely and in a manner that:

• minimizes environmental impact; • satisfies PGE's obligations under the Endangered Species Act;

Bull Run HydroelectricProject PortlandGenc*al Electric Company ProjectNo. 477 Page 7 of 19 So/ntExp/anatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

• provides for the prudent w,anagement of sediments now located upstream of Marmot Dam; u restores the site to a condition suitable for mixed use; and • terminates FERC jurisdiction as expeditiously as possible.

Project removal will begin in 2007 and continue until 2009. PC_d! will remove the two Project dams during successive 17-week in-water work periods (July - October) in 2007 and 2008. Marmot Dam will be removed in the first in-water work period before the existing canal/tunnel system is removed so that it can be used to divert a portion of the Sandy River flow. Once Marmot Dam is removed, closure of the canals and tunnels will be initiated and they will be remeved over a period of 8 months without the need for in- water work. Little Sandy Dam will be removed during the second in-water work period in the year aRer Marmot Dam is removed. Flow, which is minimal, will be routed around the dana, into the flume, which will be opened up to return flow to the Little Sandy streambed below the dam. The concrete structures supporting the flume within the Little Sandy River channel will also be removed during the second in-water work period. Roslyn Lake will be drained and removal will commence concurrently with the Little Sandy work. The powerhouse will be removed between August 2008 and June 2009.

1. Method of Removal of Marmot Dam

Approximately one million cubic yards of sediment have accumulated behind Marmot Dam. One of the key decisions that the Working Group reached was the treatment of this sediment when Marmot Dam is removed. During the earlier alternative decommissioning process, PGE evaluated four principal alternatives:

Alternative A Remove the dam and as much in-stream sediment as possible in one in-water construction season to a distance of 5,500 feet upstream. Alternative B Remove the dam and only as much sediment as required to complete removal. Alternative C Step down the dam to permit controlled release of sediment and remove remainder of dam and remaining sediment in next in-water construction season. Alternative D In one in-water season remove the dam and all sediment to a distance of 2,700 feet upstream.

The DWG narrowed this range to three principal alternatives: Alternatives B and C, and a modification of Alternative D, which contemplated removing only as much sediment as could be removed in one season, now estimated to be approximately 125,000 cubic yards. In fact, however, the DWG focused on two alternatives, B and D as modified. Sediment removal is constrained in the Sandy River. Access is poor, limiting the amount of equipment that could be brought on site. Multiple season removal is not feasible, as the area behind the dam would quickly refill with sediment, and downstream effects would be prolonged. Alternative C was eliminated because the DWG determined that the adverse impacts of a second in-water season, combined with the uncertainties regarding

Bull Run Hydroel~Izic Projec~ Portland C_,e~ralElectric Company Proj~'1 No. 477 Page 8 of 19 Joint Explanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

additional sediment inputs, outweighed any conceivable henef'|t from the additional sediment removal. Indeed, one season removal was determined to he necessary to minimize the impact of removal on listed fish species.

Alternative B was chosen on the basis of detailed state of the art geomorphologieal modeling, which demonstrated that in light of the geomorphology of the Sandy River, the majority of the sediment could he released downstream without unacceptable environmental impacts. To manage any uncertainty remaining, the DWG agreed on a program of monitoring for downstream impacts from sediment releases, combined with a carefully designed program of PGE responses to defined impacts. The DWG determined that this combination (single season removal, coffer dam designed to tnaximize the chance of rapid sediment movement, intense monitoring and correction of identified impacts) would provide more downstream protection than would removal of 125,000 cubic yards of sediment.

For this reason, the Settlement Agreement and Decommissioning Plan are based on removing Marmot Dam in a single in-water season and only as much sediment as required to complete dam removal; and the Parties respectfully request that the Commission approve this removal methodology.

2. Timing of Removal of Marmot Dam

The Sandy River is the home to a number of fish species, including fall chinook salmon, spring chinook salmon, steelhead, coastal cutthroat trout, rainbow trout, and bull trout, as well as lamprey and other species. Of these, fall chinook, spring chinook, steelhead, and bull trout have been listed under the ESA as threatened species. The Sandy River supports an active sports fishery, which, due to the listed status of the basin's wild salmonids, must focus on hatchery fish. However, the threatened status of the wild fish also limits the role of hatchery fish. NMFS requires that the number of hatchery fish be strictly limited, the genetics of the hatchery fish be closely matched to those that are native to the system ("native broodstock') or that adult hatchery fish be excluded from wild fish sanctuaries. The fish ladder at Marmot Dam has been used to separate hatchery and natural fish, providing the necessary sanctuary above Marmot Dam. Its presence has been an essential component of ODFW's fisheries management in the Sandy River basin.

Following PGE's initial announcement of its intent to remove Marmot Dam, ODFW amended its management plan for the Sandy River to remove the reliance on Marmot Dam as a sorting facility. As a result of this change, ODFW will only be releasing native broodstock into the Sandy River. However, the last of the out-of-basin hatchery fish will not return to the Sandy River until 2007, necessitating the continuing presence of Marmot dam to sort the out-of-basin hatchery stock from the wild stock until that time. Keeping Marmot in place until 2007 is critical to the continued sports fisheryin the Sandy, to the protection of ESA listed salmonids, and to an orderly transition to a fish management approach that does not rely on a sorting facility.

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Comlxmy Project No. 477 Page 9 of 19 ./o/n: F_ap/anatoryStatement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

For this reason, the Parties respectfully request that the Commission approve the continued operation of Marmot Dam until 2007, including protective license terms and other interim measures designed to protect fish species in the Sandy river, and authorize its removal starting in July of that year.

3. Continued Project Operation until 2008

All Parties to the Settlement Agreement have agreed that since the entire Project mnst remain in place until November 2007, and since removal of the Project's two diversion dams must take place in successive years, it is appropriate that generation continue until Little Sandy Dam is removed in 2008, as provided in the Decommissioning Plan. This will maximize the utilization of the resource, and provide the maximum financial resources to enable PGE to decommission and remove the Project. It will also facilitate the removal process. Indeed, cessation of generation prior to removal of the Little Sandy Dam would serve no useful purpose and would, in fact, complicate the removal of Marmot Dam, since the canal system is needed to divert water from the Marmot construction site and all agencies agree that the Little Sandy River should not be used to convey this flow below Little Sandy Dam. Thus, the canals must be used through removal of Marmot Darn, and the flume mast remain in place until Little Sandy Dam is removed.

Therefore, in order to maximize revenue generation and protection of threatened species in the Sandy River, the Partie~ respectfully request that the Commission authorize the Project to continue generation until Marmot Dam has been removed in November 2007.

4. Water Quality Monitoring Below Marmot Dam

Increased turbidity and habitat changes due to sediment movement are predicted to be the two most substantial environmental impacts from removal of the Bull Run Project. The Sandy River is a glacially fed system that commonly experiences high turbidities and a moderate to high sediment bed load. Approximately 1 million cubic yards of sediment have accumulated behind Marmot Dam. When the darn is removed, much of this material is expected to move downstream, especially during increased flow events that occur al~er the removal process. The fine particles associated with this material are likely to increase turbidity downstream of the dam site, and sediment bedioad may alter downstream habitat.

In order to understand and minimize the impacts of dam removal, the Decommissioning Plan established a monitoring plan that includes monitoring turbidity levels in the affected rivers before, during and after removal of Marmot Dam. Monitoring related to movement of the sediment as bedload is described elsewhere. Implementation of both pre- and post-removal monitoring is essential if possible impacts from Project removal are to be fully controlled.

Noxt for Pr¢-Marn~t Dam Removal Turbidity Monitorin2: Turbidity data collected prior to Project removal will allow the background variability in the Sandy system to be

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany Project No. 477 Page 10 of 19 Joint Explanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

characterized. Currently, there are episodic events of high turbidity year round in the Sandy River. However, because these episodes can be relatively short rived, lasting a few weeks, monthly or bimonthly sampling has not adequately captured them. As a result, no data currently exist that reasonably describe the system's turbidity. Such data could be used to determine what levels of increased turbidity are commonly observed in the Sandy system.

Oregon water quality standards allow for a 10% increase in turbidity compared to background turbidity levels. Site-specific information about background turbidity levels would provide greater flexibility in triggering management changes to respond to increased construction-related turbidity levels. Turbidity data collected during dam removal will enable ODEQ to determine if pre-removal turbidity levels are exceeded and if additional controls are necessary to reduce the turbidity levels in the river.

Need for Post-Marmot Dam Removal Turbidity Monitoring: Construction-related turbidity is expected to be minimal at this site. The main Project contribution to turbidity will occur once the dam is removed, the gravel cofferdam is breached, and the stored sediment begins to move downstream. Turbidity monitoring, under the review of the Endangered Species Act Monitoring and Implementation Team ("MIT'), will enable PGE to assure that clean-running tributaries are accessible to fish species listed under the Endangered Species Act. Quantitative information about turbidity levels during storm events both before and aRer clam removal will assist the MIT to decide when and bow to address the high post-removal turbidity levels. In addition, the combination of pre- and post- monitoring data will enable ODEQ to evaluate the actual contribution of the dam removal to the observed turbidity levels.

For these reasons, the Parties respectfully request that the Commission approve the entire scope of water quality monitoring contemplated by the Amendment Application, the Settlement Agreement, and the Decommissioning Plan.

5. Extent Of Post-Marmot Dam Removal Habitat Monitoring

The Decommissioning Plan requires PGE to monitor downstream impacts on aquatic habitat and species for a number of years aRer Marmot Dam is removed. At this time, the Parties expect that the minimum duration for this monitoring would be five years, from the removal of Marmot Dam, or approximately three years after the removal of the last Project works. The duration of this monitoring effort and implementation of certain specified contingency actions based on the monitoring is central to the Settlement Agreement, and to providing assurances that Project removal will comply with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act.

Project decommissioning will eliminate the effects the Project has had on fish passage and fish habitat. Wild Sandy River fish will no longer have to negotiate the fishway at Marmot Dam. Removal will restore a natural flow regime to the Sandy River below Marmot Dam; it will also restore access to approximately 10 miles of aquatic habitat in the Little Sandy River and eliminate the possibility of false attraction to the Bull Run

Bull Run HydroelectricProject PoctlandC, eneral ElectricCompany Project No. 477 Page I I of 19 Joint Explanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

River. Juvenile fish mortality at the Marmot fish diversion structure will be eliminated.

Nonetheless, Project removal also has the potential to cause a number of short-term negative impacts. The primary concerns are impacts on fish passage, impacts of channel adjustment in the reservoir reach, impacts of downstream sediment deposition, and impacts of downstream suspended sediment increases. These impacts, which are described in detail in the Dra~ Biological Evaluation, merited development of post- removal monitoring and contingency plans.

Once a removal methodology was selected for Marmot Dam, a team of experts from PGE, NMFS, USFWS, and ODFW met to develop actions that would minimize incidental take of ESA-listed fish species and reduce impacts of dam removal on fish habitat in the Sandy River Basin. It was anticipated that these protective actions would largely fulfill the ESA requirement to minimize incidental take of ESA listed fish species, and would likely be the main protective requirements of future Section 7 consultation on the removal of Marmot Dam.

This effort had two components: determining specific actions that would minimize impacts on threatened species and their habitat, and determining the length of time that PGE would be required to monitor for the possible occurrence of and respond to these impacts.

Actions to Minimize Incidental Take: PGE's sediment modeling and analysis indicated two main areas of ESA concern as a result of Marmot Dam removal: fish passage barriers and habitat impacts. First, measures to minimize Sandy River habitat impacts were developed. Habitat impact minimization measures include single season removal of Marmot Dam; coffer dam removal during the season that would result in the least downstream impacts; designing the coffer dam to breach under high flows to cause rapid sediment scour; shaping sediment banks to minimize dry season bank sloughing; providing fish passage during inwater dam removal activities; and providing minimum downstream flows into Sandy River. However, other than contingencies for fish passage blockage, no post-Marmot Dam removal actions are proposed to address habitat modifications in the Sandy River.

Afler Marmot Dam removal, seven general categories of Marmot Dam removal impacts that may result in PGE's take of listed fish species or impact their habitat were identified. Each impact will be evaluated based on river reach, fish species, fish lifestage, and run- timing. PGE's monitoring actions, contingency triggers (specific thresholds of concern), and contingency options to address an impact were identified. Once a contingency trigger has been identified via monitoring, corresponding contingencies will be performed by PGE to minimize incidental take of ESA fish species. The options available vary depending on the run timing of the species present at that time, as well as the magnitude of the impact and other environmental conditions. A Monitoring and Implementation Team (MIT) will provide guidance and recommendations to PGE after Marmot clam removal. The MIT will meet annually or more often to review new information, ensure the most appropriate contingency options are selected and

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland GeneralElec~'ic Company Project No. 477 Page 12 of 19 Joint F~lanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

implemented to minimize and reduce take of ESA listed fish species, and follow-up all PGE actions to ensure that incidental take minimization actions were effective.

Actions to Determine PGE's Monitoring Endpoint: The MIT also will participate in "Endpoint Monitoring" to determine when PGE's ESA fish monitoring and contingency response obligations are complete. The Endpoint Monitoring, as described in the Decommissioning Plan, will use annual Sandy River channel cross section measurements to determine risk of fish passage blockage. When Endpoint Monitoring indicates that a predetermined set of criteria, which are described in Section 4.7 of the Decommissioning Plan, have been met, PGE's ESA fish monitoring requirements will he complete. While it is not possible to determine, at this time, precisely how long monitoring will continue, the Parties expect that all monitoring will be completed pursuant to the Decommissioning Plan by 2017, within the term of the Project license as amended.

This post-removal monitoring may extend somewhat longer than has been customary when licensed projects are removed. It is, however, the product of intensive evaluation by NMFS and USFWS and represents what all Parties agree is the effort necessary to ensure that adverse impacts to listed threatened species are minimized.

6. Removal of Roslyn Lake

Since PGE determined that it should decommission the Project, it has tried to find a way to preserve Roslyn Lake Park, a recreational facility that PGE constructed on Roslyn Lake. The Park has numerous day use facilities that are used by approximately 10,000 people each year. However, without a source of water, the lake, which is entirely manmade, and is fed by the box flume from the Little Sandy Dam, as well as by water from the City of Portland's aqueduct, would quickly become stagnant and unusable.

PGE originally considered an alternative to complete removal of Roslyn Lake, which would have used the City of Portland's adjacent aqueduct as a source of fresh water. The City has determined, however, that it cannot supply water to Roslyn Lake, which means that there is no conceivable source of flesh water. Accordingly, the Parties are in agreement that there is no way to maintain the Lake, and that it should he removed. Without Roslyn Lake, there is no reason to retain the Park, and it too will be removed.

B. Transfer of Water Rights to the State of Oregon

The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project has utilized waters from the Little Sandy and Sandy Rivers since March 3, 1903. A central component of the Settlement Agreement is the removal of Marmot and Little Sandy dams on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers and cessation of power generation, which will result in restoration of the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers to free flowing status. In addition, in order to protect the instream benef'~ that will occur as a result of decommissioning the Project, PGE will, as part of the decommissioning process, assign its Bull Run Project hydroelectric Surface Water Registration to the Oregon Water Resources Department, which will convert it to an Instream Water Right.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Pcrdand GeneralElectric Company Project No. 477 Page 13 of 19 Joint F~lanatory Stmement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Under State law, an '"Instream Water Right" is a Water Right Certificate for instream purposes, held in trust by the Oregon Water Resources Department for the benefit of the people of the State of Oregon. The purposes of the instream flows protected by an Instream Water Right are for public uses relating to (a) recreation and scenic attraction, (b) protection and maintenance of water quality, and (c) conservation, maintenance and enhancement of aquatic and fish life, wildlife and fish and wildlife habitat. Thus, conversion of PGE's water right to an instream water right will help protect all of the values associated with free-flowing rivers.

C. Dispeslflon of PGE Lands

All Project and non-Project lands owned by PGE in the Bull Run area of the Sandy River basin, except for the lands associated with Roslyn Lake, will be donated to Western Rivers Conservancy to help establish conservation corridors on both the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers to ensure long-term management of the lands to accomplish four objectives: protect and restore riparian habitat; protect the integrity of river ecosystems; establish connections and corridors between habitat units for terrestrial wildlife; and provide low-impact public access to the rivers and lands, consistent with the above objectives.

PGE owns approximately 1,938 acres of lands in the Bull Run area of the Sandy River basin. Approximately 1,058 acres are Project La~s associated with the Project. Most of these Project Lands are the site of Project facilities and will he involved in decommissioning. The remaining 880 acres of non-Project lands are not involved in decommissioning. Some of the Non-Project Lands are on or near the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers, while others are uplands removed from the rivers. The PGE lands, on both the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers, are an integral part of the river ecosystem with high values for aquatic and terrestrial species alike, especially in light of the proposed removal of Marmot and Little Sandy River Dams. As a result, these lands could he the core for conservation corridors that would serve the goals, not only of fish and wildlife habitat, but also public recreation for visitors fi'om the nearby Portland metropolitan area.

With that in mind, in 1999 PGE entered into a working relationship with the Western Rivers Conservancy ("WRC") to develop a strategy for conserving PGE's land base on the two rivers with maximum benef'~ for the public. WRC made a commitment to acquire privately owned lands on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers that are interspersed with PGE lands in order to assemble continuous conservation corridors on both rivers. The lands surrounding Roslyn Lake were specifically excluded from this partnership, with PGE retaining ownership of and control over disposition.

WRC investigated options for permanent land stewardship and concluded that a partnership with the federal Bureau of Land Management would he the best course of action on the Sandy River. The BLM had a record of land stewardship and river management on the middle and lower Sandy River and had already established an "Area

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland GeneralElectric Company Project No. 477 Page 14 of 19 Joint Explanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

of Critical Environmental Concern" (ACEC) on the fiver. On the Little Sandy River, the WRC coordinated with the Mt. Hood National Forest, which owns the headwaters of the river. Downstream from the National Forest boundary, PGE owns two trams of land totaling 281 acres, including Little Sandy Dam. The WRC identified four additional privately owned parcels on the Little Sandy totaling 492 acres.

WRC worked with the Oregon delegation to Congress to secure the first appropriation from the Land & Water Conservation Fund to enable the BLM to purchase lands on the Sandy River in Fiscal Year 2001. The appropriation of $750,000 was later increased by $500,000. PGE donated 60 acres to WRC adjoining the 152-acre purchase and the total 212 acres was conveyed to the BLM in April of 2001.

WRC assisted BLM by negotiating an option to purchase a portion of the Minsinger Bench Ranch including lands along 1.5 miles of the Sandy where Wildcat Creek and Alder Creek enter from the south. This property was threatened with a major aggregate mine. WRC exercised its purchase option on this 272-acre parcel and closed its purchase on May 1, 2001, utilizing an interest-free loan from PGE's parent company's "Enron Fund." Congress appropriated an additional $3,000,000 from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to the BLM for the Sandy River project for Fiscal Year 2002, and this enabled the BLM to buy the Minsinger Bench tract in April of 2002. Additional purchases of 545 acres on the Sandy River are planned by the BLM in Fiscal Year 2002.

As an outgrowth of this project, the WRC is acquiring lands both north and south of the Sandy River, in the vicinity of Wildcat Creek, that will connect the Bull Run Watershed Management Area of the Mt. Hood National Forest to the north with the Salmon- Huckleberry Wilderness Area to the south. If Highway 26 can be bridged, this will provide a corridor for terrestrial wildlife between two major public land habitat areas.

PGE and the WRC had anticipated that Little Sandy River lands would be acquired and conveyed to the Mt. Hood National Forest for management. However, in 2001 Congress passed legislation expanding the Bull Run Watershed Management Area of the Mr. Hood National Forest to include the Little Sandy watershed. This raised the prospect that if Little Sandy lands were conveyed to the Forest Service any and all public access would be prohibited. PGE and WRC concluded that they should entrust the lands to an agency, private or public, which would include public access among its management goals. It is possible the Forest Service can take title to a portion of the lands if the management objectives can be met. The goal of ensuring responsible public acce~ on the Little Sandy River was subsequently endorsed by the Bull Run Hydro Project Decommissioning Working Group.

PGE's donations of land to Western Rivers Conservancy are intended to accomplish two purposes: to ensure long-term management of the lands consistent with the objectives above; and to assist WRC in acquiring other private lands within the Sandy and Little Sandy corridors. It is WRC's commitment to place the land with a steward that will ensure the lands will be managed consistent with those objectives in perpetuity. Funds that the WRC realizes by selling donated land to the Bureau of Land Management are to

Bull Run HydroelectricProject PortlandGeneral EleclricComl~ny ProjectNo. 477 Page 15 of 19 Joint E~lanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

cases, PGE may donate non-Project lands that are located well away from the Sandy and Little Sandy and have little significance to the river ecosystem. In those eases, PGE anticipates that WRC will utilize the donated lands to trade for lands within the conservation corridors. No donations of Project Lands will be made until the Bull Run Project has been decommissioned and facilities removed. Except to the extent required by ongoing operations or dam removal, PGE will manage the lands consistent with the long-term management objectives until they are conveyed to WRC.

PGE and the WRC anticipate that the process for disposing of PGE lands and assembling conservation corridors will continue at least until 2012. Land purchases on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers are being made on an opportunity basis, as landowners agree to sell land at a reasonable price. Conveyances will be made to federal agencies as they receive funding from the Land & Water Conservation Fund or other sources. Although funding is unpredictable and subject to the vagaries of budget levels and Congressional polities, support has been very strong, however, from the Bureau of Land Management and the Oregon delegation to Congress.

At the end of the disposition process, there will be two conservation corridors for aquatic species on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers. These conservation corridors will be managed to enhance recovery of fish species under the protection of the Endangered Species Act, as well as the more general goal of ecosystem health. Habitat protection and enhancement will combine with dam removal and flow restoration to increase the prospects for species recovery in the Sandy River basin.

D. Whltewater Recreation

No dams exist upstream of the existing Marmot Dam Construction of dams on the Sandy River and Little Sandy Rivers for hydropower generation has obstructed downstream navigation and compromised whitewater recreation opportunities on these respective rivers. In addition, operation of the facilities dewaters the river channel in a fashion that either eliminates or greatly reduces the number of days available each year for whitewater recreation. Furthermore, the diversion of water in the respective rivers has decreased the annual peaks in the hydrograph resulting in alterations to the natural channel features. Removal of dams on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers will restore the natural free-flowing hydrologic features to these respective rivers, remove navigational obstructions and culminate in restoration of habitat and recreation opportunities.

The Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers are uniquely situated near Portland to provide a varied experience ranging from easy to challenging whitewater opportunities for the public. Water currently diverted at Marmot Dam for hydropower operations will remain in the Sandy River after the decommissioning of the Project. The existing river channel between Marmot dam and the diversion return contains two distinct sections. These two runs are the Sandy River Gorge, a 6.5 mile Class III+-IV river reach and the Revenue Bridge Run, a 5 mile Class II section. Marmot Dam removal will put the full natural flow of the Sandy River back into this 11.5 mile section of the Sandy River.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany Project No. 477 Page 16 of 19 Joint E~lanalory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Removal of Marmot Dam is expected to significantly increase the available user days on the Sandy River Gorge and Revenue Bridge whitewater sections. Under the existing Project operations, both sections are boated on an irregular basis between November and May as water exceeds Project diversion capacity and overtops the dam. Removal of Mam~t Dam will restore natural flows adding significantly to boating opportunities. Free flowing conditions will increase the probability of boatable flows during the winter months and extend the whitewater recreation season into July. This increase in flow nearly doubles the available boater days. In this unique situation the increase in boating days will benefit both novice and advanced boaters. Commercial ra~ing is also likely to increase in these sections of river due to the increased volume and reliability of the flow.

Approval of the Settlement Agreement is in the Public Interest

As early as 1908, President Teddy Roosevelt understood the need to safeguard our nation's rivers and helped to devise a system of periodic review to protect these national treasures"

"The public must retain control of the great waterways. It is essential that any permit to obstruct them for reasons that seem good at the moment should be subject to revision when changed conditions demand.''2

When the periodic review process for PGE's Bull Run Hydroelectric Project began in the late 1990% several years prior to license expiration, it became evident to all stakeholders, including PGE, that conditions had changed, both locally and nationally. The Sandy River Basin is home to several fish species recently listed under the Endangered Species Act. And, importantly, society is increasingly realizing that dams cannot and do not last forever.

For more than 90 years, PGE's Bull Run Hydroelectric Project has provided an important public benefit - low cost liydropower. However, such a benefit has not come without a cost to the environment. Over the past several decades, the scientific community has advanced our understanding of rivers and helped us understand the negative impacts that dams have on river systems. Marmot and Little Sandy Dams are no exception, with historic and existing operations that decidedly favor power production over the ecological needs of the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers.

The adverse effects of the Bull Run Project are now well documented. Some of the most significant include adult and juvenile mortality of anadromous salmonids that pass Marmot Dam, and alteration of the natural flow regimes in both the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers. Marmot Darn diverts water for power generation, reducing flows in the Sandy River below the dam. Little Sandy Dam completely dewaters the river teach below the dam, disrupting river connectivity, eliminating access to historic habitat, and isolating populations and habitats for a range of species.

2 (Quoted in) HJL Rep. No. 507, 99e' Cong., 2d Sess. 11 (1986).

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElecfficCompany Project No. 477 Page 17 of 19 Joint Explanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

The periodic review process associated with relicensing provides an opportunity to address such negative impacts and re-evaluate the appropriate use of a river's resources and the future operations of the hydropuwer project. It often results in the identification of structural upgrades and operational modifications necessary to comply with modern environmental standards and to ensure the protection and restoration of valuable fisheries, natural ecosystem functions, and natural flow regimes.

At the outset of the review process for the Bull Run Project, PGE determined that removing the Project rather than continuing to operate under conditions that would likely he required pursuant to relicensing was the most cost effective and environmentally sound decision. Many in the region have applauded PGE's decision as a positive step in ongoing salmon recovery efforts. The ecological benefits that will result from dam removal are numerous. And, river restoration advocates welcome the prospect of a major river system flowing relatively untamed from headwater tributaries to its confluence with the mighty Columbia River.

Experience has shown us that dam removal can be a critical river restoration tool, eliminating the ongoing impacts of the dams and restoring free flowing rivers.3 The record is replete with information detailing the multitude of environmental benefas that removing Marmot and Little Sandy Dams will provide. The dynamic nature of both the Sandy and Little Sandy River systems will be restored, with water returning to the Little Sandy River for the first time in about 100 years. Restoration of the natural flow regime is expected to bring about increases in biodiversity and population densities of native aquatic organisms. On the Sandy River, juvenile and adult salmonids will no longer have to navigate past Marmot Dam on their migration to and from the ocean. Critical salmonid habitat on the Little Sandy River that has been inaccessible for years will now he accessible.

In addition, PGE's proposal contains two particularly noteworthy elements with regard to protection of lands and instream flows. Disposition of PGE's project and non-project lands as proposed and conversion of its water rights instream will promote long-term protection of the Sandy and Little Sandy River ecosystems.

The range of measures contained in the Decommissioning Plan demonstrates PGE's commitment to environmental stewardship of a public resource from which it has benefited for ninny years. However, the review process revealed that those power generation benefits historically provided by the Project no longer outweigh its costs. While Parties expect removal of the Bull Run Project to improve environmental conditions in the Basin, continuing to operate the Project will provide marginal economic benefits at best. Numerous factors, including changed societal values, contributed to the determination that free-flowing, healthy Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers are more valuable than the power generation produced by the Project. Removal of PGE's Bull Run Hydroelectric Project is the alternative that best serves the public interest. As a result, the

3 Just a few monthsafter the EdwardsDam in Maine was breached, significantsigns of a restoredriver were already being seen.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland GeneralElectric Company Project No. 477 Page 18 of 19 Joint Explanatory Statement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

benefits provided by healthy free-flowing Sandy and Little Sandy rivers - better water quality, revitalized fisheries, new recreational opportunities - will soon be enjoyed.

Request for Expedited Consideration

All Parties to the Settlement Agreement agree that the Settlement Agreement is fair and reasonable and in the public interest. Because the Settlement Agreement contemplates the immediate initiation of mitigation measures as well as a complex chain of events leading to Project removal, the Parties respectfully request that the Commission approve the Settlement, and the accompanying documents being filed today with the Commission, on an expedited basis.

Conclusion

On behalf of all Parties to the Settlement Agreement, PGE respectfully requests that the Commission approve, as expeditiously as possible, the Bull Run Decommissioning Settlement Agreement, as well as PGE's application to amend the Project License, PGE's Application to Surrender Project License, and the accompanying Decommissioning Plan.

Respectfully submitted,

Julie A. Keil Director, Hydro Licensing Portland General Electric Company Tel: 503-464-8864

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland GeneralElectric Coml~my Project No. 477 Page 19 of 19 Joim Krplanamry Smtemera Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

SURRENDER APPLICATION FOR THE BULL RUN HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC Project No. 477

F~ed by m PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY With the FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF HYDROPOWER LICENSING WASHINGTON, DC

I November 2002

J Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

SURRENDER APPLICATION m FOR THE BULL RUN HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC Project No. 477

aim

alJ

FUcd by PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY With tl~ FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF HYDROPOWER LICENSING WASHINGTON, DC

November 2002 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

m EXHIBIT A: PROJECT DESCRIPTION I (1) Description of Project Works ! (a) Dams and Spillways 1 Co) Water Conveyance Systems 2 (c) Project Forebay - Roslyn Lake 3 (d) Intake and Penstocks 3 (e) Powerhonse 3 (f) Tailrace 4 (g) Substation/Transmission Lines 4 (2) Descriptionof Impoundments 5 (3) Descriptionof Turbines and Generators 5 (4) Specificationsof Any Additional Mechanical, Electrical,and Transmission Equipment Appurtenant to the Project 5 a (5) Lands of the United States 6 (6) Proposed Plans for Decommissioning 6 EXHIBIT B: PROJECT OPERATION AND RESOURCE UTULIZATION 8 (1) Project Operation 8 (2) Capacity and Average Annual Energy Production 9 (a) Dependable Capacity and Average Annual Energy Production 9 Co) Supplemental Data 9 (c) Hydraulic Capacity of the Powerplant 9 (d) Tallwater Rating Curve 10 (e) Powerplant Capability Versus Head 1O I (3) Power Utilization 10 (4) Plans for Future Development 10 EXHIBIT C: CONSTRUCTION HISTORY AND PROPOSED DECOMMISSIONING SCHEDULE 26 m (1) Construction History 26 (a) Initial Developments 26 (b) Commencement of Commercial Operation 27 (c) Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Additions and Modifications 27 (2) Proposed Schedule for Decommissioning 29 EXHIBIT D: STATEMENT OF COSTS AND FINANCING 31 J (I) Odginai cost of Existing Unlicensed Facilkies 31 (2) Estimated Amount Payable upon Federal Takeover 31 (a) Fair Market Value 31

m Co) Net Investment 31 (c) Severance Damages 32 (3) Estimated DecommissioningCosts 32

a (4) Estimated Average Annual Cost of the Project 32 (5) Estimated Annual Value of Projected Power 33 (6) Source and Extent of Financing and Annual Revenues 33 EXHIBIT F: GENERAL DESIGN DRAWINGS AND SUPPORTING DESIGN REPORT 34 m (1) C~neral Design Drawings 34 (2) Supporting Design Report - DecommissioningPlan 34 EXHIBIT G: PROJECT LANDS AND BOUNDARY 35 Ill (1) Detail Maps 35 (2) Project Bonndary 35 (3) Federal Lands 35 911 (4) Non-Federai Lands 35

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project i Poctland General Electric C~y 4tl PERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE B-I: Bull Run Hydroelectric Projec~ January Flow Duration Curve ...... 17

FIGURE B-2: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project February Flow Duration Curve ...... 18

FIGURE B-3: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project March Flow Duration Curve ...... 19

FIGURE B-4: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project April Flow Duration Curve ...... 20

FIGURE B-5: Bull Run Hydroelc~m'ic Project May Flow Duration Curve...... 21

FIGURE B-6: Bull Run Hydroeleclric Projecl June Flow Duration Curve...... 22

FIGURE B-7: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project July Flow Duration Curve ...... 23

FIGURE B-8: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project August Flow Duration Curve ...... 24

FIGURE B-9: Bull Run Hydroelectric Projecl Sept~ Flow Duration Curve ...... 25 I FIGURE B-10: Bull Run Hydronlec~c Project October Flow Duration Curve ...... 26

FIGURE B-I 1: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project November Flow Duration Curve ...... 27

FIGURE 13-12: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project December Flow Duration Curvv ...... 28

FIGURE B-13: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Annual Flow Duration Curve ...... 29

Bull Run Hych'ceMctricProjec~ ii Portland CnmeralElectric Company ,~ FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE A-I : Bull Run Hydroelectric Project l~ndment Data ...... 4

TABLE B-I : Average Annual Generation at the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project (1995-99) ...... 13

TABLE B-2: Median, Mean, Maximum, and Minimum Annual and Monthly Flows at Sandy River below the Bull Run Rive~ Confluence (USGS Gage No. 14142500) Period of Record: Water Year 1910-14; 1929-66; and 1984-97 ...... 15

TABLE B-3: Median, Mean, Maximum, and Mininmm Annual and Monthly Flows at Sandy River above Marmot Dam (USGS Gage No. 14137000) Period of Record: Water Year 1911-97 ...... 15

TABLE B-4: Median, Mean, Maximum, and Minimum Annual and Monthly Flows at the Little Sandy River just above the diversion dam (USGS gage No. 14141500) Period of Record: Water Year 1911-13; 1919-97 ...... 16

TABLE B-5: Median, Mean, Maxirmlm, and Minimum Annual and Monthly Flows at the Bull Run River (USGS Gage No. 14140000) Period of Record: Water Year 1959-97 ...... 16

Bull Run HydroelectricProject iii Portland GeneralElectric ComI~eny FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

411

al LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

BLM Bureau of Land Management CFR Code of Federal Regulations cfs cubic feet per second FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission gpd gallons per day MHNF Mr. Hood National Forest msl mean sea level MWH meguwatt hours ODFW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife PGE Portland General Electric RCC roller-compacted concrete RM rive~ mile rpm revolutions per m/nute PRI.,&P Portland Railway, Light & Power Company USFS United States Forest Service USGS United States Geological Survey WSHCC Westside Hydro Conn'ol Center

Bull Ran H~lroelectric Project iv Portland General Electric Comply FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

United States of America

Before the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

) ) Portland General ) Project No. 477 Electric Company ) ) )

Application for Surrender of License for Major Project

. Pursuant to 18 CFR Part 6, Portland General Electric Company ("PGE"), licensee for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 477 (the "Project"), hereby applies to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC') to surrender the license for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 477. As required by 18 CFR §6.1, this surrender application is being filed in the same form and manner as an application for license.

The current license for the Project was issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on May !, 1980, with an effective date of November 17, 1974, and an expiration date of November 16, 2004. On November 12, 1999, PGE f'ded a notice of its intent not to seek a new license for the Project. On March 2, 2000, the FERC issued a public notice of PGE's filing, in which FERC stated: "If tbe licensee does not, by two years prior to the expiration of the current license, file an application to surrender the current license, the Commission will

g apply the relicense competition procedures set forth in its regulations at 18 CFR 16.25 (1999)."

a PGE decided not to seek a new licensc for the Proj~t, because it concluded that the likely cost of providing the necessary level of protection, mitigation, and enhancement for the fish, wildlife, and other resources affected by the Project would outweigh the economic benefit of II generation at the Project over the life of a new license. As described in tim Joint Explanatory Statement that accompanies this filing, after notifying FERC of its intent not to relicense the Project, PGE convened a working group composed of governmental and non-governmental

II stakeholders in the Project to develop a Decommissioning Plan that would maximize benefits to the resources affected by the Project, consistent with PGE's obligations as a regulated public utility. As described in the Joint Explanatory Statemem, these efforts were successful,

a and this Surrender Application is accompanied by a Settlement Agreement signed by 23 parties.

Bull Run Hydroclec~c Project Portland General Electric Company d FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

2. The location of the Project is:

State: Oregon County: Clackamas Nearby Town: Sandy Stream: Sandy, Little Sandy, and Bull Run Rivers

3. The exact name, business address, and telephone number of the applicant are:

Portland General Electric Company 121 S. W. Salmon Street Portland, OR 97204 (503) 464-8864

The exact name and business address of each person authorized to act as agent for the applicant in this application are:

Julie KeiL Director Hydro Licensing and Water Rights Portland General Electric Company 121 S. W. Salmon Street Portland, OR 97204

am . The applicant is a domestic corporation and is not claiming preference under Section 7(a) of the F~deral Power Act.

N (i) The statutory or regulatory requirements of the State in which the Project is located and that affect the Project as proposed, with respect to bed and banks and to the appropriation, diversion, and use of water for power purposes, and with respect to the right to engage in the business of developing, transmitting, and distributing power and in any other business necessary to accomplish the purposes of the license under the Federal Power Act are:

Chapter 757 et. seq., Oregon Revised Statutes, defines public utilities and regulates the business of retail distribution of electricity by the Public Utility Commission of Oregon. am Chapters 543 and 543A et. seq., Oregon Revised Statutes, governs appropriation, diversion, and use of water for hydropower generation and provides for the reauthorization of #11 hydropower projects.

Chapter 468B, Oregon Revised Statutes, governs the issuance by the Oregon Department of ,at Environmental Quality of the water quality certification required for federally-licensed hydroelectric projects under Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §1341 (§ 401). am

Bull Run HydroeMctric Project Portland General ElectricCompany I FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

(ii) The steps which the applicant has taken or plans to take to comply with each of the laws cited above are:

PGE is an electric utility organized under the laws of the State of Oregon in good standing with the Oregon Secretary of State's Office.

PGE currently holds water fights to divert up to 800 cubic feet per second of the waters of the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers through Roslyn Lake to the Bull Run River for the purpose of hydroelectric generation at the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project.

As required by ORS Chapter 468B and the Settlement Agreement, PGE has submitted, with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, an application for Section 401 Water Quality Certification of this Application for Surrender of License for and Decommissioning of Major Project.

/ 5. The name and address of the owners of existing Project faeifities are:

Portland General Electric Company 121 SW Salmon Street Portland, OR 97204.

This Application for Surrender for a Major Project, is executed in the

STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH ¢

. -- can't i'~'"} I By~'o|,~J I~.t..'l . the~,Jco%t~.Oset," of Portland General Electric Company, 121 S. W. Salmon Street, Portland, OR 97204, being truly sworn, deposes and says that the contents of this application are true to the best of his/her knowledge or belief. The undersigned applicant has signed this application this~ day of Gc~a ~ ,20Q~

m Portland General Electric Company

i SUBSCRIB~ED AND SWORN TO before me, a Notary Public of the State of Oregon, this Q__.~_~'tK day of o~-'~,b.~- ,20~.

My Commission Expires: omc I g wo~.~u A ~Y I NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON I COMMI8810N NO. 332450 | F OOMMISION EXPIRE8 MARCH 24, 2004 I

Bull Run Hych'(~lectric Project Portland Gena'al Elec;Tic Company "" FERC No. 4'/7 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

United States of America

Before the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

) ) Portland General ) Project No. 477 Electric Company ) ) )

I Statement Pursuant to 18 C.F.IL § 4.32

(1) Name and address of every person, citizen, association of citizens, domestic corporation, municipality, or state that has any proprietary right necessary to operate, or decommission and remove the Project:

Portland General Electric Company 121 SW Salmon Street Portland, Oregon 97204

(2) Name and address of every county in which any part of the Project, and any Federal facilities that are used by the Project are located:

Clackarnas County Clackamas County Commission 906 Main Street Oregon City, OR 97045

(3) Name and address of every city, town, or similar local political subdivision in which any part of the Project, and any Federal facilities that are used by the Project, are located: 411 City of Sandy 39250 Pioneer Blvd. i Sandy, OR 97055-8001

Lands occupied by the Project include federal lands managed by: J United States Forest Service Bureau of Land Management Mt. Hood National Forest 1717 Fabry Road SE 16400 Champion Way Salem OR 97306 Sandy, OR 97055

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland GenexalElectric Coml~my a FERC No. 477 SurrenderApplica~on Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

(4) Name and address of every city, town, or similar local political subdivision that b.as a population of 5,000 or more people and is located within 15 miles of the Project dams:

City of Sandy 39250 Pioneer Blvd. Sandy, OR 97055-8001

(5) Name and address of every irrigation district, drainage district, or similar special purpose political subdivision in which any part of the Project and any Federal facilities that would be used by the Project, would be located:

Not applicable

(6) Name and address of every irrigation district, drainage district, or similar special purpose political subdivision that owns, operates, maintains, or uses any Project facilities or any Federal facilities that would be used by the Project:

Not applicable

(7) Name and address and address of every other political subdivision in the general area of the Project that there is reason to believe would likely be interested in, or affected by, the surrender application:

Oregon Division of State Lands Portland Bureau of Water Works 775 Summer Street, NE, Suite 100 Atm: Rosermry Menard Salem, OR 97301-1279 1001 Southwest 5 th Avenue Suite 450 Portland OR 97204.

(8) Name and address of all Indian tribes that may be affected by the Project:

Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon

Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Indian Reservation

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 SurrenderApplication Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

EXHIBIT A: PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PGE proposes to decommission and remove all Project works according to the plan and schedule contained in the Decommissioning Plan accompanying this Surrender Application. As described in detail in the Decommissioning Plan, Project removal will commence in July 2007 and be completed by December 2009. The Project site will be restored, ownership of Project lands will be transferred to non-governmental organizations or to third-party owners, and water rights will be transferred in-stream. This Exhibit describes the existing Project works and briefly summarizes the treatment of these facilities pursuant to the Decommissioning Plan.

(1) Description of Project Works

m The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project is associated with three sub-drainages in the Sandy River Basin: the Sandy River, Little Sandy River, and Bull Run River. All three rivers J originate on the west slope of Mt. Hood in Northwestern Oregon. The Little Sandy flows into the Bull Run at River Mile (RM) 2.6, and the Bull Run empties into the Sandy at RM 18.4. This major water power project consists of: two diversion darns -- Marmot and Little Sandy; a complex system of canals, tunnels, and flumes; a forebay -- Roslyn Lake; an intake structure; penstock; powerhouse; tailrace; and transmission lines from the powerhouse to a substation. The project configuration is shown on the project works drawings in Exhibit F of this application.

(a) Dams and Spillways a Marmot Dam, rebuilt in 1989, is a concrete-encased, roller-compacted concrete, gravity dam. It has a crest length of approximately 345 feet and rises about 47 feet above the riverbed. The main section of the dam is 195-feet long. On the north end of the dam, a concrete gravity-section wing dam extends downstream to provide 140 feet of additional spillway, and to direct water to an intake structure. The concrete wing dam has a height I of 5 feet, thickness at crest of 3 feet and at the base the thickness is approximately 7 feet. The structure is anchored to the foundation rock by steel rods. The intake structure has a trash rack and two radial (tainter) gates that regulate the diversion flow into the concrete g canal system. The pond area upstream from the dam has no storage capacity, because it is silted to the level of the dam crest. A concrete fish ladder facility at the south end of the at dam provides upstream fish passage. Each of two tainter gates controlling the water diversion at Marmot Dam is powered by an electric motor. Gate position controls the diversion flow into the canal. The gates are controlled by an automated control system utilizing a programmable logic controller to divert the flow selected from the PGE Westside Hydro Control Center (WSHCC), located J near Estacada, Oregon. The automatic control system uses measurements of flow in the Sandy River and the canal system to ensure that minimum river flows are maintained. River levels, canal levels, and gate position are monitored at the WSHCC. mt The spillway is a free overflow type. It has a variable crest elevation ranging from 732.1 feet mean-sea-level (msl) at the center to 735.5 feet near the south abutment. This ma variability is designed to improve the flows near the fish ladder entrance, especially Bull Run Hydroelectric Project I Pcctland Genial Electric Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Application

I Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

during low flows. There are two rows of baffle blocks at the toe of the dam to dissipate the energy in the water flowing over the spillway.

The Little Sandy Diversion Dam is 15.75 feet high, with a spillway crest at elevation 702.75 feet. Twelve-inch flashboards minimize the time that water is spilled past the Little Sandy Diversion Dam and allow the wooden flume to be filled to capacity. The free-overflow spillway is 114 feet long, 1.5 feet thick at its crest and approximately 18 feet thick at its base. The spillway passed the flood of record of 5,360 cfs in 1964.

(b) Water ConveyanceSystems

The water conveyance system from the Sandy to the Little Sandy River consists of a concrete-lined canal that is 1,520-feet long, 6 feet deep, 13 feet wide at the bottom, and 25 feet wide at the top. Approximately 700 feet below the Marmot Dam intake, the canal widens for a sand trap and a set of three vertical rotating screens, which are part of the u down-stream migrant bypass system to return downstream migrant fish to the main channel. The fish screen facility includes a bypass flume around the screened section for use if the screens are plugged with trash or are under repair. Capacity of the conveyance system downstream from the fish screens is approximately 600 cfs.

Downstream from the fwst concrete-lined canal section, the diverted water enters two interconnected concrete-lined tunnels (Nos. 3 and 4), with a combined length of 2,188 feet. A concrete canal follows, which is 1,562 feet long and discharges into a 1,550-feet long concrete-lined tunnel (No. 2). Downstream of tunnel No. 2 is a 4,220-foot long concrete canal that discharges into a concrete box flume 575 feet long. From that flume, the water enters tunnel No. 1, which extends 4,702 feet and empties into the Little Sandy River just upstream of the Little Sandy Diversion Dam.

Adjoining the north end of the Little Sandy Diversion Dam is a steel-reinforced, concrete water diversion control structure that controls flow into the Little Sandy wood-box flume. The structure is protected by steel trash racks followed by a 45-feet long concrete transition flume with the lower 15-feet section (on the river side), providing a spillway to divert water to the river if the intake gate at the entrance to the wooden-box flume is partially or completely closed. The intake gate at the head of the wood-box flume is powered by an electric motor operated by an automated control system using a programmable logic controller. The control system maintains the required operating a level in Roslyn Lake by varying the position of the vertical intake gate, and thus the amount of water entering the flume. The gate position and the system parameters are monitored at the WSHCC. Emergency power for the operation of the intake gate and the UJ control system is provided by a propane-fuel emergency generator adjacent to the Little Sandy Diversion Dam.

J The wood-box flume is 14,900 feet long, approximately 9.5 feet deep and 14 feet wide. The wooden flume begins at the north abutment of the Little Sandy Diversion Dam and crosses the Little Sandy River about 200 feet downstream. The flume then follows the rill southern bank of the Little Sandy and Bull Run rivers at a height of 15 to 75 feet above the ground. It crosses several canyons on timber and steel bent support structures that are

.m similar to railroad trestles. The existing wood-box flume was reconstructed in 1948 using Bull Run HydroelectricProject 2 PortlandGeneral ElectricCompany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

pressure-treated lumber supported at 4-feet intervals along its entire length. It was designed to carry a flow capacity of 800 cfs. Timber ties along the top of the flume support steel rails for a standard-gage railroad track. The track is used for maintenance and inspection trains, which are propelled by diesel engine-driven "speeders." The ties also support a wood plank walkway. Both the rail and walkway extend the full length of the flume.

The downstream end of the wood-box flume connects to a reinforced concrete transition structure, which discharges into a trapezoidal concrete-fined canal. These two structures total about 850 feet in length. These discharge into a tunnel (Tunnel No. 0), approximately 11 feet in diameter and 457 feet long. The tunnel discharges through a short 248-feet long concrete canal into the southeast arm of Roslyn Lake.

N Roslyn Lake is an entirely rr~n-n'~le lake, which was constructed in 1911. Approximately 8,000 feet of earth-fill dike sections form the perimeter of the lake. The main dike encloses the east, west, and north sides of the lake. A separate dike forms part of the south shore of the lake. The dikes vary in height depending on the elevation of the contour of the ground at the base. The highest portions of the dike are 45 feet above the base elevation, on the north side of the lake. The top (crest) of the dike is at a nominal elevation of 657.0 feet msl. The dike crest elevation varies by approximately 6 inches over its length. Crest width averages about 10 feet. Earth and rock buttresses are installed on the north and west dike sections to improve stability for earthquake loadings.

(d) Intake and Penstocks

A reinforced concrete intake structure is located at the northeast corner of Roslyn Lake. It includes trash racks, three 10-foot diameter butterfly type penstock control valves, and air intake pipes and valves for use in filling and draining the penstocks. The top of the intake structure is at elevation 662 feet rml. The original installation included equipment for two complete penstocks and a 158-feet section for a future penstock (No. 3), which was removed in 1977. Each butterfly valve has a geared motor and is actuated either by a adl push-button station at the gatehouse or by remote control from the powerhouse switchboard. Power service to the penstock gatebouse also serves a trash rack cleaning

all hoist. Penstocks Nos. 1 and 2 are 1,211 feet long, 9 feet in diameter, and made of riveted steel. The penstocks are buried and each one leads to a steel bifurcation structure in the dll embankment behind the powerhouse. Each bifurcation in turn connects to two 6.5-foot diameter penstocks to supply individual turbines in the powerhouse. Each penstock also

ms has a steel surge tank with a 5-foot diameter steel pipe riser to a tank with a top elevation of 657.0 feet msl. Each penstock has two expansion joints (slide couplings) installed to allow for movement of the hillside surrounding the penstocks.

I (e) Powerhouse

I Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Pcctland General ElecxricCornIJ~ny FERC No. 477 SurrenderApplication

~s Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

The Project powerhouse is located on the left bank of the Bull Run River. It is an indoor facility, constructed of reinforced concrete with steel roof trusses over the generator room. The powerhouse is equipped with an overhead bridge-type-traveling crane of 30- ton capacity. Four main horizontal hydro turbine-generator units and two abandoned 300-hp auxiliary turbine-generators are in the room. Behind the generator room and above the buried penstocks, there is a reinforced concrete structure two stories high; the floor of the lower story is about 25 ft above the generator room floor surface. This floor contains an operations Control Room with the main switchboard, and separate panels for telemetry and supervisory operation of water diversion control. A battery room is located behind the control room. On the building's top floor above the control room are two 6.6- kV generator buses with ten oil circuit breakers used for the bus tie, control of two underground cable installations serving the 57-kV step-up transformers in the transformer building, and for the station service bus feed. Two 69-kVA voltage regulators are on the bus feeder.

(O Tailrace

The tailrace includes a concrete weir, approximately 3 feet high, which extends into the main Bull Run River channel to seal the dral~ tubes. There are no other obstructions in the tailrace area.

(g) Substation/Transmission Lines

The main step-up transformers for the plant's generation are located in a reinforced concrete building located above and behind the powerhouse. The installation consists of two 9,000-kVA transformer banks and one spare transformer. Each transformer bank has three, single-phase, 3 MVA, 6.6-57 kV, water-cooled transformers.

Adjacem on the east side of the building comaining the seven step-up transformers is an outdoor-type transmission switchyard constructed in 1954, with structural steel supports N for 57-kV buses and related equipment. Overhead conductors from two 57-kV buses in the upper portion of the transformer building connect the outdoor buses. Connected to each set of conductors is a lightning arrester. Between the arresters and the connection all with the outdoor bus is a disconnect switch. The two 57-kV bus sections have a tie controlled by an oil circuit breaker. Identical oil circuit breakers and disconnecting switches are in the circuits connected to the buses and two outgoing 57-kV transmission am lines. One line goes to the Dunns Comer substation, and the other line goes east to the Brightwood - Mt. Hood area. The switchyard includes switching and metering equipment for the 57-kV transmission line from the City of Portland's two hydroelectric generating plants on the Bull Run River. The circuit in the switchyard from the City's project is connected to a circuit breaker and metering equipment and then to a circuit going to the Dunn's Comer substation. It is not connected to the Bull Run bus although the equipment is located in the Bull Run switchyard.

Generated power leaves the Project via a single circuit 57-kV transmission line extending I approximately 2.8 nil. west from the Bull Run switchyard to the Bull Run-Dunn's Comer substation. A 12.5 kV line enters the Project to provide auxiliary station power. While

d Bull Run HydroelectricProject 4 • Portland C~ncral ElectricCompeny FERC No. 477 Surrender Al~l~calion Im Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

the City of Portland's hydroelectric project transmission line passes through the Bull Run switchyard, it is not part of the Bull Run Project. (2) Description of lmpmmdments

Table A-1 provides specific information about the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project impoundments.

Table A-1 Buff Run Hydroelectric Project Impoundment Data

Normal Maximum Water 18 acres I 3 acres I 160 acres Surface Area Normal Maximum Water 742 feet [PGE datum] 710 feet [PGE ] 655.0 feet [PGE Surface Elevation datum] [ datum] Gross Storage Capacity [ None None 2,000 acre-feet Usable Storage Capacity I None None I 928 acre-feet

(3) Description of Turbines and Generators

Each of the four main hydroelectric turbines is a horizontal, Francis-type, rated for 8,200 hp at a 320-ft design head and an operating speed of 514 revolutions per minute (rpm). Turbine unit Nos. 1 and 2 were manufactured by Wellman-Seaver-Morgan, and Nos. 3 and 4 were manufactured by the PLatt Iron Works. Turbine unit Nos. 2, 3, and 4 were installed in 1912; No. 1 was installed in 1922. In 1991-1993, three new rormers from American Hydro replaced the old runners in unit Nos. 1, 3, and 4. Each turbine has a pressure refief mechanism. Ahead of each turbine casing is a hydraulic pressure operated gate-type vertical lift valve. Turbine Nos. 1 and 2 have 54-inch cast steel valves, and Nos. 3 and 4 ha~/e 60-ineh valves. In 1980, the original belt-driven governors on the four main turbines were replaced by Woodward governing equipment with equipment necessary to use the original turbine wicket-gate servomotor drive and linkage components.

The four main generators are of Westinghouse manufacture, and are of the indoor open- type with horizontal shaft direct-connected to their turbine. Rating of each generator is 5,250 kW, 6,250 kVA at 0.84 power factor, 6,600-volt, 3-phase, 60-Hertz at 514 rpm. Excitation is provided by Basler static exciters, installed in 1983.

m (4) Specifications of Any Additional Mechanical, Electrical, and Transmission Equipment Appurtenant to the Project a~ The City of Portland constructed a diversion facility in 1958 to tap their municipal water supply conduits Nos. 2 and 4, which cross PGE property along an easement strip near the

Bull Run H!gh'oelectricProject Potlland General Elec~c Comlxmy FERC No. 477 5urrender Appllcation d Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

northeasterly side of Roslyn Lake. Two steel delivery pipes, 52-inches and 66-inches in diameter and controlled by ball valves, feed the diversion tower, which is a reinforced concrete structure built within the Roslyn Lake dike. The pipes discharge into a concrete- lined spillway. The spillway terminates at a concrete apron and energy-absorbing structure with baffle wall at its mid point, followed by a sill and by riprap to protect the lake bed. Diversion capacity from the City's conduit Nos. 2 and 4 is approximately 260 cfs.

(s) Lands of the United States

PGE owns the majority of lands within the Project boundary. Other ownership or management includes Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land at the Marmot Dam location and the concrete flume section. A section of the wooden-box flume lies within the Mr. Hood National Forest (MHNF), both on land owned by PGE and on land owned by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Land above the tunnel between the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers is not within the Project boundary since this feature, the tunnel, does not add any land acreage to the Project. The Project transmission line corridor, which runs west to Bluff Road, lies on private and BLM lands. Total land within the Project boundary is approximately 606 acres, of which 84 percent is PGE-owned, 9 percent is BLM-managed or State-owned, and 3 percent is managed by the USFS. The remainder is privately owned by parties other than PGE. (6) Proposed Plans for Decommissioning

PGE is proposing to surrender its current operating license for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project and decommission the project. Through a collaborative process with interested agencies, non-government organiTations, and members of the general public, PGE has developed a decommissioning plan that balances the environmental, human, and economic considerations related to the Project.

An assessment of various decommissioning alternatives has been completed in conjunction with members of the collaborative team. Results from this assessment have been compiled into a Project Decommissioning Plan. This plan describes permitting, and construction activities associated with the removal of the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. Environmental impacts of Project removal are discussed in the draft Environmental Assessment and Biological Evaluation that accompany this application.

In general, PGE's proposal consists of the complete removal of both Marmot and the Little Sandy Diversion Dams, along with the dismantling of their associated water conveyance structures. In addition, Roslyn Lake will be drained, the powerhouse generating equipment will be disabled, and the powerhouse structure will be demolished. Descriptions of this proposed action are presented in greater detail in the Decommissioning Plan. All PGE-owned lands within the existing project boundary will be conveyed to the Western Rivers Conservancy once the project is surrendered and al removed, with the expressed intent that these lands be used to protect and conserve fish and wildlife habitat, public access, and recreation opportunities in the Sandy River basin. Project water rights will be relinquished and as a consequence these rights will revert to

t instream use. Overall, this proposed action will result in the cessation of all pro~ect Bull Run HydroelccuicProject 6 Portland General Elecu'icComlmny FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

I energy generation and water diversions; thus, resulting in the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers reverting back to a free-flowing state.

Bull Run Hych'oelectricProject 7 Portland C,¢nvralEleclric Company FERC No. 477 SurrenderAppllcation Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

EXHIBIT B: PROJECT OPERATION AND RESOURCE UTULIZATION

(1) Project Operation

PGE is authorized to use up to 800 cfs of combined flow from the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. Additional water, supplied directly into Roslyn lake by the City of Portland from their municipal water supply conduits, is also used for generation. The City of Portland's facility is capable of supplying up to 260 efs from the Bull Run watershed into Roslyn Lake during periods of excess capacity. At full generation, the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project draws approximately 900 cfs of flow from Roslyn Lake.

Roslyn Lake, the Project forebay, is supplied from the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers' water conveyance system, and from the City of Portland's municipal water supply conduits. There is no significant drainage area for Roslyn Lake so the lake is normally maintained at its full elevation 655 feet rnsl. From that elevation, 7 feet of allowable drawdown provides 928 acre-feet of usable storage. Maintaining Roslyn lake at or near full pool also benefits recreational use of PGE's Roslyn Lake Park facility.

Up to 800 cfs of Little Sandy River flow is diverted into the flume. When Little Sandy flow is less than 800 cfs, which occurs throughout most of the year, Sandy River flow is diverted at Marmot Dam to supplement Little Sandy River flow into Roslyn Lake. Water diverted from the Sandy River is physically limited to 600 efs by the water conveyance system.

Minimum flow requirements below Marmot Dam can further limit the amount of Sandy River water diverted. Since 1976, PGE has been required under its current license to provide the following minimum flows below Marmot Dam: 200 ors-June 16 through October 15; 400 cfs-October 16 through october 31; and 460 cfs-Novernber 1 through June 15. Additionally, the canal level is restricted to 4.7 feet (maximum canal level is 5.8 feet) from March l to May 31 by FERC order dated August 19, 1997, to protect fry during movement downstream. lip The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) currently operates a trapping and sorting facility for several species of salmonids at Marmot Dam. The purpose of this facility is to capture and sort hatchery-reared and wild salmonids; consequently, allowing only wild fish to pass upstream to spawn.

411 On the Little Sandy River, there is no minimum flow release below the diversion dant There is some leakage, and with accretion flows the summer low flow at the mouth is 41 about 5 cfs. To ensure that a flow of 800 cfs can enter the wood-box flume without any flow over the spillway, PGE uses 12-inch flashboards on the Little Sandy Diversion Darn. Minimizing spill is desired to avoid stranding fish in the 1.7-mile reach below the

aa Little Sandy Diversion Dam as water levels recede after spill events.

During low flow periods, the Project is also operated to minimize downstream flow

,m fluctuations in the Bull Run River. Cavitation damage can occur if the units are operated Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 8 Pmaland General Electric Coml~ny FERC No. 477 Surrender Application .4 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

under low flow conditions (around I00 cfs). Under these low flow conditions, the turbines are shut down and water is stored in Roslyn Lake. A single turbine is then operated for a period of time (8-12 hours) and the cycle repeated, typically on a daily basis. Since this condition normally occurs during the recreation season when it is desirable to maintain Roslyn Lake at full pool, lake level is maintained within a 6 to 9- inch band.

(2) Capacity and Average Ann~ Energy Production

(a) Dependable Capacity and Average Annual Energy Production

The dependable capacity for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project is 22 MW. The average annual generation for the period 1995-99 is 110,979 MWH. The annual plant factor, which is def'med as the actual annual generation divided by the theoretical annual generation at rated capacity, is approximately 0.58. Average annual generation for the period 1995-99 is shown in Table B-1.

Table B-1 Average 099s-99)

1999 l I09,736 1998 103,250 1997 116,772 1996 90,030 1995 135,105 Average 110,979

(b) Supplemental Data

Annual and monthly flow duration curves were developed from USGS stream flow data for the Sandy River below the Bull Run River (USGS Gage No. 14142500), the Sandy River just above Marmot Dam (USGS gage No. 14137000), the Little Sandy River just above the diversion dam (USGS gage No. 14141500), and the Bull Run River (USGS Gage No. 14140000). The curves are shown in Figures B-I through B-13. In addition Tables B-2 through B-5 illustrates the median, mean, maximum, and minimum annual and monthly flows for these USGS gages. (c) Hydraulic Capacity of the Powerplant

The powerplant estimated maximum hydraulic capacity (at elevation 655 feet msl) is 900 cfs.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject 9 Portland Gen~'al Elec~c Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Appllca~n m Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

(d) Tailwater Rating Curve

The typical tailwater elevation at the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project is 326.7 feet msl. This elevation almost never varies more than 1-foot. However, there may be a few days during the course of the year when flows in the river are high enough m increase the tallwater elevation by 3 to 4 feet. (e) Powerplant Capability Versus Head

There is 330 feet of head at the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. The net head at the Project does not change more than about 0.2% over the entire operating output range for approximately 97% or more of the year. The Project has 4 units, 2 of which have peak efficiency at full gate. The other 2 units have typically shaped efficiency curves with best efficiency point being at about 80% gate.

(3) Power Utilization

The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project is part of PGE's generation, transmission and distribution system serving 700,000 retail electric customers in and around the Portland Metropolitan Area and within the Willamette Valley corridor south to Salem.

(4) Plans for Future Development

PGE will surrender the current operating license for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project and decommission the project according to the plan and schedule contained in the Decommissioning Plan that accompanies this application.

TABLE B-2 Median, Mean, MaJdmum, and Mlnhnum Annual and Monthly Flows at Sandy River below the Bull Run River Confluence (USGS Gage No. 14142500) Period of Record: Water Year 1910-14; 1929-~and 1984-~

504 I 2480 I 3502 37700 February 626 2320 3355 57500 II March 574 2530 3041 45000 April 550 3100 3398 26800 May 379 2640 2825 17000 June 395 1420 1804 18500 July 111 714 816 3990 August 80 483 499 1360 September 66 443 543 8650 October 63 586 1176 13400 November 63 2080 3204 34800 J December 291 244O 3756 57800 Annual 63 1620 2311 57800

il Bull Run HydroelectricProject 10 Portland Genial Eleca-icCompany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application a Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

TABLE B-3 Median, Mean, Mmdmum, and Minimum Ann~ and Monthly Flows at Sandy River above Marmot Dam (USGS Gage No. 14137000) Period of Record: Water Year 1911-97

January 325 1400 2023 23500 February 329 1370 1891 33800 March 481 1380 1658 19800 April 525 1740 1890 15700 May 473 1680 1804 9150 June 379 1010 1220, 8820 July 301 585 644 2400 August 238 408 428 1750 September 213 360 417 5290 October 193 403 656 10600 November 207 1050 1616 22500 December 218 1420 2087 41400 Annual 193 994 1355 41400

aml TABLE B-4 Median, Mean, Maximum, and Minimum Annual and Monthly Flows at the Little Sandy River just above the diversion dam (USGS gage No. 14141500) mm Period of Record: Water Year 1911-13; 1919-~

Ill

Apdl 36 178 196 2060 May 23 148 163 1100 June 14 75 102 966 11 31 39 474 ml July August 9 19 23 452 September 8 20 39 1080 10 43 87 1610 II October November 11 132 212 3260 December 12 160 243 3320

III Annual 8 97 144 3500

Bull Run Hydr~lectricProject II Portland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

a TABLE B-$ Median, Mean, Maximum, and Minimum Annual and Monthly Flows at the Bull Run River (USGS Gage No. 14140000) Period of Record: Water Year 1959-97

6 I 629 1124[ 13500 is@ February 5 611 997 1~ March 7 538 721 6440 April 6 657 777 4940 May 6 445 551 5120 June 4 106 270 4670 3 8 64 2120 m August 2 5 18 1670 September 2 5 34 1600 October 2 7 191 6570 November 2 520 893 10800 December 3 690 1159 17800 Annual 2 211 564 17900

Bull Run HydroelectricProject 12 Portland General ElectricCompany FERCNo. 477 SurrenderApplication Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

RGURE B-1 Portland General Bectrlc Bull Run Hydroelectric Project January Row Duration Curve

80~ .

7000.

•-o.--Sandy Ri~e¢below Bull Run Rium" Confluence 6O00 -B--Sandy Rher abo~ Man'no( Dam

Uttle Sandy above Little Sandy Dam --)(--Bull Run Ri~erbelow Bull Run 5OOO Flesenolr No. 2

~4000

30OO

2OOO

1000

J 0 -!.--~-,-- 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded a

Ill Bull Run HydroelectricProject 13 Portland General Elccu'icCompany FERC No. 477 SurrenderAppiical~on dt Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

FIGURE B-2 Portland General Beclrlc Bull Run Hydroelectric Project February Row Duration Curve 7000

-.o--Sandy Ri~er below Bull Run Rivet Cc~fluence .-~-- Sandy P,ker abo~ Marmot Dam

-~--D~ Sandy ab°~ Little Sandy

•-~--Bufl Run Rke¢ below Buff Run

0 .+ 0% 10% 20% 30'% 40% 50°/o 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %of 1"line Flow Is EqusIled o¢ Exceeded

i Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 14 Portland General Elcclric Cc~npany FERC No. 477 SurrenderApplication ,J Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

FIGURE B-3 Porti=nd General Bectdc Bull Run Hydrnelectdc Project March Flow Duration Curve 6000

--e--Sandy ~ below Butl Run RM~ Confluence Sandy ~r aJ3o~ Marmot Dam 50OO

~ Sandy above Uttle Sandy

•-x.-- Bull Run Rl~er below Bull Run

40OO

2OOO

1000.

ell

0 ell 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded

J Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 15 Portland C~neral Elec~ic Company I:~qC No. 4.77 Slu~e~r AppHca~on

.m Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

FIGURE B-4 Portland General Electric

41m Bu. Run Hydroelectric Project April Flow Durlltlon Cunm 600O

5000 -e--Sandy River below Bull Run River Confluence -B-Sandy River above Marmot Dam Little Sandy above Little Sandy Dam 4000 ~ Bull Run River below Bull Run

~ 3000 E

2000

NI \ 1000

0 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% % of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded

411 Bull Run Hych'oelectric Project 16 Portland General Electric Comply FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

4ll

FIGURE B-5 Portland Gml Electric Bull Run Hydroelectric Project May Flow Duration Curve 500O

Iml

45~0 Ill --e--Sandy River below Bull Run River Confluence III 4000 ¸ -|l-Sandy River above Marmot Darn --A-- Little Sandy above Little Sand~ I Dam 35O0 --X--Bull Run River below Bull Run Reservoir No. 2 ill

000 , a

iBm ~ 2500 ,

in 2000

Ill 1500

III

1000' Ii

.11 500,

ill

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Jig % of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded

a Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 17 P~land General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Application d Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

RGURE B-6 Portland General Becldc Bull Run Hydroelectric Project June Flow Duration Curve 500 •

3O0O

--*--Sandy River below Bull Run Confluence --B--Sandy Rker aboue Marmot Dam 25OO +Little Sandy above Little Sandy Dem •.-~.- Bull Run River I~low Bull Run Reser~ir No. 2 2OOO

UL 1500

1000

5OO

0~ 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded

all

m, Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 18 Pcxtland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 SurrenderApplication

411 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

FIGURE B-7 am Portland General Elect]tic Bull Run I.lydrcelecUic Project July Row Duration Curve ., 1400 ¸

1200 ¸

1111111 --e--Sandy Rker below Bull Run -- ~. Flker Confluence "~ .--=-- Sandy P,ker abo~ Marmot Dam

600 ¸

II 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50o 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded dll

I Bull Run HydroeleclricProject 19 PortlandGeneral ElectricCompany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application 4 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

FIGURE B-8 Portland General Eleclrlc Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Augu,* Flow Duration Curve 00

7011 -e--Sandy Rh~ below Bull P.ker Confluence I .-m-- Sandy Rl~erabo~ Marmot Dam

E~ Sandy abo~ Little Sandy

~.~ --)(-- Bull Run Rher bek)w But, Run

"--~ .. - 5-.. :: ~ ~ _.... - 0 d 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 20 Portland General Eleca'ic Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Application d Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

FIGURE B-9 Portland General Bectrlc Bull Run Hydroelectric Project September Row Duration Curve 00

00 ~" --e-Sandy Rker below Bull Run Rker Confluence 700 Sandy Ri~erabo~e Ma~ot Dam __

•-*- Sandy abo Littk Sandy

Buff Run P,ker beJowBuJI Run __ 6OO

00 •

100-

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded

Bull Run Hydroeleclzic Project 21 Pc~land Gent~l Elec~ic Coml~ny FERC No. 4"/7 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

III

FIGURE B-10 Portland General Electric Bull Run Hydroelactrlc Project October Flow Duration Curve 30OO

-e-Sandy River below Bull Run River Co~luence 2500 I --B--Sandy River above Marmot Dam 1 -~--Ltttle Sandy above little Sandy Dam Bull Run River below Bull Run Reservoir No. 2 _ 2OOO

v 1500

m 1000

Ill 5OO

411

all 0 ~----~-~--- 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% a % of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exce~lclad

a Bull Run Hydroelec~ic Project 22 Poland Gtmeral ElectricCompany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Ill

FIGURE B-11 N Portland General Eleclltc Bull Run Hydroelectric Project November Flow Duration Curve a 000 .

000 .~ m

• " 6000

--e--Sandy Ri~r below Bull Run am Ri~Br Conflu~tce

5~00 . .-=--Sandy Rker above Man'not Dam

m -.- Little Sandy above Little Sandy Dam •-~-- Bull Run Rher bek~ Bull Run I ~ 4000 - Resen~r No. 2

000 .

2000

Ill

al 1000

d 0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% d % of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded

d Bull Run HydroeMctric Project 23 Portland Gen~'al Elec~ic Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Application

al Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

ell

RGURE B-12 a Portland General Beclrlc Bull Run Hydroelectric Project December Flow Duration Curve 8O00

000 ,

--e--Sandy Rker b~ow Buff Run Ri~Br Cot~uence Sandy Rher abote Marmot Dam

--A--I_ittle Sandy abo~ Little Sandy Dam --~--BuJl Run ~ be~w Bull Run 000 . Reser~oir No. 2

~4000

3OOO

2OOO

1000

,r ,I r T -ff F "T 0% 10% 20=/o 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %of Time Flow Is Equalled or Exceeded

Bull Run Hydxoelectric Proje~ 24 Portland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

RGURE B-13 Portland General Bectdc Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Annual Flow Ouratlon Curve 5000

45OO

40~0 .

--i--Sandy RNBf below Bull Run 500 , P,ker Confluence •-m--Sandy RlvBrabo~ Marmot Dam

-~-Utile Sandy abo~e L~e Sandy 000 Dam -K-- Bull Run ~ b~ow Bull Run ~2500

2000

1500

Ill 1000

0 ill 0% 10% 2:)0% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Time Flow Is Equalled o4" Exceeded

i Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 25 Portland G-~cr~l El~Uic Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Applicalion

d Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

all

/ EXHIBIT C: CONSTRUCTION HISTORY AND PROPOSED DECOMMISSIONING SCHEDULE

J (1) Construction History

(a) InitialDevelopmmts J

While the Project was t'n'st considered in 1903, major studies of hydroelectric

aim development at Bull Run began in 1906 when the Mt. Hood Railway and Power Company ("Mt. Hood Co.") acquired land and water rights on the Sandy, Little Sandy, and Bull Run rivers. Mt. Hood Co. intended to operate a general light and power

m business, as well as build a standard-gauge railway line from Portland to the southern base of Mt. Hood, directly competing with the Portland and Sandy River Electric Company. During 1906-07 some grading was done for a railroad from Montavilla to the

m plant, as well as the excavation for the generating station and penstocks. However, equipment ordered in 1907, including two 3,000 kW hydro generating units, a switchboard, switchyard equipment, and 155 miles of aluminum transmission line cable,

I was delayed several years due to water rights issues and financing difficulties.

From 1907 to May 1910, enough work was performed on the Project to hold water fights, including 35 claims. Of those claims, 22 were recorded prior to 1907. Water rights on the Bull Run River were relinquished on July 6, 1908 by the Mt. Hood Co., in favor of the City of Portland and in exchange for fights-of-way for a flume, canal, or aqueduct on City property. In December 1992, PGE filed its Water Rights Registration Statement for the Bull Run Project (SWR-389), pursuant to ORS 539.240, for its pre-1909 water fights remaining on the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers. m In November 1910, a contract was let to the Mt. Hood Construction Co. for grading the 16.5 miles of railroad from Montavilla to the powerhouse site on the Bull Run River. By I February 1911, the Mt. Hood Co. had made substantial progress on its system and was building a rail line from Portland to the Project area and erecting electrical distribution lines within its service area. Ground had been broken at the Bull Run powerhouse, and al concrete walls were rising quickly as the Bull Run Project went forward. Contract awards began for the remaining equipment and structures required for the three-unit, 19,200-horsepower hydro generating plant at Bull Run. all Heavy rainfall and access problems in 1911 hampered progress on much of the hydro plant construction. It took 3 hours by stage to get to Bull Run from the electric interurban .m depot at Boring. The road from Sandy to Bull Run (and from Bull Run to the Sandy Diversion Dam area) had to be planked to support traffic until June 1911, when the railroad was completed for steam operation from an interconneetion with the Union I Pacific at Montavllla. Horse-powered trucks, scrapers, and loaders were standard equipment in those days.

411 On March 21, 1912, the merger of the Mt. Hood Co. with Portland Railway, Light & Power Company (PRL&P) was completed. Investigation continued to determine the best III Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 26 Portland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Applicalion Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

location of the dam for the Sandy River diversion (Marmot Dam), and to complete the almost 5,000-foot long tunnel (Tunnel No. 1) between the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers. PRL&P assumed management of the construction, and in six months (by September 1912) had completed the Little Sandy Flume, the Roslyn Lake forebay, and the Bull Run powerhouse with three 3,750 kW hydroturbine generating units (Nos. 2, 3, and 4) designed for 326 feet of static head.

Excavation for the timber crib, rock-filled Marmot Dam was started in August 1912 and completed February 20, 1913. This dam had a maximum height of 43 feet and a length of 345 feet. The location selected for Marmot Dam was approximately 2 miles upstream from Tunnel No. 1 entrance, necessitating the construction of a system of additional tunnels, canals, and a flume that were completed in April 1912. Wet weather during the September 1912 to April 1913 period of final construction, and problems in maintaining an adequate work force due to the remote location, hampered the work.

(b) Commencement of Commercial Operation

Operation of the Bull Run Project began on September 12, 1912 with generating units Nos. 2, 3, and 4. The plant initially operated only on water from the Little Sandy River until Marmot Dam on the Sandy River was completed. On April 13, 1913, Bull Run's three 3,750 kW turbine generators began full operation on water from both the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers.

The Bull Run Project at this point included:

• The Marmot Dam on the Sandy River;

i • Wooden fish ladder facility at Marmot Dam; • The Little Sandy Diversion Dam on the Little Sandy River; • Earthen embankments forming Roslyn Lake; • Roslyn Lake, the Project's forebay; • A water conveyance system, 16,280 feet in length, from the Sandy to the Little Sandy River consisting of concrete-lined canals, tunnels, and a concrete flume;

m • A water conveyance system, 16,810 feet in length, from the Little Sandy Diversion Dam to Roslyn lake consisting of a treated wood-box flume, concrete-lined canals, and a tunnel section; Ill • Two 1,400 foot long, 9-foot diameter penstocks, with steel surge towers, extending from Roslyn Lake down to the powerhouse on the Bull Run River; • The Bull Run powerhouse; glt • A transformer building and switchyard; and • A machine shop. (e) Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Additions and Modifications

PQwerl~¢se: In November 1921, new generator laminations, coils, and turbine runners a were installed in two of the units, increasing rated capacity to 5,250 kW each. The third unit was similarly improved in October 1922. In December 1922, a fourth 5,250 kW

.m Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 27 Pcr*dandC_~r*[ Elec~ic Coml~'ny FERC No. 477 Surrender Application

g Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

I generating unit (No. 1) was put into service. Maximum capacity of each unit was 5,500 kW. In 1954, a 57-kV outdoor switching station was installed adjacent to the powerhouse. In 1980, the original belt-driven governors on the four main turbines were replaced by governing equipment manufactured by Woodward Governor Company. In 1983, a Basler shunt static exciter was added to each generator, replacing the direct current turbine generators which are now abandoned in place. As a result of PGE's hydro I automation project begun in 1994, the Bull Run Project is now automated, using programmable controllers both at the plant and at PGE's Hydro Control Center located PGE's Faraday facility near Estacada, Oregon. a Transformer Building: As built in 1912, the transformer building at Bull Run housed seven step-up transformers, including one as a spare. The building bad two arch-top multi-pane windows on its side elevation, larger but generally similar to those of the powerhouse designed to accommodate the trolley line, which passed through the building. I West of the Bull Run powerhouse, a reinforced concrete penstock intake structure was constructed with trash racks, three 10-foot diameter butterfly-type penstock control valves, and air intake pipes and valves for use in filling and draining the penstocks. In 1977 and 1978, seepage and deterioration of the timber lining in the penstock tunnels necessitated major repairs. Included in the work was excavation of the I dike and removal of overburden above the tunnels. Concrete was poured around the penstocks near the intake structure to cut off seepage. Concrete was backfilled around the exposed penstocks. The section of dike above the penstocks was excavated and rebuilt with compacted clay backfill. A section originally installed for a future third penstock was removed. Earth movement in 1980 caused the penstocks to pull apart at riveted circumferential seams. A Dresser-type expansion coupling was installed at breaks upstream and downstream of the surge tanks.

Roslvn Lake: In 1926, a 2,000-foot section of the original flume discharging into Roslyn Lake was replaced by the construction of approximately 1,000 feet of concrete-lined canal (rebuilt in 1968), 450 feet of concrete-lined tunnel, and an exit spillway. Beginning in 1957, PGE constructed a large public recreation area at Roslyn Lake. Roslyn Lake Park provides day-use activities including non-motorized boating (boat rentals), swimming, outdoor games, and picnicking. Numerous improvements at the park have been made over the years. In December 1958, the Portland Water Bureau constructed a diversion from its two municipal water supply conduits, as well as a concrete spillway structure, into Roslyn Lake to allow sales of surplus water to PGE.

Li~l~ Sandy Flume: In 1929, 9,500 linear feet of the Little Sandy flume was replaced and enlarged to increase its capacity to 750 cfs. In 1948, the entire Little Sandy wood box flume, 15,838 feet long, was rebuilt with pressure-treated creosoted box lumber and its capacity increased to 800 cfs. The unstable ground traversed by much of the Little Sandy flume has contributed to major breaks in the flume:

Bull Run HydroelectricProject 28 PoctlandGeneral ElectricCompany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

lira • In 1936, 465 feet of flume washed out at Section 70; long piling was required to bridge the area. • In August 1953, a slide destroyed 160 feet of flume at Section 90. mini • In December 1964 and January 1965, flood damage to the flume in Section 75 required replacement of 154 lineal feet of the flume box. High concrete piers and large bridge timbers were needed to support the new flume in this area. • In June 1987, 60 feet of flume in Section 155 was damaged due to a landslide of several tons of rock and soil. The damaged section and foundation were completely rebuilt. • In February 1996, a mud slide carried away a 100-foot section of the flume at Section roll 70. The flume box was rebuilt on top of a steel support structure.

Waterwlly, Sandy River to Little Sandy Diversion Dam: In 1949, three vertical rotating fish screens and a sand trap, with a bypassing wood flume, were installed in the first 1,520-feet section of the concrete lined canal downstream from the Marmot Dam. In 1964 and 1969, 5,400 linear feet of 8-foot fencing was installed along the canals to prevent animals from falling in, and bridges were built across the canals where well-used game trails were evident.

iiim Marmot l)gm grid Little Sandy Diversion Dam: In 1955, the headgates at Marmot and Little Sandy dams were motorized. Automatic and supervisory gate control was installed at both diversion structures and on the forebay penstock gates. Controls are in the powerhouse and at the three intakes.

Marmot Dam: In 1943, a 150-foot section of the wing dam was replaced with a concrete M spillway section. In 1989, the diversion dam was rebuilt as a concrete-encased, roller- compacted concrete, gravity dan~ It has a total length of approximately 345 feet made up

lIB of a main 195-foot free-overflow section and a 140-foot wing dam extension. The dam rises about 47 feet above the riverbed. The intake structure for the canal is located on the north bank and uses two control gates.

I Fish Facility In~rovements at Marmot Dam: In 1918, improvements to the Bull Run Project included the construction of 15 concrete pools to replace the original wood ones

all in the lower portion of the Marmot Dam's fish ladder. On July 17, 1956, the ladder was extended downstream, and a 12-inch diameter steel water pipe was added to attract upstream migrant fish to the ladder entrance. The upstream fish ladder was completely II remodeled in 1983 to be efficient over a wider range of flows, and a camera fish counter was installed to photograph each individual fish as it moves through the ladder. When PGE rebuilt Marmot Dam in 1989, the new concrete diversion dam was designed to 411 improve both upstream and downstream fish passage.

(2) Proposed Schedule for Decommisslondng Ill PGE proposes to begin decommissioning the Project in July 2007 and to complete removal by December 2009. Monitoring activities will continue in accordance with the protocol described in Section 4.7 of the Decommissioning Plan. The following is the

a Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 29 Portland General Electric Ccanl~ay FERC No. 477 Surrender Appltcation Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

proposed schedule for decommissioning the various components of the Bull Run Project.

Pre-removal Geomomhological and Water Oualitv Monitorin~ Aug. 2002 - Aug. 2006

PermUte Nov. 2002 - Mar. 2007

Removal of Marmot Dam July 2007-October 2007

l~moval of Little Sandy Diversion Dam July 2008-Octoher 2008

R~moval of Canals Nov. 2007 - July 2008

Removal of Tunnels Nov. 2007- Sept. 2008

gfmoval of Flume July 2008 - June 2009

Dfmolition of Project Powerhouse Aug. 2008 - June 2009 IN

Removal of Roslyn Lake July 2008 - Nov. 2008

Po~- Removal Monitorin~ and Contineency Response Oct. 2007--TBD*

Note: The actual endpoint for monitoring and contingency response will J be det~'mined as provided in Section 4.7 of the Decommissioning Plan.

The Decommissioning Plan contains a detailed description of the procedures that will be used to remove each Project facility and to restore the Project site. The Decommissioning Plan also m describes the monitoring and contingency activities that will be conducted before, during and at~er Project removal.

dll

a Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 30 Portland General ElectricCompany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application

l Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

EXHIBIT D: STATEMENT OF COSTS AND FINANCING

The Federal Power Act requires that FERC compensate licensees if it decides not to issue a new license to them. Specifically, Section 14 of the Power Act provides that the entity to which FERC issues the new license for a project must pay the existing licensee its "net investment" in the project, plus the value ("severance damages") of any other property whose value is "dependent for its usefulness upon the continuance of the license." Insofar as PGE is seeking to surrender the Project license and decommission the Project, PGE does not expect that these provisions will be called into play in this proceeding. Nevertheless, as required by FERC's regulations, this exhibit provides the basic information upon which FERC can establish the quantum of compensation that would be required in the event that it determined to issue a new license to some other entity. PGE reserves the right to f'de appropriate revisions to this exhibit to the extent that such filings are necessitated by administrative proceedings before the Oregon Public Utilities Commission ("OPUC"). m (I) Origlnal cost of Existing Unlicensed Facil/ties

This section does not apply to the Project, because PGE is not applying for an initial license for the Project. Decommissioning costs are summarized below and in the Decommissioning Plan.

I (2) Estimated Amount Payable upon Federal Takeover

m As noted, if the Project is taken over pursuant to Section 14 of the Power Act, PGE will be entitled to receive its net investment, which is not to exceed the Project's "fair value," plus severance damages.

(a) Fair Market Value

all Fair market value is an historical term that has been interpreted by FERC to mean the current cost of Project reproduction less depreciation. The Handy-Whitman Cost Index is a standard utility-industry tool used to trend original plant cost or costs of prior dl improvements to the current date for the purpose of estimating current plant values. In this case, however, since PGE proposes to surrender the license, and the fair market value is greatly in excess of net investment, there is no need to calculate what fair market value al would otherwise be.

(b) Net Investment al The Power Act defines "net investment" as the original cost of the Project, plus additions, less depreciation and various other elements not relevant in this case. On this basis, the .m net investment in the Project, as reflected on PGE's books, as of December 31, 2001, is shown in Table D-1:

,at

II Bull Run Hydroelectric Project 31 Portland General Electric Campany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application

III Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

4111

Table D-I

Net Investment (as of 9/30/02)

Plant In-service $ 23,936,050 Accumulated Depreciation 10,859,426 Net Plant $13,076,624

• - (c) Severance Damages

Property Damages: The severance damages include a loss in value of non-project gl facilities or property which would be caused by loss of license. This section is not applicable, since PGE is surrendering its operating license.

Replacement Power:. Severance damages would also include the replacement power costs. This section is not applicable, since PGE is surrendering its operating license.

(3) Emmat IX -ommt ning Costs

PGE plans to decommission the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project according to the Plan and schedule contained in the Decommissioning Plan. The cost of decommissioning the Project is summarized in Table D-2:

m Table D-2

all Decommissioning Cost Summary

I Pre-filing Costs (1998-2002) $ 4,240,000 Pre-rernoval monitoring 300,000 Permitting and engineering 810,000

J Interim measures 500,000 Project removal 9,500,000 Post-removal activities 1,710,000 Total $17,060,000

(4) Estimated Average Annual Cost of the Project

This section is not applicable, because PGE proposes to surrender the license and decommission the Project.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject 32 Portland General ElectricCompany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

dill

I (S) Estimated Annual Value of Projected Power

I The estimated value of the replacement power costs for power generated by the Project would have been $ 5,311,454, based on the average annual generation shown in Exhibit B.

(6) Source and Extent of Financing and Annual Revenues

PGE plans to decommission the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. It is expected that PGE will f'mance the cost of decommissioning on a company-wide basis, making use of PGE's normal sources of short and long-term capital, preferred stock, and con'anon equity. As noted above, roll this fmancing will be consistent with the terms oftbe OPUC Stipulation.

III Bull Run H~IroeMctricProject 33 Portland GeneralEl~lxic Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Applicalio. d Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

all

Ill

EXHIBIT F: GENERAL DESIGN DRAWINGS AND SUPPORTING DESIGN REPORT air (I) General l)~gn Dnlwlags

General design drawings showing plans, elevations, and sections of the principal project work are included as follows:

a Title 1 General Vicinity Map-Profile from Marmot Darn to Tailrace 2 Powerhouse, Plan & Sections, Intake Structure Plan & Sections 3 Surge Tank and Lake Roslyn Dikes, Canal, Flume & Tunnel Sections gll 4 Fish Screen Structure Plan and Sections 5 Marmot Dam Plan and Sections

m 6 Powerhouse and Switchyard General Plan 7 Powerhouse Electrical Arrangement 8 57 kV Switching Structure Sections

I 9 Little Sandy Dam Plan and Sections 10 Manr~t Dam Fish Trap and Haul 11 Emergency Trap and Haul near Sandy River at River Mile 23 12 Marmot Dam Sediment Disposal Site Plan

~m (2) Supporting Design Report - Decommissioning Plan

An assessment of various dam removal ahernatives was conducted by the Decommissioning mils Working Group in order to select the removal methods described in the Decommissioning Plan. The alternatives are described in the Joint Explanatory Statement and Draft Environmental Assessment that accompany this application. The Decommissioning Plan includes all 4 engineering plans and drawings, environmental impacts, permitting, construction, monitoring and contingency response activities associated with the removal of the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. I

g Bull Run H~lroelectricProject 34 I~tland General ElectricCompany FERC No. 477 Surrender Application

I Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

LARGE-FORMAT IMAGES

One or more large-format images (over 8 1/2" X 11") go here. These images are available in FERRIS at:

For Large-Format(s): Accession No.: ~0-o30 ~0g - 07o~-

Security/Availability: ~'/'PUBLIC

[] NIP

[] CEll

[] NON-PUBLIC/PRIVILEGED

File Date: Docket No.: "~' ~ "7 "~

Parent Accession No." oqq ,

Set No.: I of 5

Number of page(s) in set:

TRP43; RLrV.. 4/2003 (vello*,.) Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

EXHIBIT G: PROJECT LANDS AND BOUNDARY

(1) Detail Maps

Maps of the Project area showing principal project features and the project boundary are included as follows:

Sheet No. Title 1 Detail Map 2 Detail Map 3 Detail Map 4 Detail Map 5 Detail Map 6 Detail Map (2) Project Boundary

The project boundary is shown on the attached Exhibit G maps.

(3) Federal lands

PGE owns the majority of lands within the Project boundary. Other ownership or management includes land at the Marmot Dam location, which is owned by the State and managed by BLM, and the concrete flume section, which is owned by BLM. A section of the wooden-box flume lies within the MHNF, both on land owned by PGE and on land owned by the USFS. Land above the tunnel between the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers is not within the Project boundary since this feature, the tunnel, does not add any land acreage to the Project. The Project transmission line corridor, which runs west to Bluff Road, lies on private and BLM lands. Total land within the Project boundary is approximately 606 acres, of which 84 percent is PGE-owned, 9 percent is BLM-managed, and 3 percent is managed by the USFS. Federal land parcels are identified on the attached Exhibit G drawings.

(4) Non-Federal Lands

PGE has acquired, either through fee purchase, lease, or release, all land and fights necessary to operate the Project. Each parcel to which PGE holds title or rights is identified on the attached Exhibit G drawings.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject 35 l~¢fland General Electric Company FERC No. 477 Surrender Application Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

SETI'LEMENT AGREEMENT

CONCERNING THE REMOVAL OF THE BULL RUN HYDROELECTR/C PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 477 CLACKAMAS COUNTY OREGON

AMONG

PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY

USDA FOREST SERVICE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE USDI FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE USDI BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

STATE OF OREGON OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OREGON WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OREGON DIVISION OF STATE LANDS

ALDER CREEK KAYAK SUPPLY, INC. AMERICAN RIVERS AMERICAN WHITE,WATER ASSOCIATION OF NW STEELHEADERS CITY OF SANDY, OREGON THE NATIVE FISH SOCIETY NORTHWEST SPORTFISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OREGON COUNCIL OF TROUT UNLIMITED OREGON TROUT SANDY RIVER BASIN WATERSHED COUNCIL TROUT UNLIMITED WATERWATCH OF OREGON and WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY

October 24, 2002 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

a SETFLEMENT AGREEMENT

CONCERNING THE REMOVAL OF THE BULL RUN HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 477 CLACKAMAS COUNTY OREGON

AMONG

PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY

USDA FOREST SERVICE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE USDI FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE USDI BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

STATE OF OREGON OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OREGON WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OREGON DIVISION OF STATE LANDS

ALDER CREEK KAYAK SUPPLY, INC. AMERICAN RIVERS AMERICAN WHITEWATER ASSOCIATION OF NW STEELHEADERS CITY OF SANDY, OREGON THE NATIVE FISH SOCIETY NORTHWEST SPORTFISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OREGON COUNCIL OF TROUT UNLIMITED OREGON TROUT SANDY RIVER BASIN WATERSHED COUNCIL TROUT UNLIMITED WATERWATCH OF OREGON and WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY

October 24, 2002 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

SECTION 1. PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF THIS AGREEMENT ...... 2 1.1 Purpose of Agreement ...... 2 1.2 Limitations...... 3 1.3 Representations Regarding Consistency and Compliance with Statutory Obligations...... 3 SECTION 2. ACTIONS UPON EXECUTION OF THIS AGREEMENT ...... 3 2.1 FERC Filings...... 3 2.2 Permits ...... 3 2.3 Communications with FERC and Other Governmem Agencies...... 4 2.4 Water Rights ...... 4 2.5 ODSL Easement ...... 4 2.6 Disposition of PGE Lands ...... 5 SECTION 3. PROJECT DECOMMISSIONING ...... 5 3.1 Schedule for Project Removal ...... 5 3.2 Amendment of Project License ...... 5 3.3 Interim Measures ...... 5 3.4 NEPA Process on USDA-FS and BLM Lands ...... 6 3.5 Section 106 Consultation ...... 6 SECTION 4. COORDINATION AND DECISION MAKING ...... 6 4.1 Purpose and Function ...... 6 4.2 Coordinating Committee ...... 6 4.2.1 Decision-Making Process ...... 6 4.2.2 Notice ...... 7 4.2.3 Decommissioning Coordinator ...... 7 4.2.4 Meetings ...... 7 4.2.5 Reports ...... 7 4.3 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and Implementation Team...... 7 4.4 Inspection, Consultation, and Notice ...... 8 4.5 Cooperative Activities...... 8 4.5.1 Sandy River Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Program...... 8 4.5.2 Other Basin Monitoring and Research Program...... 8 SECTION 5. POST-REMOVAL COVENANTS ...... 8 5.1 Public Benefit from Decommissioning of the Project ...... 8 5.2 Coordination of Information ...... 8 5.3 Oregon Public Utility Commission Proceedings ...... 9 5.4 Certification of Project Removal ...... 9 SECTION 6. COMMITMENTS OF GOVERNMENTAL PARTIES ...... 9 6. ! General Provisions ...... 9 Bull Run Hydto¢lo~ic Project Portland C,¢ne~alElectric Campany FERC Project No. 477 SettlementAgreemen: ii Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

6.1.1 Authority under the Federal Power Act ...... 9 6.1.2 Other Statutory Authorities...... 10 6.2 Endangered Species Act ...... 10 6.2.1 Applicable Procedures ...... 10 6.2.2 Consultation ...... 10 6.2.3 Subsequent Permit Applications...... 11 6.3 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act ...... 11 6.4 Federal Land Management and Resource Plans ...... 11 6.5 Clean Water Act ...... 12 6.5.1 Water Quality Certification at Surrender Application...... 12 6.5.2 Water Quality Certification at Dredge and Fill Permit ...... 12 6.5.3 Water Quality Certification at 404 State Equivalent ...... 12 I 6.6 State Fish Passage Law ...... 13 6.7 State Removal/Fill Permit ...... 13 SECTION 7. IMPLEMENTATION OF AGREEMENT ...... 13 7.1 Parties Bound ...... 13 7.2 Resolution of Disputes Before FERC Order ...... 13 7.2.1 Actions Before Filing of Surrender Application...... 13 7.2.2 Actions After Filing of Surrender Application...... 14 7.2.3 PGE Fails To Perform Interim Measures ...... 14 7.3 Resolution of Disputes About FERC Order ...... 15 7.3.1 Conditions of FERC Order Inconsistent with This Agreement ...... 15 7.3.2 Provisions Omitted from FERC Order ...... 15 7.4 Impact of]Delay...... 15 7.5 Resolution of Disputes after Issuance of FERC Order ...... 16 7.5.1 PGE Falls To Comply with FERC order ...... 16 7.5.2 PGE Falls To Perform Covenants of This Agreement Not Included in the FERC Order ...... 16 7.5.3 Action by Third Party ...... 16 7.5.4 Review of Other Agency Actions ...... 16 7.5.5 Resolution of Objections to Certification Notice ...... 17 7.5.6 Effect of Withdrawal of a Party Other than PGE ...... 17 7.6 Cooperation Among Parties ...... 17 7.6.1 Responsibility forCosts ...... 17 7.6.2 Availability of Funds ...... 17 7.7 Dispute Resolution ...... 18 7.7.1 General ...... 18 7.7.2 Procedures ...... 18 SECTION 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS ...... 18 8.1 Entire Agreement ...... 18 8.2 Modifications...... 19 8.2.1 Parties Other than PGE ...... 19 8.2.2 PGE ...... 19 8.3 Signatory Authority ...... 19 8.4 No Third-Party Beneficiaries...... 19 Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement iii Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

8.5 Successors and Assigns...... 20 8.6 Failure To Perform Due to Force Majeure ...... 20 8.6.1 Declaration of Force Majeure...... 20 8.6.2 Consultation with NMFS and USFWS ...... 20 8.6.3 Duration of Force Majeure ...... 20 8.7 Indemnification and Hold Harmless...... 21 8.8 Governing Law ...... 21 8.9 Elected Officials Not To Benef'n...... 21 8.10 No Partnership ...... 21 8.11 Reference to Regulations...... 21 8.12 Notice ...... 21 8.13 Paragraph Titles for Convenience Only ...... 22 8.14 Signing in Counterparts ...... 22 8.15 Waiver...... 22

Exhibits and Appendices

Exhibit A Decommissioning Plan Exhibit B Authorized Representatives of the Parties

Appendix A Application for Amendment of License Appendix B Application for Surrender of License Appendix C Dratt Environmental Assessment Appendix D Biological Evaluation Appendix E Preliminary Determination Pursuant to Wild and Scenic Rivers Act Appendix F ODSL Easement Appendix G Joint Explanatory Statement Appendix H Draft Memorandum of Agreement Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Appendix I Section 106 Preliminary Finding of Effect Appendix J Agreement for Instream Conversion

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement iv Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

BULL RUN SEIWLEMENT AGREEMENT

This Settlement Agreement (this "Agreemem") is made as of October 24, 2002 (the "Effective Date") by and among Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon corporation ("PGE"); USDA Forest Service ("USDA-FS'); USDI Fish and Wildlife Service CUSFWS'); USDI Bureau of Land Management ("BLM"); National Marine Fisheries Service ("NMFS"); the State of Oregon; Oregon Department of Environmental Quality CODEQ"); oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife ("ODFW"); Oregon Water Resources Department ("OWRD"), Oregon Division of State Lands CODSU'); Western Rivers Conservancy; Sandy River Basin Watershed Council; Association of NW Steelheaders; Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association; City of Sandy, Oregon; Alder Creek Kayak Supply, Inc., American Whitewater, Waterwatch, American Rivers, Oregon Trout, The Native Fish Society, Trout Unlimited, and Oregon Council of Trout Unlimited, each referred to individually as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." USDA-FS, USFWS, BLM, NMFS, ODEQ, ODP3,V, OWRD and ODSL may I be referred to collectively as the "Governmental Parties." USDA-FS, USFWS, BLM, and NMFS may be referred to collectively as the "Federal Governmental Parties." ODEQ, ODFW, OWRD and ODSL may be referred to collectively as the "State Governmental Parties." Sandy River Basin Watershed Council; NW Steelheaders; Alder Creek Kayak and Canoe, American Whitewater, WaterWatch of Oregon, American Rivers, Oregon Trout, Native Fish Society, Trout Unlimited, and Oregon Council of Trout Unlimited may be referred to collectively as the "NGO Parties."

RECITALS

A. The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project, also known as FERC Project No. 477 and referred to in this Agreement as the "Project," is located in north-central Oregon on the west side of Mt. Hood in Clackamas County, about 35 miles (55 km) east of Portland. The Project, owned and operated by PGE, is located on the Sandy, Little Sandy, and Bull Run Rivers. The Project works include Marmot Dam, located at River Mile (RM) 30 on the Sandy River, the m Little Sandy Diversion Dam, located at RIM 1.7 on the Little Sandy River, Roslyn Lake (which is formed by 8,000 feet of dikes), a 3.1 mile series of canals and tunnels leading from Marmot Dam to the Little Sandy River just upstream of the Little Sandy Diversion Dam, a 2.8 mile box flume leading from the Little Sandy Diversion Dam to Roslyn Lake, two 1,200 foot penstocks, and a powerhouse containing four generators with a total capacity of 21 MW. The powerhouse discharges to the Bull Run River 1.5 miles above its confluence with the Sandy River at RM 18.4. B. The Sandy River and its tributaries are used by fall chinook, spring chinook, stcelhead, cutthroat and rainbow trout, bull trout, lamprey, and other fish species. The steelbead, bull trout, and chinook that use the Sandy River and its tributaries have been listed as threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act ("ESA"). Continued operation of the Project under a new license could adversely affect these fish species.

C. The Project is located primarily on private lands owned by PGE. Marmot Dam is located on lands both administered by the BLM and claimed to be owned by the State of Oregon pursuant to the State Land Board's declaration of the Sandy River's title navigability Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

dated February 5, 2002. A portion of the flume is located on lands administered by USDA-FS. Total land within the Project boundary is approximately 606 acres, of which approximately 84 percent is PGE-owned, 9 percent is BLM-managed or state-owned, and 3 percent is managed by USDA-FS.

D. Pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes ("ORS") 539.240, PGE filed a Surface Water Registration Statement, Pre-1909 Vested Water Right Claim, with OWRD. This statement, which was filed on December 30, 1992, claims the right to divert 800 cfs, in any combination, from the Sandy or the Little Sandy rivers. The claim states that water development under this claim began in 1903. In addition, PGE has filed with OWRD and paid fees pursuant to ORS 543.720 for maintenance of Power Claim #117.

E. The initial minor part license for the Project was issued by the Federal Power Commission on November 17, 1924, with an expiration date of November 16, 1974. On May 23, 1980, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued a new license, for the entire Project, Ill with an effective date of November 17, 1974, and an expiration date of November 16, 2004. On November 12, 1999, PGE filed a notice of its intent not to seek a new license for the Project. On March 2, 2000, the FERC issued a public notice of PGE's filing, in which FERC stated: "If the licensee does not, by two years prior to the expiration of the current license, file an application to surrender the current license, the Commission will apply the relicense competition procedures set forth in its regulations at 18 CFR 16.25 (1999)."

F. On December 12. 2001, PGE initiated discussions with a group of stakeholders including the Parties. In January 2002 a facilitated Decommissioning Working Group ("DWG") was formed and began meeting to negotiate a settlement agreement that would enable PGE to file an application to surrender the Project license by November 15, 2002. In addition to the Parties, the DWG included the City of Portland, Oregon. The DWG met for a period of ten months, until October 2002.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants in this Agreement, the Parties agree as follows:

SECTION 1. PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF THIS AGREEMENT at 1.1 ~J~,£1~.m~_t.

all The Parties have entered into this Agreement for the purpose of resolving all issues that have or could have been raised by the Parties in connection with obtaining a FERC order authorizing the surrender alxi decommissioning of the Project as specified in this Agreement. For these

i purposes, the Parties agree that this Agreement is fair and reasonable and in the public interest. Except as specifically provided below, each of the Governmental Parties agrees that PGE's performance of its obligations under this Agreement will be consistent with and is intended to

I fulfill PGE's existing statutory and regulatory obligations as to each Govemmemal Party relating to the surrender and decommissioning of the Project.

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General Elec~ic Company FERC Project No. 477 SettlementAgreement

am Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

1.2 Limitations.

This Agreement establishes no principle or precedent with regard to any issue addressed in this Agreement or with regard to any Party's participation in any other pending or future licensing proceeding. Further, no Party to this Agreement shall be deemed to have approved, accepted, agreed to, or otherwise consented to any operation, management, valuation, or other principle underlying any of the matters covered by this Agreement, except as expressly provided in this Agreement. By entering into this Agreement, no Party shall he deemed to have made any admission or waived any contention of fact or law that it did make or could have made in any FERC proceeding relating to the surrender of the Project license and decommissioning of the Project. This Agreement shall not he offered in evidence or cited as precedent by any Party to this Agreement in any judicial litigation, arbitration, or other adjudicative proceeding, except in a proceeding to establish the existence of or to enforce or implement this Agreement. This Section 1.2 shall survive any termination of this Agreement.

1.3 Rep ~rt~..-tations Reeardin~ Consistencv and Comullanee with Statutory Ob aUo

Except as specifically provided below, by entering into this Agreement, the Governmental Parties represent that they believe their statutory and other legal obligations are, or can be, met through implementation of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall be construed to affect or limit any government agency from complying with its obligations under applicable laws and regulation or from considering comments received in any environmental review or regulatory process related to the Project in accordance with this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be interpreted to predetermine the outcome of any environmental or administrative review or appeal process.

SECTION 2. ACTIONS UPON EXECUTION OF THIS AGREEMENT

2.1 FERC Filings.

Following the execution of this Agreement by all Parties (the "Effective Date"), but in no event later than November 15, 2002, PGE shall file with FERC a f'fling (the "FERC Filing") consisting of an application to amend the Project license (the "Amendment Application", attached hereto as Appendix A), an application to surrender the Project license (the "Surrender Application", attached hereto as Appendix B), the Decommissioning Plan (attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof), the DraR Environmental Assessment (attached hereto as Appendix C), the Biological Evaluation (attached hereto as Appendix D), a Joint Explanatory Statement (attached hereto as Appendix G), and a fully executed copy of this Agreement, including all other Exhibits and Appendices. PGE shall request expedited consideration and approval of the Surrender Application and shall use its best reasonable efforts to obtain a FERC ord~ or orders amending the Project license, approving the Decommissioning Plan, and approving surrender of the Project license (the "FERC Order") in a timely manner. N 2.2 Permi

Subject to Section 7.3.1 of this Agreement, upon issuance of the FERC Order, PGE shall apply for and use its best reasonable efforts to obtain in a timely manner and in final form all Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland GeneralElectric Company FERC ProjectNo. 477 Settlement Agreement

I Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

applicable federal, state, regional, and local permits, licenses, authorizations, certifications, determinations, and other governmental approvals for purposes of implementing this Agreement and the FERC Order ("Permits"). The applications for such Permits shall be consistent with the terms of this Agreement. Subject to Section 1.3 of this Agreement, each Party, upon PGE's request, shall use its best reasonable efforts to support PGE's applications for Permits and shall not file comments or recommend Permit conditions that are inconsistent with this Agreement, providing that this sentence shall not apply to a Party that is the agency issuing the requested Permit. PGE shall pay all fees required by law related to such Permits, except as provided otherwise in this Agreement. The Parties shall cooperate during the permitting, environmental review, and implementation of this Agreement. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, PGE shall not be required by this Agreement to implement an action required under this Agreement or the FERC Order until all applicable Permits required for that action are obtained. If a proceeding challenging any Permit required for the action ("Proceeding") has been coran~nced, PGE shall be under no obligation to implement the action or any related action under this Agreement until any such Proceeding is terminated. In the event any Proceeding is commenced, the Parties shall confer to evaluate the effect of such Proceeding on implementation of this Agreement. Nothing contained in this Section shall be construed to limit PGE's authority to apply for a Permit before issuance of the FERC Order.

2.3 Commnn!cgfl0ns with FERC and Other Government Ag~..les.

PGE shall submit to FERC in support of this Agreement the Joint Explanatory Statement attached to this Agreement as Appendix G. ThereaRer, subject to Section 7.2.2, the Parties shall be free to make comments and respond to comments or responses to comments filed by them. to the extent any comments or responses are filed with FERC, ODEQ, OWRD, or any other agency in the context of the Surrender Application or Permit processes.

2.4 Wa r

Pursuant to ORS 543A.305, PGE shall assign its hydroelectric water fights for the Project to OWRD for conversion to an instream water fight, and OWRD shall take actions to effect such conversion, in accordance wRh the process and conditions set forth in the Agreement for lnstream Conversion attached to this Agreemem as Appendix J. Nothing in this Agreement is intended in any way to affect, diminish, impair or predetermine any federally reserved or state- law-based water right that the Federal Governmental Parties, on behalf of the United States, may have in the Sandy River or its tributaries.

QD L rsement.

Prior to execution of this Agreement PGE shall apply to ODSL, and ODSL shall thereafter issue, an easement to PGE authorizing occupancy of submerged and submersible lands by the Martnot Dam, which easement shall be in the form and contain the terms set out in Appendix F to this Agreement. No Party shall be deemed to have admitted, adjudicated, or otherwise greed to the State of Oregon's claim to ownership of the beds and banks of the Sandy River by virtue of this Agreement.

Bull Run HydroelecfficProject Portland General Elecffic Company FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement 4 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

2.6 IMEposition of PGE Lands.

PGE shall transfer its private Project and non-Project lands, except for the lands associated with Roslyn Lake, to the Western Rivers Comervancy to help establish conservation corridors on both the Sandy and Little Sandy River as described in the Decommissioning Plan and the Joint Explanatory Statement. PGE shall transfer its private non-Project lands to the Western Rivers Conservancy within 180 days after receipt of the FERC Order. PGE shall apply to the Oregon Public Utilities Commission ("OPUC") for approval of the transfer of PGE's private project lands to the Western Rivers Conservancy no later than six months after completion of removal of structures on the parcel to be transferred. Each Party shall use its reasonable best efforts to support PGE's application for such approval, and shall, if requested by PGE, use its reasonable best efforts to submit appropriate general letters of support of PGE's application. The legal documents used for transfer of lands riparian to the Sandy River shall include a notice or acknowledgment of the State of Oregon's claim of ownership of beds and banks of the river.

lit SECTION 3. PROJECT DECOMMISSIONING

PGE shall, at its own expense, decommission the Project in accordance with the schedule and requirements set forth in this Agreement and the Decommissioning Plan attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A and made a part hereof ("project Removal").

3.1 Schedule for Proiect Removal

Project works will be removed pursuant to the schedule contained in Section 2.1 of the Decommissioning Plan (the "Decommissioning Schedule"). Subject to Sections 3.3 and 7.4 of this Agreement, if the removal of Marmot Dam is delayed as a result of delay in issuance of the FERC Order or a Permit, or pursuant to agreement of the Parties, it is the expectation of the M Parties that other decommissioning activities described in the Decommissioning Plan will be delayed accordingly. The Decommissioning Schedule may be amended only by mutual agreement of the Parties. M 3.2 Amendment of Proiect License.

al4 PGE shall request in the Amendment Application that FERC extend the term of the Project license to November 16, 2017, authorize the continued operation of the Project until removal of the Little Sandy Dam in 2008 pursuant to the Decommissioning Plan, and, amend the terms of the Project license to include as license conditions the Interim Measures.

3.3 htWrim Measures.

The Decommissioning Plan describes measures that PGE shall implement for geomorphological n~nitoring, pre-removal turbidity monitoring, operation of the fish ladder and sorting facility at

all Marmm Dam, and protection of threatened and endangered species pursuant to the Decommissioning Schedule ('qnterim Measures"). Subject to Section 7.4 of this Agreement, the Interim Measures shall be implemented until Project Removal is complete and regardless of any aid delay in issuance of the FERC Order or Permits.

all Bull Run Hydr(xlectricProject Por~and C~eral Electric Company FERC ProjectNo. 477 Settlemenz Agreemem

m Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

3.4 NEPA Process on USDA-FS and BLM Lands.

In connection with the issuance of the FERC Order, the Parties anticipate that FERC will complete an environmental analysis under NEPA based on the information contained in the draft Environmental Assessment attached to this Agreement as Appendix C. To the extent that USDA-FS or BLM determine that they must approve activities associated with decommissioning the Project, and that such approval requires an independent environmental analysis under NEPA, USDA-FS or BLM, as the case may be, agree that Appendix C contains sufficient information for them to conduct such analysis in a timely manner, unless they become aware of new information that is materially different than the information contained in Appendix C.

3.5 Sefti0n 106 Consultation.

In connection with the issuance of the FERC Order, the Parties anticipate that FERC will enter into a Programmatic Agreement with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, USDA-FS, and BLM based on information contained in the Surrender Application. A drat~ Memorandum of Agreement between FERC, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, and a draft Determination of Effect are attached to this N Agreement as Appendices H and I, respectively.

SECTION 4. COORDINATION AND DECISION MAKING **am 4.1

J The Parties agree to cooperate in implementing the letter and spirit of this Agreement. PGE shall provide periodic updates to the Parties regarding the status of its implementation of the Decommissioning Plan in accordance with Section 4.2.5 of this Agreement, the requirements of the Decommissioning Plan, and any reporting obligations imposed by the FERC.

4.2 CA~7~lnafin~ Committee.

qm~ Implementation of this Agreement shall he coordinated by a Coordinating Committee. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, PGE shall convene the Coordinating Committee; and each Party may designate a representative to the Coordinating Committee. Except as provided in Section 4.3 of this Agreement, the Coordinating Committee shall have the responsibility to facilitate and coordinate the implementation of the Decommissioning Plan and this Agreement. all 4.2.1 Decision-Making Process.

all The Coordinating Committee shall endeavor to conduct its business by consensus, which for purposes of this agreement shall mean that any decision reached is acceptable to all representatives of the Parties participating in the Coordinating Committee. Decisions of the Coordinating Committee shall not usurp the authority of the individual Parties or of agencies specifically identified in this Agreement as having approval authority regarding specific measures required by the Decommissioning Plan or Permits. If the Coordinating Committee

al cannot reach consensus on any issue, the Coordinating Committee shall refer the issue to the appropriate policy makers designated by each Party. If the policy makers are unable to resolve

m Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Elecuic Company FERC Project No. 477 SettlementAgreement 6

Ill Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

the issue by consensus within 30 days after referral to that group, any remaining dispute shall be resolved as provided in Section 7.7 of this Agreement.

4.2.2 Notice.

PGE shall provide members of the Coordinating Committee a minimum of 30 days' notice prior to any meeting, provided that n'~..tings may be called on shorter notice if the circumstances require.

4.2.3 Decommissioning Coordinator.

PGE shall designate its representative on the Coordinating Committee as the Decommissioning Coordinator to oversee the coordination and implementation of Decommissioning Plan. The Decommissioning Coordinator will provide reasonable administrative and clerical support for the Coordinating Committee.

4.2.4 Meetings.

The Decommissioning Coordinator shall arrange an annual meeting of the Coordinating Committee as well as any additional meetings deemed necessary by the Parties to coordinate activities and inform the Parties concerning the status or implementation of this Agreement and

Iim the Decommissioning Plan. 4.2.5 Reports.

M In addition to any reports that FERC may require, PGE shall prepare and file with FERC and the Parties a detailed annual report on the activities of the Coordinating Committee and on the implementation of the Decommissioning Plan during the previous year. Filing of such reports N shall commence upon the first anniversary of the Effective Date and annually each year thereat~er until the decommissioning is complete and Certification Notice has been issued pursuant to Section 5.4 of this Agreement. The Decommissioning Coordinator will prepare annual reports in consultation with the members of the Coordinating Committee and will provide such members with at least 30 days to comment on a draft report prior to filing a final version

m with FERC. PGE shall prepare and distrilmte such other reports as provided in the Decommissioning Plan.

am 4.3 Endanc,~nglSI~g~ Act Mgnitorin~ and Imnlementalton Team. The Decommissioning Plan provides for the formation of an Endangered Species Act Monitoring

aMm and Implementation Team ("MIT") to oversee the monitoring of impacts of Project decommissioning and to advise F'GE on the proper response to certain contingencies that may occur during the decommissioning process. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, PGE shall convene the MIT; and NMFS, USFWS, and ODFW shall designate a representative to the MIT. Thereafter, the MIT shall operate as described in Section 7.3 of the Decommissioning Plan. Except as provided in Section 5.4 of this Agreement, the decisions and operation of the MIT shall not be subject to the dispute resolution provisions of this Agreement.

ml Bull Run Hydroelecl~cProject Portland General ElectricCompany FERC ProjectNo. 477 Settlement Agreement

al Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

4.4 Insuection. Consultation. and Notice.

PGE shall permit the Parties to inspect Project facilities and Project records pertaining to the decommissioning of the Project upon reasonable notice at any reasonable time. PGE shall notify the Parties 90 days before the start of any Project Removal construction or related ground-, sediment-, or habitat-disturbing activities and upon completion of construction. PGE shall consult with the Governmental Parties as necessary during removal and related activities. PGE shall obtain the approval of BLM with respect to BLM lands or the USDA-FS with respect to USDA-FS lands before performing any work pursuant to this Agreement on BLM lands or USDA-FS lands. BLM or USDA-FS shall not unreasonably withhold or delay such approval, which shall be consistent with the requirements of this Agreement and the Decommissioning Plan. Ill 4.s

4.5.1 Sandy River Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Program.

Not later than September 1, 2007, PGE shall enter into a grant or contract with ODFW to provide $25,000 to ODFW toward implementation of the Sandy River Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Program described in Section 3.5 the Decommissioning Plan. This contribution shall be PGE's sole obligation to support the Sandy River Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Program.

4.5.2 Other Basin Monitoring and Research Program.

Not later than January 15, 2004, and January 15, 2008, PGE shall contribute $100,000 and 200,000, respectively, toward implementation of the Other Basin Monitoring and Research Program described in Section 4.9 of the Decommissioning Plan. This contribution shall be PGE's sole obligation to support the Other Basin Monitoring and Research Program.

SECTION 5. POST-REMOVAL COVENANTS

5.1 Public Benefit from DecommissioninR of the Prolect.

The Parties agree that decommissioning of the Project in accordance with this Agreement serves the public interest and achieves a reasonable resolution of issues posed by decommissioning of the Project. The Parties also agree that the schedule in the Decommissioning Plan for termination of generation and removal of the Project is a reasonable time necessary to serve the public interest in a safe, appropriate, and effective manner. The Parties further agree that decommissioning the Project in accordance with the Decommissioning Plan is an effective and expedient means of protection, mitigation, and enhancement of fish, wildlife and other resources affected by the Project.

i 5.2 C.~rdlnatign of Information.

The Parties agree to use their best efforts to coordinate information provided to public agencies and to the public regarding this Agreement, the Decommissioning Plan, the FERC Filing, the FERC Order, and the Permits. 4111 Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

5.3 Ore2on Public Utility Commission Ihroceedln2s.

The Parties agree to support PGE's planned decommissioning cost recovery application for Project Removal before the Oregon Public Utilities Commission ("OPUC"). Upon request of PGE, each Party shall use its reasonable best efforts to submit appropriate genera] letters of support of PGE's application within their areas of expertise.

5.4 ~.~rtification of Proleet Removal.

PGE shall notify the Parties not more than six months prior to the date that PGE believes that Project Removal will be completed in accordance with this Agreement, the Decommissioning Plan, and applicable provisions of the FERC Order and the Permits. Not mere than 60 days after PGE's completion of Project Removal, PGE shall submit to the Parties a draft Certification of Project Removal ("Certification Notice"). Within 60 days of the date of the dra_~ Certification Notice, any Party who reasonably believes that Project Removal has not been completed in accordance with this Agreement, the Decommissioning Plan, and applicable provisions of the FERC Order and the Permits may initiate dispute resolution under Section 7.7 of this Agreement. PGE may not file the Certification Notice with FERC until dispute resolution has been completed. After completion of the dispute resolution process, any Party who reasonably believes that Project Removal has not been completed in accordance with this Agreement, the Decommissioning Plan, and applicable provisions of the FERC Order and the Permits may file an objection with FERC as provided in Section 7.5.5. If no timely objection is submitted by any Party, PGE may file the Certification Notice with FERC and PGE shall be deemed to have completed Project Removal in accordance with this Agreement, the FERC Order, the Decommissioning Plan, and Permits as of the date of the Certification Notice. If any Party initiates dispute resolution in a timely manner, PGE shall continue to implement the measure(s) as to which the Parties are disputing until resolution of the dispute pursuant to Sections 7.5.5 or 7.7, as applicable.

SECTION 6. COMMITMENTS OF GOVERNMENTAL PARTIES

6.1 General Provisions.

6.1.1 Authority under the Federal Power Act.

The provisions of this Agreement are intended to satisfy the Governmental Parties' exercise of authority under the Federal Power Act. The Governmental Parties intend that any future terms, conditions, prescriptions, and reconur~ndations, to the extent applicable to this proceeding, will be consistent with this Agreement and that any inconsistency shall be resolved in accordance with Section 7.7 of this Agreement. In addition, each Governmental Party reserves the right to exercise any authority it may otherwise have under the Federal Power Act in the event this Agreement is not filed with FERC, the Surrender Application is withdrawn, FERC allows the all filing of an application to relicense the Project, the Governmental Party withdraws from this Agreement, PGE fails to implement any provision of this Agreement, or this Agreement is terminated for any reason whatsoever, provided in each instance that PGE's rights shall be all governed by the applicable provision of Section 7 of this Agreement.

all Bull Run Hydroelec~e Project Portland GeneralElectric Company FERC Project No. 477 SettlementAgreement 9 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

6.1.2 Other Statutory Authorities.

If PGE is required to obtain, from a Governmental Party, a Permit that is not specifically described in this Section, such Governmental Party shall, subject to Section 1.3 of this Agreement, use its reasonable best efforts to exercise its authority in a manner consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not limit the ability of any Governmental Party to assert its authority under any statute other than the Federal Power Act in the event that the Agreement is not filed with FERC, the Surrender Application is withdrawn, FERC allows the filing of an application to relicense the Project, the Governmental Party withdraws from this Agreement, PGE falls to implement any provision of this Agreement, or this Agreement is terminated for any reason whatsoever, provided in each instance that PGE's rights shall be governed by the applicable provision of Section 7 of this Agreement.

6.2 Endangered Svecles Act.

6.2.1 Applicable Procedures.

As required by Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act ("ESA"), FERC may not issue the FERC Order until it has completed consultation with NMFS and USFWS with respect to threatened and endangered species affected by the Project. If FERC adopts the provisions of this Agreement, as described in the Biological Evaluation attached to this Agreement as Appendix D, as the proposed action, such proposed federal action shall be the basis for a Section 7 consultation between FERC and NMFS and USFWS, and any biological opinion relating to project removal shall address and evaluate such provisions. PGE has been designated as FERC's nonfederal representative for the purpose of preparing a Biological Evaluation, which will serve FERC as a draft biological assessment, and which is attached to this Agreement as Appendix D. As of the date of this Agreement, ESA Section 7 consultation has not been completed.

6.2.2 Consultation.

The Biological Evaluation attached hereto as Appendix D has been developed during the negotiations of the DWG and in informal consultation with NMFS and USFWS. PGE and NMFS and USFWS have worked col]aboratively to develop measures in the Decommissioning W Plan to address specifically the needs of ESA listed species. By signing this Agreement, NMFS and USFWS do not formally bind themselves to make any specific recommendations or take any particular action with respect to ESA compliance. NMFS and USFWS acknowledge that the information contained in the Biological Evaluation is sufficient for FERC to begin formal consultation under Section 7 of the ESA. If FERC issues a Biological Assessment that is not materially different than the Biological Evaluation attached hereto as Appendix D, and if no new information that is materially different than the Biological Evaluation becomes available during the consultation process, NMFS and USFWS anticipate that the measures contained in this Agreement will he adequate to avoid a jeopardy finding and minimize any incidental take occurring as a result of implementation of this Agreement for species presently listed as threatened or endangered. NMFS and USFWS expressly reserve the right, consistent with federal law, to take such future actions as they may deem necessary to meet their obligations under the ESA. If during consultation with FERC pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, NMFS or USFWS requests any conservation measures that are inconsistent with the terms of this

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany FERC ProjectNo. 477 SettlementAgreement 10 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Agreement, the Surrender Application, and the Decommissioning Plan, the provisions of Section 7.2.2 of this Agreement will apply. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit or waive the authority of NMFS and USFWS to take whatever action each agency may deem necessary if the FERC Order fails to satisfy fully the requirements of ESA Section 7, including failing to adopt as license conditions the terms and conditions contained in a biological opinion issued by NMFS and USFWS, provided that if such NMFS or USFWS action is inconsistent with this Agreement, PGE's rights shall be governed by the applicable provision of Section 7 of this Agreement.

6.2.3 Subsequent Permit Appfications.

NMFS and USFWS will consider the effects of dredge and fill activities during their consultation with FERC to the extent these activities are included in the proposed action pursuant to Section 7 of the ESA regarding the issuance of the FERC Order. If consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers regarding issuance of the 404 permit is required, NMFS and USFWS anticipate that the analysis of the impacts of the permit issuance will not differ from the analysis of the FERC action, unless the Corps proposes to issue a 404 permit that is materially different than the FERC action or NMFS or USFWS become aware of new information that is materially different than the information contained in the Biological Opinion provided to FERC. In the event that the State of Oregon assumes the Corps' 404 responsibilities, the need for additional Section 7 consultation would be determined pursuant to the terms of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's delegation of 404 responsibilities to the State of Oregon.

6.3 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

As required by provisions of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, USDA-FS and BLM have made a preliminary determination under Section 7(a) that removal of the Project, pursuant to this Agreement, the Decommissioning Plan and the FERC Order, developed consistently with this Agreement, will not "invade or unreasonably diminish the scenic, recreational, and fish and wildlife values" present in the river corridor at the date of its designation. This preliminary determination is attached to this Agreement as Appendix E.

6.4 Fedcrl~l Land Manaeement and Resource Plans.

a. The decommissioning of the portions of the Project located on federal lands managed by USDA-FS must comply with the standards and guidelines of the National Forest Management bet and the Mt. Hood National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as modified by the a Northwest Forest Plan, including its Aquatic Conservation Strategy. USDA-FS anticipates that PGE's performance of the covenants in this Agreement, the FERC Order, and the Decommissioning Plan will satisfy these standards and guidelines.

b. The decommissioning of the portions of the Project located on federal lands, managed by BLM must comply with the standards and guidelines of the Federal Land and Policy Management Act, and the Salem District Resource Management Plan. BLM anticipates that PGE's performance of the covenants in this Agreement, the FERC Order, and the Decommissioning Plan will satisfy these standards and guidelines.

Bull Run H~lxoelectricProject PoctlandGeneral ElectricComl~ny FERC ProjectNo. 477 Settlement Agreement I1 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

6.5 ~lgan Water Act.

6.5.1 Water Quality Certification at Surrender Application.

Concurrent with filing of the FERC Filing, PGE shall file with ODEQ an application for water quality certification pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 USC §1341. The certification application shall consist of this Agreement, with Exhibits and Appendices, and otherwise include the information required by Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 340-048- 0020(2). ODEQ anticipates that Project Removal activities consistent with this Agreement and Decommissioning Plan will comply with water quality standards and protect beneficial uses. Subject to consideration of public comment and any new information, ODEQ will issue a water quality certification for the Project Removal activities and not impose certification conditions inconsistent with this Agreement and the Decommissioning Plan; provided, ODEQ may issue certification conditions that (a) require PGE to apply for a second water quality certification at the time of PGE's application for a § 404 permit, in accordance with Section 6.5.2 below, enabling ODEQ to consider results of Interim Measures and other new information; (b) reserve ODEQ's right to reconsider the certification, in accordam:e with OAR 340-048-0040, in the event the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ("USACOE") issues a § 404 permit without a second water quality certification having been issued by ODEQ; and (c) reserve ODEQ's right to reconsider the certification, in accordance with OAR 340-048-0040, in the event removal of the Marmot and Little Sandy Dams is not completed by December 31, 21XD. ODEQ will endeavor to issue this certification within six months of receiving the application.

6.5.2 Water Quality Certification at Dredge and Fm Permit.

Upon applying for a dredge and fill permit for Project Removal activities from the USACOE pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, 33 USC § 1344, PGE shall seek water quality certification by ODEQ for such activities pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act by filing a certification application in accordance with OAR 340-048-0020(2). Provided such Project Removal activities are consistent with the terms of this Agreement and the a Decommissioning Plan, ODEQ anticipates that Project Removal activities will comply with water quality standards and protect designated beneficial uses. Subject to consideration of any new information at the time of the application for the dredge and fill permit and consideration of any public comment as required by law, ODEQ will issue a water quality certification for the Project Removal activities proposed to be authorized by the Corps' permit and will not impose certification conditions inconsistent with this Agreement and the Decommissioning Plan, provided, ODEQ may issue certification conditions that reserve ODEQ's right to reconsider the certification, in accordance with OAR 340-048-0040, in the event removal of the Marmot and Little Sandy Dams is not completed by December 31, 2009.

6.5.3 Water Quality Certification at 404 State Equivalent.

In the event ODSL assumes authority to administer dredge and fill permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act by the time such permit is required for Project Removal activities, PGE shall apply for such permit and ODEQ will make water quality determinations and provide comments to ODSL in accordance with ORS 196.825 or successor statutes in effect at that time. Provided such Project Removal activities are consistent with the terms of this Agreement and the

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland Genffal Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement 12 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Decommissioning Plan, ODEQ anticipates that Project Removal activities will comply with water quality standards and protect designated beneficial uses. Subject to consideration of any new information at the time of the application for the dredge and fill permit and consideration of any public comment as required by law, ODEQ will provide ODSL comments or proposed water quality conditions consistent with this Agreement and the Decommissioning Plan.

6.6 Sggt¢ Fish Passage Law.

This Agreement and the attached Decommissioning Plan serve as proposed fish passage under ORS 509.585. ODFW has submitted the Agreement and Decommissioning Plan to the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission in accordance with ORS 509.585(6).

6.7 State Removal/Fill Permit.

PGE shall apply to ODSL for a removal/fill permit or permits for Project Removal activities in accordance with ORS 196.795 et seq. Provided such Project Removal activities are consistent with the terms of this Agreement and the Decommissioning Plan, and subject to consideration of any new information at the time of the application for a removal/fill permit and consideration of any public comment as required by law, ODSL will issue a removal/fill permit or permits for the Project Removal activities and will not impose permit conditions inconsistent with this Agreement and the Decommissioning Plan.

SECTION 7. IMPLEMENTATION OF AGREEMENT

7.1 p~rties Bound.

a. The Parties shall be bound by this Agreement from the Effective Date until the terms of this Agreement are fulfilled and FERC issues an order accepting the Certification of Project Removal and terminating or accepting the surrender of any license then in effect, unless this Agreement is sooner terminated or a Party withdraws as provided in this Section 7.

m b. Prior to withdrawing from this Agreement as otherwise allowed by Section 7, a Party intending to withdraw must provide sixty days written notice of its intent to withdraw and undertake dispute resolution under Section 7.7 of this Agreement toward eliminating the reason for such withdrawal. If a Party withdraws as allowed by this Agreement, and the Agreement is not terminated as provided in this Section, that Party shall not be bound by this Agreement

all following such withdrawal.

7.2 RfsoluU?n of Dismltes Before FERC Order.

m The following events may occur before FERC issues the FERC Order, and the Parties shall seek to resolve any disputes regarding such events as provided in this Section.

7.2.1 Actions Before Filing of Surrender Application.

If any Party takes an action inconsistent with this Agreement before PGE files the Surrender I Application, any other Party nmy withdraw from this Agreement, and PGE may, in its sole

I Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General Electric Company FERC ProjectNo. 477 SettlementAgreement 13

m Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

discretion, determine not to file the Surrender Application, in which case this Agreement shall be of no further force and effect.

7.2.2 Actions After Filing of Surrender Application.

a. If any of the following occur aRer the Surrender Application is filed, but prior to FERC issuing the FERC Order:

1. The final biological opinion developed by USFWS or NMFS pursuant to the ESA requires in its incidental take statement, reasonable and prudent measures or terms and conditions implementing the reasonable and prudent measures that are inconsistent with this Agreement;

2. USDA-FS and BLM issue a determination pursuant to Section 7(a) of the WSRA that contains terms and conditions that are inconsistent with the Decommissioning Plan or the terms of this Agreement;

3. Any Party takes action inconsistent with this Agreement, including submitting conditions to the FERC Order or Permits inconsistent with this Agreement or failing to timely implement any provision of this Agreement; or

4. Any Party withdraws from this Agreement,

the remaining Parties first shall undertake dispute resolution under Section 7.7 of this Agreement toward conforming this Agreement to the action or otherwise keeping this Agreement in effect.

b. If dispute resolution does not resolve an inconsistent action or Party withdrawal to the satisfaction of remaining Parties, any Party may:

1. Petition FERC to adopt and enforce this Agreement; or

2. Withdraw from this Agreement and, upon withdrawal, to the extent allowed by law, may submit new or amended terms, conditions, prescriptions or reconmmndations to FERC in connection with Project Removal, seek new te-ns and conditions in a FERC annual license, and exercise any remedy or authority available under applicable law.

I In addition, PGE may withdraw the Surrender Application, or oppose any new or amended term, condition, or recommendation submitted to FERC by a withdrawing Party.

m 7.2.3 PGE Fails To Perform Interim Measures.

If, after the Surrender Application is filed but prior to FERC issuing the FERC Order, PGE fails to perform an Interim Measure and such failure is not excused by force majeure, any Party may provide notice to PGE of such failure. If PGE's failure to perform an Interim Measure is not capable of cure, or is capable of cure but not cured within 3 days of such notice, or is not curable within 3 days of such notice and PGE has not commenced a cure within that period and diligently proceeded with such cure, any non-PGE Party may: Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General ElectricCompany FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement 14

ma Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

1. Petition FERC to adopt and enforce this Agreement; or

2. Seek immediate specific performance without resorting to dispute resolution pursuant to Section 7.7 of this Agreement.

7.3 Resolution of DL~utes About FERC Order.

7.3.1 Conditions of FERC Order Inconsistent with This Agreement.

If the FERC Order is inconsistent with this Agreement, any Party may, without resort to the dispute resolution procedures of Section 7.7 of this Agreement, seek rehearing or judicial review of the FERC Order, or any other FERC order related to Project Removal, as provided by the Federal Power Act. If any Party seeks rehearing or judicial review, PGE may seek a stay of the FERC Order, and such other Party or Parties seeking rehearing will not oppose such request as to the term or condition subject to rehearing or judicial review and related terms and conditions

m affected by the rehearing or judicial review. The Parties shall follow dispute resolution procedures to the extent reasonably practicable while any such rehearing or appeal is pursued. If a Party has filed for administrative rehearing or judicial review and the Parties subsequently agree to modify this Agreement to conform to the inconsistent action, the filing Party or Parties shall withdraw the appeal or recommend such withdrawal, as appropriate. If, after rehearing or judicial review, as the case may be, the FERC Order is still inconsistent with this Agreement, any Party may, within 60 days aRer completing the dispute resolution procedures in Section 7.7 of this Agreement, withdraw from this Agreement and exercise any remedy available under applicable law. If any Governmental Party withdraws from this Agreement as provided in this m Section, PGE shall, within 30 days of such withdrawal, have the option to withdraw from the Agreement, to seek to withdraw the Surrender Application, or take any other action to oppose any action by the withdrawing Party. roll 7.3.2 Provisions Omitted from FERC Order

If the FERC Order does not contain all of the provisions of this Agreement because FERC expressly determines that it does not have jurisdiction to adopt or enforce the omitted provisions, a Party may withdraw from this Agreement as provided in Section 7.3.1 if its interests are am directly affected by the FERC determination. If the FERC Order does not contain all of the provisions of this Agreement because FERC expressly determines that it does not have jurisdiction to adopt or enforce the omitted provisions, and if a Governmental Party has not Ill withdrawn as provided in this Section, the Parties agree that they shall be bound by the entire Agreement, including those provisions omitted by FERC, and that any Party may, if necessary, exercise the remedies set forth in Section 7.5.2 of this Agreement. If a Governmental Party I withdraws from this Agreement as provided in this Section, the remaining Parties may withdraw or take such other actions as provided in Section 7.2.2.

a 7.4 Impact of Delay.

If the removal of Marmot Dam has not commenced by July 2007, the Parties will meet to 91111 determine whether the terms of the then effective FERC license, the FERC Order, or the Decommissioning Plan should he modified and whether additional interim measures should he implemented. If the Parties cannot reach agreement whether the terms of the FERC license, the I Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany FERC ProjectNo. 477 Settlement Agreement 15

m Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

FERC Order, or the Decommissioning Plan should be modified and whether additional Interim Measures should he implemented, any Party shall he free to withdraw and the Parties shall be free to assert their respective authorities under applicable law.

7.5 Reso~tl~ of Diseutes after Issuance of FERC Order.

7.5.1 PGE Falls To Comply with FERC Order.

If PGE fails to perform any of the previsions of this Agreement included in the FERC Order and is not excused by force majeure, any Party may, without resort to the dispute resolution procedures under Section 7.7 of this Agreement, petition FERC to enforce the FERC Order. If FERC fails to enforce the FERC Order, any Party other than PGE may withdraw from this all Agreement and exercise any remedy or authority available under applicable law.

7.5.2 PGE Falls To Perform Covenants of This Agreement Not Included in the a FERC Order.

IfPGE fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement that are not included as terms in the FERC Order, any Party may give PGE notice of the failure and, without resort to the dispute resolution procedures under Section 7.7 of this Agreement, seek specific performance or withdraw from this Agreement and exercise any remedy or authority available under applicable law.

7.5.3 Action by Third Party.

If, during the term of the FERC Order, a third party not a Party to this Agreement successfully petitions FERC or obtains a court order modifying the operation of the Project in a manner that is

I inconsistent with this Agreement, then any Party who objects to such order may give notice to the other Parties and commence dispute resolution procedures pursuant to Section 7.7 of this Agreement to determine whether this Agreement should he amended or otherwise reconciled

I with such inconsistency. In addition, the aggrieved Party or Patties may seek rehearing or appeal of such order. If. after exhaustion of the dispute resolution procedures or other proceedings, the order complained of remains in effect, or as modified is still inconsistent with this Agreemem,

It¢ any Party may withdraw from this Agreement and exercise any remedy or authority available under applicable law.

7.5.4 Review of Other Agency Actions.

To the extent provided by applicable law, any Party may seek administrative rehearing and judicial review of any action by a Governmental Party inconsistent with this Agreement. The dispute resolution procedures of Section 7.7 of this Agreement do not preclude any Party from timely filing and pursuing an appeal under the respective Governmental Party's applicable rules, or judicial review, of any such action that is inconsistent with this Agreement, or any other final condition that relates to subjects not resolved by this Agreement. However, the Parties shall follow dispute resolution procedures to the extent reasonably practicable while any such appeal of an inconsistency is pursued. If a Party has filed for administrative rehearing or judicial review of any inconsistent action and the Parties subsequently agree to modify this Agreement to

Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland GeneralElectric ~y FERC ProjectNo. 477 SettlementAgreement 16 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

I conform to the inconsistent action, the filing Party or Parties shall withdraw the appeal, or recommend such withdrawal as appropriate.

,tim 7.5.5 Resolution of Objections to Certification Notice.

In the evem dispute resolution under Section 7.7 of this Agreement does not resolve an objection I to the Certification Notice under Section 5.4 of this Agreement to the satisfaction of all Parties, any Party may petition FERC for appropriate relief, and may seek judicial review of any decision by FERC in response to such petition, or any petition filed by another Party. In the event dispute I resolution under Section 7.7 of this Agreement does not resolve an objection to the Certification Notice under Section 5.4 of this Agreement to the satisfaction of all Parties, and such objection concerns a provision of this Agreement omitted from the FERC Order because FERC expressly I determines that it does not have jurisdiction to adopt or enforce the omitted provision, any Party may seek specific performance of such provision or pursue any other remedy available under applicable law. am 7.5.6 Effect of Withdrawal of a Party Other than PGE.

Ifa Party other than PGE withdraws from this Agreement pursuant to this Section 7.5, PGE may in its sole discretion oppose any term, condition or recommendation that is inconsistent with this Agreement submitted to FERC by a withdrawing Party, or oppose the assertion of such other remedy or authority as that, or any other, Patty seeks to assert under any applicable law. In addition, if a Party withdraws from this Agreement pursuant to any provision of this Section 7.5 other than Sections 7.5.1 or 7.5.2, and PGE withdraws from the Agreement, PGE may notify FERC that PGE has withdrawn from this Agreement and seek such further FERC action as PGE in its sole discretion deems appropriate.

mm 7.6 Cooueration Amone Parties.

7.6.1 Responsibility for Costs.

I PGE shall pay for the cost of actions required of PGE by this Agreement. PGE shall have no obligation to reimburse or otherwise pay any other Party for its assistance, participation, or

lilt cooperation in any activities pursuant to this Agreement, the FERC Order, the Decommissioning Plan, or the Permits, except as specified in this Agreement, in cost reimbursement agreements among PGE and Governmental Parties, or as required by law.

7.6.2 Availability of Funds.

Implementation of this Agreement for a Party that is a federal agency is subject to the requirements of the Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 USC §§ 1341-1519, and the availability of appropriated funds. Nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall be construed to require the obligation, appropriation, or expenditure of any money from the U.S. Treasury. The Parties acknowledge that the Governmental Parties that are federal agencies shall not be required under this Agreement to expend any federal agency's appropriated funds unless and until an authorized official of each such agency affirmatively acts to commit such expenditures, as evidenced in writing. Implementation of this Agreement by Governmental Parties that are state agencies is subject to the availability of appropriated funds. Nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall Bull Run HydroelectricProject Pot'flandGeneral Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement 17 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

be construed to require the obligation, appropriation, or expenditure of any money from the Treasury of the State of Oregon. The Parties acknowledge that the Governmental Parties that are state agencies shall not be required under this Agreement to expend any appropriated funds 411 unless and until an authorized official of each such agency aff'u'matively acts to commit such expenditures, as evidenced in writing.

7.7 Dispute Resolution.

7.7.1 General I Except to the extent that FERC or another agency with jurisdiction of a particular issue has a procedure that precludes implementation of this Section 7.7, and except where dispute resolution J is expressly not required by another provision of this Agreement, all disputes among the Parties regarding the obligations of the Parties under this Agreement shall, at the request of any Party, be subject to dispute resolution pursuant to this Section 7.7. The Parties agree to devote such time, i resources, and attention to dispute resolution as are needed and as can be reasonably provided to attempt to resolve the dispute at the earliest time possible; and each Party shall cooperate in good faith to promptly schedule, attend, and participate in the dispute resolution. Each Party shall implement promptly all final agreements reached, consistent with its applicable statutory and regulatory responsibilities. Nothing in Section 7.7 is intended or shall be construed to affect or limit the authority of FERC, the Governmental Parties, or other agency with jurisdiction over the mm Project to resolve a dispute brought before it in accord with its own procedure and applicable law.

i 7.7.2 Procedures.

A Party claiming a dispute shall give notice of the dispute within 30 days of the Party's actual m knowledge of the act, event, or omission that gives rise to the dispute, unless this Agreement provides otherwise. At a minimum and in any dispute subject to these procedures, the Parties shall hold at least one informal meeting within 30 days after notice to attempt to resolve the I disputed issue(s). If the informal meeting fails to resolve the dispute, the Parties may by unanimous agreement attempt to resolve the dispute using a neutral mediator unanimously selected by the disputing Parties within 15 days after notice by a Party that the informal meetings did not resolve the dispute. The mediator shall mediate the dispute during the next 60 days after its selection. Any of these time periods may be reasonably extended or shortened by agreement of the Parties, or as necessary to conform to the procedure of an agency or court with jurisdiction i over the dispute. Unless otherwise agreed among the Parties, each Party shall bear its costs for its own participation in the dispute resolution.

i SECTION 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS

8.1 Entire Aereement. I This Agreement, together with the Exhibits and Appendices referred to in this Agreement, sets forth the entire agreement of the Parties with regard to the environmental, cultural, public I recreation, fishery, wildlife, operational, and related measures, relating to Project Removal. This Agreement is made on the understanding that each term is in consideration and support of every other term, and each term is a necessary part of the entire Agreement. If there is any all Bull Run H~h'oelectricProject Portland General Electric Co~y FERC ProjectNo. 477 SettlementAgreement 18 II Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

inconsistency between the Decommissioning Plan and this Agreement, this Agreement will controL If there is any inconsistency between the Decommissioning Plan and the Appendices to this Agreement, the Decommissioning Plan will control.

8.2 Modifications.

Any amendment or extension of this Agreement shall he in writing and executed by all Parties. As appropriate, the Parties will submit a statement to FERC in support of the amendment or extension.

8.2.1 Parties Other than PGE.

I During the implememation of the Decommissioning Plan, except as provided in the FERC Order or this Agreement, the Parties other than PGE may not request FERC to modify the FERC Order or Decommissioning Plan or other obligations of PGE, except in the event of materially changed factual circumstances (including, but not limited to, new listings of threatened or endangered species under the ESA). The Party seeking to modify the Decommissioning Plan shall provide the other Parties at least 90 days' notice to consider the proposed modification. A Party shall not he required to comply with this 90May-notice provision if it believes an emergency exists. Nothing in this section or Section 8.2.2 of this Agreement precludes the Parties from developing, through the Coordinating Committee or M1T, before or after the FERC Order, alternative measures to accomplish the objectives of this Agreement in those instances where measures set forth in the Decommisssioning Plan fail to do so.

I 8.2.2 PGE.

PGE shall not seek to modify the FERC Order or Decommissioning Plan, except as expressly provided in this Agreement. Prior to filing a proposed modification that would affect performance of the covenants in this Agreement, PGE shall provide the other Parties at least 90 days' notice of its intention to do so. Promptly following the giving of such notice, PGE shall I consult with Parties responding within 30 days of such notice regarding the need for and the purpose of the modification. PGE shall not he required to comply with this 90May-notice provision if it believes an emergency situation exists or if required to meet its responsibilities m under applicable law or an order of an agency with jurisdiction over PGE. In such a situation, PGE shall give notice to FERC and the Governmental Parties within five days of the event.

Each signatory to this Agreement certifies that he or she is authorized to execute this Agreement and to legally bind the Party he or she represents, and that such Party shall he fully bound by the terms hereof upon such signature without any further act, approval or authorization by such Party.

8.4 No Tb|r~-Party Beneficiaries.

Without limiting the applicability of rights granted to the public pursuant to applicable law, this Agreengnt shall not create any fight or interest in the public, or any member of the public, as a third-party beneficiary of this Agreement and shall not authorize any non-Party to nmintain a suit Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland Genegal Electric Comlmny FERC Project No. 477 SettleraentAgreement 19 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

at law or equity pursuant to this Agreement. The duties, obligations, and responsibilities of the Parties with respect to third parties shall remain as imposed under applicable law.

This Agreement shall apply to and be binding on the Parties and their successors and approved assigns. Upon completion of a succession or assignment, the initial Party shall no longer be a Party to this Agreement, but shall remain secondarily liable for the performance of the assignee. A transferring or assigning Party shall provide notice to the other Parties at least 60 days prior to completing such transfer or assignment.

&6 Fldlure Te Pgrform Due to Force Maleure. J 8.6.1 Declaration of Force Majenre.

No Party shall be liable to any other Party for breach of this Agreement as a result of a failure to perform or for delay in performance of any provision of this Agreement if such performance is delayed or prevented by force majeure. The term "force majeure" means any cause reasonably beyond the affected Party's control and that could not be avoided with the exercise of due care, whether unforeseen, foreseen, foreseeable, or unforeseeable, and without the fault or negligence of the affected Party. Force majeure may include, but is not limited to, natural events, labor or civil disruption, breakdown or failure of Project works, orders of any court or agency having jurisdiction over the Party's actions, delay in the FERC Order becoming final, or delay in issuance of any required permit. Increased cost for the perfo~e of the Decommissioning Plan shall not be deemed to constitute force rmjeure. Delay in issuance of the FERC Order shall not be force majeure with respect to PGE's performance of measures that it has covenanted to perform by a date certain, subject to other events of force majeure listed above. The Party whose performance is affected by force majeure shall notify the other Parties in writing within 24 hours aRer becoming aware of any event that such affected Party contends constitutes force majeure. Such notice will identify the event causing the delay or anticipated delay, estimate the I anticipated length of delay, state the measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay, and estimate the timetable for implementation of the measures. The affected Party shall make all reasonable efforts to promptly resume performance of this Agreement and, when able, to resume all performance of its obligations and give the other Parties written notice to that effect.

8.6.2 Consultation with NMFS and USFWS.

If PGE is unable to perform any obligation pursuant to any provision of this Agreement as a result of force majeure, it shall, within three days after notifying the other Parties of the existence at of an event constituting force majeure, initiate consultation with NMFS and USFWS to minimize any take of species listed as endangered or threatened.

Ill 8.6.3 Duration of Force MaJeure.

If PGE's inability to perform any obligation pursuant to any provision of this Agreement ma continues or is reasonably anticipated to continue for more than 180 days due to force rmjeure, any Party other than PGE may withdraw from this Agreement, and any Party that withdraws from this Agreement may pursue any other remedy available under applicable law. If any Parties Bull Run HydroelectricProject PoztlandGeneral ElectricC~y FERC Project No. 477 SeulementAgreement 2O Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

withdraw from this Agreement pursuant to this Section 8.6.3, PGE may oppose the assertion of such other remedy or authority that Party seeks to assert under any applicable law or notify FERC that PGE has withdrawn from this Agreement and seek such further FERC action as PGE in its sole discretion deems appropriate.

8.7 Indelnntflcation and Hold Harmless.

PGE shall indemnify and hold harmless each of the Parties to this Agreement and their respective hoards, commissions, officers, employees, and agents for any claims or liabilities for all property damage or personal injury arising from Project Removal activities undertaken by PGE or its employees, agents, contractors, or successors.

8.8 Governin2 Law.

By executing this Agreement, no federal agency or officer is consenting to the jurisdiction of a state court. By executing this Agreement, no state agency or officer is consenting to the jurisdiction of a federal court. All activities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement shall be in compliance with all applicable law.

8.9 E1¢¢¢¢4 Officials Not To BeneflL

No member of or delegate to Congress shall be entitled to any share or part of this Agreement or to any benefit that may arise from it.

8.10 N 9 Partnershin.

Except as otherwise expressly set forth herein, this Agreement does not, and shall not be deemed to, make any Party the agent for or partner of any other Party.

8.11 Refercpf¢ tO Reanlation~

Ill Any reference in this Agreement to any federal or state regulation shall be deemed to be a reference to such regulation or successor regulation in existence as of the date of the action.

J s.12 SoUce.

Except as otherwise provided in this Section, any notice required by this Agreement shall be written and shall be sent by first-class mail or comparable method of distribution to all Parties still in existence and shall be filed with FERC. For the purpose of this Agreement, a notice shall be effective seven days aRer the date on which it is mailed or otherwise distributed. When this Agreement requires notice in less than seven days, notice shall be provided by telephone, facsimile, or electronic mail and shaU be effective when provided. For the purpose of notice, the list of authorized representatives of the Parties as of the Effective Date is attached as Exhibit B. The Parties shall provide notice of any change in the authorized representatives designated in Exhibit B, and PGE's Decommissioning Coordinator shall maintain the current distribution fist of such representatives.

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland C,ene~al Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement 21 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

8.13 Paratwat~h Titles for Convenience Only.

The titles for the paragraphs of this Agreement are used only for convenience of reference and all organization, and shall not be used to modify, explain, or interpret any of the provisions of this Agreement or the intentions of the Parties.

8.14 SIL,nin2 in Countemart&

This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, and each executed counterpart a shall have the same force and effect as an original instrument as ff all the signatory Parties to all of the counterparts had signed the same instrument. Any signature page of this Agreement may be detached from any counterpart of this Agreement without impairing the legal effect of any at signatures, and may be attached to another counterpart of this Agreement identical in form having attached to it one or more signature pages.

mm 8.1s W ver. Waiver by any Party of the strict performance of any term or covenant of this Agreement, or of

g any right under this Agreement, shall not be a continuing waiver, and mast be in writing.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have entered into this Agreement as of the date first above

Ill written.

ALDER CREEK KAYAK SUPPLY, INC. AMERICAN RIVERS

Ill

By: ~ ~ B~

Secretary President

I AMERICAN WHITEWATER ASSOCIATION OF NW STEELHEADERS

I By By John Gangemi //Norm Ritchie Conservation Director / President Ill

CITY OF_SANDY, OREGON NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES I /) ] A SERVICE

all ~,,/ MaytJr "I Regional Administrator i J

Ill Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland C_,ene~alElectric Company FERC ProjectNo. 477 SettlementAgreement 22 am Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

THE NATIVE FISH SOCIETY NORTHWEST SPORTFISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

By: Bill M. Bakke Director Executive Director

OREGON COUNCIL OF TROUT STATE OF OREGON UNLIMITED

By: Tom Wolf Chair

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY WILDLIFE

Lindsay A. Administrator, Water Quality Division Director

By: C~x,~na2us ~

OREGON WATER RESOURCES PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT COMPANY

Chief Executive Officer

Bull Run H~h'oelectricProject Portland GeneralEleclri¢ Company FERC ProjectNo. 477 Settlement Agreement 23 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

SANDY RIVER BASIN WATERSHED COUNCIL

By: __ George Chairman onservation Director

USDA FOREST SERVICE USDI BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT-% By:

Acting Regional Forester State Director

USDI FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE WATERWATCH OF OREGON

Anne Badgley Catherine Vandemoer, Ph.D. Regional Director Executive Director

By:

S;~TCY~{~MENT AGREEMENT

Bull Run Hydraelec~c Project Portland General Elccuie Company FERC Project No. 477 Selllemenl Agreemenl 24 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Exhibit A

Decommissioning Plan

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 Settlement Agreement Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

DECOMMISSIONING PLAN FOR THE BULL RUN HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC Project No. 477

air

48 edby PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY With the J FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF HYDROPOWER LICENSING WASHINGTON, D.C.

November 2002 I

I Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

41m

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Project Description ...... 2 m 1.1.1 Project Features ...... 2 1.1.2 Existing Project Operations ...... 4 2. Detailed Project Removal Methodology and Schedule ...... 6 2.1 Overview of Removal Methodology and Schedule ...... 6 2.2 Marmot DamRemoval...... 15 2.3 Little Sandy Dam ...... 16 2.4 Flume ...... 17 2.5 Canals ...... 18 2.6 Tunnels ...... 18 I 2.7 Roslyn Lake ...... 19 2.8 Power House, Transformer Building, Shops, and Office Building ...... 19 2.9 Switchyard...... 20 2.10 Car Barn ...... 20 3. Mitigation Measures ...... 21 3.1 Operations Prior to Removal ...... 21 3.2 Revegctation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration ...... 21 3.3 Fish Passage ...... 22 3.4 ESA Aquatic Habitat Impact Minimization Measures ...... 22 I 3.5 Sandy River Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Program ...... 23 3.6 Historic Preservation...... 23

I 3.7 Navigation and Boater Safety...... 24 4. Monitoring ...... 24 4.1 Pre-removal Geomorphic Monitoring ...... 24

I 4.2 Water Quality ...... 25 4.2.1 Pre-Removal Turbidity Monitoring ...... 25 4.2.2 Turbidity Monitoring During Structure Removal...... 27 a 4.2.3 Post Removal Turbidity Monitoring ...... 27 4.2.4 Sediment Monitoring ...... 27 4.3 Stream Gages ...... 27 I 4.4 Monitoring of Construction Impacts ...... 28 4.5 Site Restoration and Monitoring ...... 28 4.6 ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingencies Plan...... 29

m 4.7 Monitoring Channel Complexity and Fish Passage to Determine PGE Endpoint ...... 39 4.7.1 Strategy...... 39 4.7.2 Proposed Channel Complexity Monitoring ...... 40 d 4.7.3 Proposed Channel Complexity Analysis...... 40 4.7.4 Proposed Monitoring Sites ...... 40 4.7.5 Duration of Monitoring ...... 41 I 4.8 Endangered and Threatened Terrestrial Species ...... 42 4.9 Other Basin Monitoring and Research Program ...... 42

Bull Run H3alroelectdcProject PortlandGeneral Elec~c ~y FERC Project No. 477 i Decorators/on/rig P/an Ill Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

a 6, Transfer of Water Rights ...... 43 7. Coordination Mechanisms ...... 44 7.1 PGE Organization ...... 44 7.2 Coordinating Committee ...... 45 7.3 ESA Monitoring and Implementation Team ...... 45

g 7.3.1 Structure and Function: ...... 45 7.3.2 Immediate Response ...... 46 7.3.3 Deliberative Response ...... 47 7.3.4 Endpoint Response...... 47 7.3.5 Roles and Responsibilities...... 48 7.4 Cost Summary ...... 49

List of Tables

ill Table 4-1. Sandy River ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingencies Plan ...... 33

List of Figures

Figure 1-1. Sandy River Basin and Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Location Map ...... 3 Figure 1-2. Map of the Sandy River Basin showing principal Bull Run Project features...... 5 Figure 2-1. Removal Schedule for Surrender Application for the Bull Run Decommissioning Project...... 9 Figure 4-1. Sandy River geomerphic reaches delineated by Stillwater Sciences...... 26 a Figure 7-1. PGE organizational structure for decommissioning of the Bull Run Project...... 44

Exhibits

Exhibit A: Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan

Exhibit B: Pre-implementation Analysis of Geornorphic and Ecological Impacts of Removing Marmot Dam on the Sandy River, OR: Proposal to Portland I General Electric

Exhibit C: Fish passage monitoring plan for the Sandy River following the g removal of Marmot Dam (June 21, 2002).

Appendices

Appendix A: PGE-ODFW Marmot Dam Fish Ladder Agreement

Appendix B: Sandy River Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Program

Appendix C: Other Basin Monitoring Opportunities

Appendix D: Disposition of PGE Lands I

a Bull Run H~lectric I~ PortlandGeneral Eloc~c Company FF2~C Projcc~No. 477 Decomm/s.g/om~ngP/an I Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

DECOMMISSIONING PLAN

1. Introduction

Portland General Electric Company ("PGE" or "Company"), the licensee for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 477 (the "Project"), is applying to the Federal Energy m Regulatory Commission ("FERC') to surrender the license for the Project. As part of the surrender process, PGE proposes to decommission and remove the project works as described in this Decommissioning Plan. am The initial license for the Project will expire on November 16, 2004. On November 12, 1999, PGE filed a notice of its intent not to seek a new license for the Project because it concluded that lIB the likely cost of providing the necessary level of protection, mitigation, and enhancement for the resources affected by the Project would outweigh the economic benefit of generation at the

! Project over the life of a new license. PGE then convened a Decommissioning Working Group CDWG") composed of all governmental and non-governmental stakeholders in the Project to develop a Decommissioning Plan that would maximize benefits to the resources affected by the Project consistent with PGE's obligations as a regulated public utility.

These efforts were successful, and this Decommissioning Plan has been developed pursuant to the accompanying Settlement Agreement and attachments, which has been signed by 23 parties ("Parties"). The Settlement Agreement describes the legal context and regulatory authorities and related obligations of each of the Parties. The Settlement Agreement establishes PGE's obligation to file with FERC an application to surrender the Project license and other associated documents, and requires that PGE shall decommission and remove the Project according to the specific methodology contained in this Decommissioning Plan. m As provided in the Settlement Agreement, PGE will apply to FERC to amend the current license to extend its term to 2017, to allow operation of the Project until 2008; to require pre-removal geomorphological and water quality monitoring; to implement interim protective measures for endangered and threatened species, as described in Section 3.1, starting in November 2004; and

I to request a surrender order for decommissioning, Project removal, and mitigation of the effects of project removal until the endpoint described in Section 4.7 below.

This Decommissioning Plan describes the Project removal methodology and timeline and has been approved by each of the parties to the Settlement Agreement. Unless otherwise noted herein, all of the actions identified in this Decommissioning Plan will he undertaken by PGE at Ill its sole expense and responsibility.

i Bull Run Hydroelectric Projea Portlmd General Electric Company IT~RC Projec~ No. 4"/7 1 Dec~g P/o~ Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

41m

im 1.1 Project Description

m 1.1.1 Project Features

I The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project is located on the Sandy River and its tributaries, Little Sandy and Bull Run Rivers, about 30 miles east of Portland, Oregon. All three rivers originate on the west slope of Mr. Hood in northwestern Oregon. The Little Sandy flows into the Bull Run, and J the Bull Run empties into the Sandy at River Mile (RM) 18.4. The Project location is shown on Figure 1-1.

I The main project features include:

• Marmot Dam, J • a trapezoidal concrete-lined canal that conveys water from Marmot Dam through three tunnels to the Little Sandy River,

m • Little Sandy Dam ( a diversion dam located on the Little Sandy River), • a 16,800-foot long timber flume, • Roslyn Lake, and • a 22-megawatt (MW) powerhouse.

The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project includes two diversion dams -- Marmot Dam and the Little Sandy Dam -- on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers, respectively. While minimum flows are maintained on the Sandy River downstream of Marmot Dam, all of the flow of the Little Sandy River is diverted, except when flows exceed the diversion capacity. Water is diverted from these m two rivers through a complex system of tunnels, and flumes, and routed to Roslyn Lake, the project forebay. From the forebay, flow is defivered to the Bull Run powerhouse through two penstocks. The diverted water is discharged to the Bull Run River after passing through the powerhouse.

Marmot Dam is located at RM 30 on the Sandy River and is a 47-foot high concrete gravity dam with a spillway crest length of 345 feet and a spillway crest elevation ranging from 732.1 feet mean sea level (msl) to 735.5 feet msl. The main section of the dam is 195 feet long. A fish ladder on the south side of Marmot Dam provides upstream passage. On the north end of the dam, a concrete gravity-section wing dam extends downstream to provide 140 feet of additional spillway, and to direct water to an intake structure. The intake structure has a trash rack and two rainier gates that regulate the diversion flow into a canal system. Approximately 700 feet below this diversion point, a truveling-screen facility bypasses downstream migrating fish back into the Sandy River. Water then flows westerly through a series of concrete canals, flumes, and tunnels for approximately 2 miles, and then ultimately in a northerly direction through a 4,702-foot long tunnel carved through a mountain. The tunnel ends at the Little Sandy River, where the diverted Sandy River water joins the Little Sandy just upstream of the Little Sandy Dam.

Bull Run Hydroelec~c Project Porthm¢l General Elecuic Company FERC Projec~ No. 477 2 Decomm/ss/on/n& P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

S~-~- ~ve Ihsin a~d hm Xy o Location .Map

llelle,-- ll~eo~ieel

Ill

I ilI II)45

T.,I

L J|

r II

i Jl.~l

i ILN

Figure 1-1. SandyRiver Basin and Bull Run Hydroelectdc Project LocationMap. l

d B~I Rum H~l~c ~C ~ No. 477 3 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

The Little Sandy Dam is 15.75 feet high, with a spillway crest at elevation 702.75 feet. The free- overflow spillway is 114 feet long, 1.5 feet thick at its crest and approximately 18 feet thick at its base. At the Little Sandy Dam, the combined waters of the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers enter a a 16,810-foot-long wooden-box flume and flow westerly before discharging into Roslyn Lake, the project forebay. Twelve-inch flashboards minimize the time that water is spilled past the dam and allow the wooden flume to be filled to capacity.

Roslyn Lake is a 160-acre man-made lake that is supplied with water entirely from the Sandy and Little Sandy River water conveyance system and from the City of Portland's municipal water supply conduits. The City of Portland's facility is capable of supplying up to 260 cfs from the Bull Run watershed into Roslyn Lake during periods of excess capacity. There is no significant drainage area for Roslyn Lake; so the lake is normally maintained at its full elevation m of 655 feet, msl. From that elevation, 7 feet of allowable drawdown provide 928 acre-feet of usable storage. An intake structure on the east side of the lake allows water to flow through two 1,40G-foot long penstocks down to the four unit, 22-MW powerhouse on the Bull Run River, J developing a 320-foot head. Water is then discharged into the Bull Run River and travels downstream 1.5 miles where it joins the Sandy River at approximately RM 18. Project works also include a transformer building adjacent to the powerhouse with two 9,000-kVA, 57/6.6 kV transformer hanks; an outdoor switchyard with a single circuit 57-kV transmission line extending approximately 2.8 miles to a switching substation; a 12.5-kV line providing auxiliary power;, and appurtenant facilities. Principal Project features are shown on Figure 1-2.

1.1.2 Existing Project Operatlom

m PGE is authorized under its water right to use up to 800 cfs of combined flow from the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. Little Sandy River flow, up to

I 800 cfs, is diverted first into Roslyn Lake via the flume. When Little Sandy flow is less than 800 cfs, which occurs throughout most of the year, Sandy River flow is diverted at Marmot Dam to supplement the Little Sandy River flow into Roslyn Lake.

a Minimum flow requirements below Marmot Dam can limit the amount of Sandy River water available to be diverted. Since 1976, PGE has been required under its current license to provide a the following minimum flows below Marmot Dam: 200 cfs from June 16 through October 15; 400 cfs from October 16 through October 31, and 460 cfs from November 1 through June 15. Additionally, the canal level is restricted to 4.7 feet (maximum canal level is 5.8 feet) from i March 1 to May 31 by FERC Order dated August 19, 1997, to protect juvenile salmonids during movement downstream.

all On the Little Sandy River, there is no minimum flow release below the diversion dam. There is some leakage, and with accretion flows, the summer low flow at the mouth is about 5 cfs. To ensure that 800 cfs of flow can enter the wood-box flume without any flow over the spillway, at PGE uses 12-inch flashboards on the Little Sandy Diversion Dam. Spill is minimized to avoid stranding fish below the Little Sandy Diversion Dam as water levels recede after spill events.

all

at Bull Rim HydroelectricProject PortlandGeneral Electric ~y FERC ProjectNo. 477 4 Decomm/&s/on~g P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

LARGE-FORMAT IMAGES

One or more large-format images (over 8 1/d' X 11") go here. These images are available in FERRIS at:

For Large.Format(s): Accession No.: 0 o%

Security/Availability: ~//PUBLIC

[] NIP [] CEIl [] NON.PUBLIC/PRIVILEGED

File Date: ~ Docket No.: P-q 7

Parent Accession No.:

Set No.: '~ of

Number of page(s) in set: /

~..G R,EV.. 4/2003 (ydlo~) Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

At full generation, the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project draws approximately 900 cfs of flow from Roslyn Lake. The project's average annual generation for the period 1995-1999 was 110,979 MW-hours.

2. Detailed Project Removal Methodology and Schedule

2.1 Overview of Removal Methodology and Schedule

Unless otherwise noted, PGE shall fund and implement all aspects of Project decommissioning, including but not limited to, all engineering, environmental assessment, permitting, construction, and mitigation activities associated with the removal of the Bull Run Project, restoration of I PGE's Project lands in accordance with this Plan and the Settlement Agreement, and mitigation of Project removal impacts on downstream habitat and fish passage. PGE shall monitor environmental impacts during and after Project removal and implement certain actions defined in the contingency plan in Section 4.6 to respond to defined events during the monitoring phase. PGE shall remove the dams and ancillary structures safely and in a manner that:

• minimizes environmental impacts; • satisfies PGE's obligations under the Endangered Species Act (ESA); • provides for the prudent management of sediments now located upstream of Marmot Dam and Little Sandy Dam; • restores the site to a condition suitable for multiple use; and • terminates FERC jurisdiction as expeditiously as possible.

Project removal will begin in 2007 and continue until 2009. PGE will remove the two project dams during successive 17-week in-water work periods (July-Octoher) in 2007 and 2008. Marmot Dam will be removed in the Fast in-water work period before the existing canal/tunnel system is removed so that it can be used to divert a portion of the Sandy River flow. Ota~ i Marmot Dam is removed, closure of the canals and tunnels will be initiated and they will be removed over a period of 8 months without the need for in-water work. Little Sandy Dam will be removed during the second in-water work period in the year aRer Marmot Dam is removed. i Flow, which is minimal, will be routed around the dam, into the flume, which will he opened up to return flow to the Little Sandy streambed below the dam. The concrete structures supporting the flume within the Little Sandy River channel will also be removed during the second in-water work period. Roslyn Lake will be drained and removal will commence concurrently with the Little Sandy work.

The powerhouse will be removed between August 2008 and Juno 2009, unless a responsible party assumes ownership and liability for the complex. The last Project features to be decommissioned will be the Car Barn area, which will be used for staging during other decommissioning activities, and the switchyard and distribution facilities. Any hazardous material discovered during decommissioning will be cleaned up and disposed of in accordance with then current regulations. All disturbed areas will be treated in accordance with the am Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan described in Section 3.2 and attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A. POE shall complete all Project removal

I Bull Rum Hydroelectn.cProject Portland General Electric Company FERC Proj~ No. 477 Decomm~sionm£ P/an il Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

m activities according to the timeline set forth in the schedule shown in Figure 2-1 (located at the end of this Section 2.1).

I Project decommissioning has five phases: (1) pre-removal monitoring; (2) permitting; (3) interim protective measures; (4) Project removal and associated protective actions; and (5) post-removal activities, including monitoring, other Sandy River Basin conservation actions, contingency response and endpoint determination. The first three phases will occur prior to removal of the Project. The fourth phase -- project removal and associated protective actions -- will take place from 2007 through 2009. The fifth phase will begin after Marmot dam removal and continue for at least five years until ESA and other endpoint determinations have occurred. The description that follows outlines the activities that will occur in each phase and provides references to detailed descriptions of each activity elsewhere in this Plan. I (1) Pre-removal monitoring: Pre-removal monitoring includes two geomorphological studies: a three year evaluation of Sandy River geomorphic conditions that will be used for PGE's post- m dam removal "endpoint monitoring" (Section 4.1); and another that will provide a geomorphological context for further evaluations, as explained in Section 3.1. Pre-removal monitoring also includes water quality and turbidity monitoring prior to and during darn removal activities, (Section 4.2), as well as northern spotted owl surveys to avoid disturbance of nesting northern spotted owls (Section 4.8).

(2) Permitting: PGE shall obtain all federal, state, and local permits required to undertake removal of the Project. Removal of Marmot Dam and Little Sandy Dam will require a dredge and fill permit from the Corps of Engineers and a water quality certificate from the Oregon J Department of Environmental Quality ("ODEQ"). PGE will apply for these authorizations, including an ODEQ water quality certification in connection with the dredge and fill permit, no

a less than 18 months prior to the expected start of removal activities. The ODEQ application will require 24 months of water quality monitoring data, and preparation of the applications is expected to take 6 months. Accordingly, PGE expects to begin water quality sampling in 2003

I and permitting activities in January 2005. Design and consultation activities, preparation of plans, and awarding of bids will take place simultaneously with the permitting activities.

I (3) Interhn Protective Actions: As described in Section 3.1, PGE will implement imerim protective measures during 2004-2007. In addition to existing license requirements, these interim measures will include new diversion canal water elevations and timing, and Marmot

Ill Dam fish ladder operation and maintenance commitments.

(4) Project Removal: As noted above, the removal of Marmot Dam and Little Sandy Dam will

I be accomplished within two 17-week in-water work periods in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Project removal will start with the removal of Marmot Dam in 2007. A fish passage trap and haul operation as well as a sediment containment plan, described in Sections 3.3 and 3.4, a respectively, shall be implemented during Marmot Dam removal. Aquatic habitat impact minimization actions, described in Section 3.4, will be implemented during Marmot Dam removal. These will include single season Marmot dam removal; cofferdam removal at the end alB of the first in-water construction season prior to high winter flows; maximizing discharge to breach the cofferdam and cause rapid sediment scour; shaping sediment banks to minimize dry

I Bull Rml HydrocM~ic Pro~ Ponla.d Ger~ral El~ic Company FERC Proj~ No. 477 Decomm/s.6on/ng P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

season bank sloughing; providing fish passage during in-water dam removal activities; and providing minimum downstream flows into the Sandy River. Turbidity above and below the work areas will be monitored according to the 401 water quality certificate, which will also N identify any removal-related management practices required to minimize high turbidity levels that occur as a result of the removal activities.

I The existing canal/tunnel system will he retained during removal of the Marmot Dam to divert a portion of the Sandy River flow. The canals will he removed starting in November 2007, when removal of Marmot Dana has been completed. Removal of the canals and closure of the tunnels m will take place from November 2007 until September 2008. Little Sandy Darn will he removed during the second in-water construction period, starting in July 2008. Removal of the wooden flume will start at the same time as removal of Little Sandy Dam and continue until June 2009. I The draining and regrading of Roslyn Lake work will commence concurrently with the Little Sandy work; draining and regrading will be completed by November 2008. The powerhouse and the switchyard and distribution facilities will be removed between August 2008 and June 2009. The last features to he removed will he the Car Barn area, which will he removed starting in June 2009. All removal activities are scheduled to be completed by September 2009.

I (5) P~t-Removal Activities: Post-Marmot Dam removal monitoring, contingency response, and endpoint determination will begin with the removal of the Marmot cofferdam, which is expected to occur by November 2007. These activities are described in Section 4. Monitoring actions I include ESA fish and terrestrial species monitoring (Sections 4.6 and 4.8, respectively), turbidity monitoring above and below the Project reaches in order to quantify the removal impacts

am (Section 4.2.3), site restoration monitoring (Section 4.5), and funding of non-PGE research efforts (Section 4.9). As described in Section 4.6, ESA contingency response will occur if monitoring indicates fish impacts. Endpoint determination monitoring will continue for a

I minimum of five years from removal of the cofferdam. Under certain circumstances, described in Section 4.6, monitoring activities will continue for additional seasons.

m PGE shall transfer its Project and non-Project lands to Western Rivers Conservancy, as described in Section 5. PGE's water fights shall be transferred instream, as described in Section 6. Additional Sandy River Basin conservation actions, including a Sandy River fall chinook salmon

I conservation program, and monitoring and research actions shall he implemented prior, during, and after Marmot Dam removal.

all Figure 2-1 is a schedule showing all decommissioning and removal activities. Project removal activities have the potential to affect the two protected species, the bald eagle and the northern spotted owl, that may occur in the Project area. Before any Project removal activities are

I undertaken, PGE will conduct surveys, as described in Section 4.8. The schedule presented in this Section assumes that neither species will he present. If either species is present, PGE will consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") to determine whether any modification to the Project removal methodology is required.

I Bull Run Hydtoelec~c Project Portland General Electric Company FERC Pr~ecL No. 477 Decommissioning Plan I I i I i • I i I I I I I I I I I i

h." n] M

I 12 2003 ~04 ZO05 om12m 1o t11 o12 F0 IB Tmk m gawilkm ~tert lilll III II UlIIII llllllIIIIIIllllIII M 1.8 1016 d IIJIIJl~ IIII,~NJII m Imam I I I I t=r PH1 - PRE-REMOVAL MONITORING ! : ', I I I I I I I FO I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I 0 11M d tlJ'IUD2 IOJ3O~D7 I I mee: I I I U PH2 - PERMITTING I I I I $ I I t~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t 0 0 I I I t~ I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I $ $ I I I I I I I i * i I I I I t I I 3.11 1114d 11/11~4 MAHAD7 I I I PH3 - INTERIM PROTECTIVE ACTIONS 0 I I I I I I I ! I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ¢ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F0 I I I f) W'Td I~ ql~,¢l~ I I I FO t,I PH4 - PROJECT REMOVAL I I I I I I ) I I I I I < I I I I I I ¢ ! I $ FO I I I I I I I I I I | | I I I I I I I I I ! I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~11711d 11/15,O4 11AH,f12 ,' 1t/I~I4 U PH6 - POST-REMOVAL ACTIVTTIE8 I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I ! I I I ) I ! I I 0 M

Figure 2-1. Removal Schedule for Surrender Apphcation for the Bull Run Decommissioning Project. t~ t~ o o t~

0 f) FO

Bull Rim HydroelecCic Project Portland General ElecCic Comlnmy FERC Project No. 477 9 Decomm/s_c/on/ng P/an I li II I I • I I I I I I I I I I I I

Figure 2-1, continued.

M ~O (3 I 12 ~ "~ ,]~! ! k., C r-,lr.; CC.1 v., C~ M ~'.,~ IB lrm llmnl BllUml ~ flnllm ]-IlllllllllllllllllllllIIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlUlIlllIIIII ~S t~I PH1 - PRE-REMOVAL MONITORING llnld II.II1~12 Itj3111 I | I I r'e I I I I I I I I I FO I | I I I I I ¢ I I I I I I I ! I I ! I I I I I i.t ao,~,~m~ a~ol~ o~ !~,~ 311:1 d Ia~il6 ~11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ) ) I I | I I 0 1.1.1 Flold Calng -Yet 1 122d I 03/15/05 08/31.o5 ,' ----,I~IMI~ '.i iinl4~li ,' I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I t~ ! I 0 0 1.1,2 Field C.,II1B - Yet 2 122d 03/15,O8 06/31/06 I I I t~ I I I I I I I I I U~ | I I 782d 08/~1,102 07/29J05 I I 1.2 ~--.,~.. c ~.~c. " " i i i ' ' I | I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I 0 521 d 07.O'1/03 (]6/28.05 I I I I I I I I I t I I l I | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F0 I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I $ | F0 < FO

0 M

t~ t~ 0 0 t~

0 fl FO c~

Bull Rim H~oelec~c Proje~ Portland General Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 I0 DeconunissionlngPlan I II I I li li ! I ! I ! I I I ! I I I I

o Figure 2-1, continued. 0J

l"11 ~ 2004 2005 2006 ~eei~OlO[~alt 20t2 C~ m T/ i ~nl I Ill Ill Ill Ill IIIIIIIIlllllllllllllll I z, PH2 - PERMITTING ~,m d t'mr,~ I.~ I I ~ ; ; ; ; i i i i i i i ! i i ~0 I I e I I I I I 0J ~.1 M1 -w~w ~ CmtllSc~im 211 d 11/11 II~14413 i' ll.fldM13 , i i , , , , I I I I | I I I I I r0 I I I I e I I $ I I o. I I I I I I I I I I ,m~ 610 d 1t43,416 t~QI~$ , , , , , , , , , , I I I I I I t I e I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I 0 129d 01A~3A~5 Oe~ , IIAI3A~ i I , , , , , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t~ I I I I I Q 1,2.2 suloml ,¢.Roic/~n Od~ ~ , l@~~, , , , Q I I I I I I I I I I t~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t.2.3 OOEG~0EDSL Re~w I I I I I t I I I I I I I I $ I I I I I I I I I I Q t..Z.4 OOEQ.~OEX~L Isle Psmi 0d 12/2W08 1~ , , , 1~ ~ OBEQ~'OE.~LmPmlnlt, I I I | I I I I | I I I I I I I I I I I d ' ' i , , , , , , , 1.4 C~llmly IIimlill ~I ~I I I I I I I I I I I fo I I I I I I I I I I fl i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I fo Z.4.~l I I I I I I I I | I fO I I I I I I I I I I 0d 11,(30/05 11/30J~ I I I I i i I I i I I I I !.43 cou~y Rmlsw lgSd 12X)1,O5 0~WIR~ I ',-:-I :-- I I M I I I I I I I I l I 2.4.4 ~ Imn.e pem~ 0d 108/31~08 0W31~OS 0 I I I I I I I I I ) I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I ~ II Bkl 11M d tl,qlM~ ~ I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I * I I I I I I I I I I I

;~1.1 1076d 1t/1SJ02 12~9408 I I I I l I I e i i I t~ I i I | i t~ i Ii I' 'I t1 t~ M4~I liim* , tW31II ,* ,' ,' ,* Q nr~Pb~&~ 217d 0t,102~18 I 1(1131,406 , Q $ I I I I I I I I t~ I I I I I I i I I I I i I I I I Z.i,3 108d 11~01~6 ~ , ,ltRI~I ~ ~, , , , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I e 0 Z.i.4 0d03m~ o3m~ : I . IIl~M41,~ A~mdltm.mml~ ', fl I I I | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I fO I I I I I I I I I I r~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I | I I I | I

Bull Run H)~boeloc~c Project PorOm~l C)ene~ Hecuic Comtmny FERC Project No. 4T7 11 D~omm~s/on/ng P/an | I II li • li I I I I I I I I I li I I I

F~ (-} Figure 2-1, continued. F~ F.J nl [11

I ID TeJk Name -,, 3.8 1114d 11/llL¢14 IIIAM.¢I7 , 11/'11MI4 ~ m.~lR7 ; ; ; r0 PH3 - INTERIM PROTECTIVE ACTIONS I I I I I I I I I I I I 4 I I I I I I I re I I I I ! I I I I I ro 3.1 FIIh Ladder l Trip Fun4110 IS4d 11~11UI4 IIIRt.ill i I I I I I t t I I I I I I t I 3.,1 r.m,I L:)~ n~(ddsm~ i-sm ) d II~.q4dl~ IlldlldlT , ~ ~ , , I I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I 3.3 hind (:h*n~k Cm~rm~ F~r*m t~ I I I I I I I I I I Q I I I I I I I I I I Q t~ :].4 r-m~ ~ ~u~c Monbd~ S beNr~ I d MJIIE MJI~JI7 ', ,' ,' I)1.11~r ~ fund Csq~'~l~ Aqu~l~ IIIonllm I I I I I I I I I I I~ro~lm I I I I I I I I I I I I $ I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I Q I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

fo o fo

0 M

t~ t~ Q Q t~

0 0 fO re

Bull Run Hydc~eleclnc Proje~ Portland Ge.ner~ EIec~c Company FERC Project No. 477 12 /k.con,mss'/onmg P/an | I ! I l | I I I I I I i I I I i P~ P~ W~

Figure 2-1, continued. W~

IZ :Z N m T/m DursOms scmt IIIIIIIIl!llillllllll l[i IIIIlllllll ? 4,o PI-14. PROJECT REMOVAL i~r d ~ ~ilTllm I ,, ,, .... , , I o o o o o o : I ,, ,, , , , , , ,, I 4.1 lqr~ In4Uitw Pwllod Oi d OTAHIOT 10~!R7 I ,' ,' ,' ,' o o o o o o o , fO I 42 Second ~ Pmliod ~d ~i t~1 I ,' ', ,' ,rtAHRt i: III~IRU ,' I I o i ¢ o i I o I I I f o o o o o o I I o o e o o ~ o 4.3 ~ conlnmt(o) ~d ~ ~ I I o o I o o I o I , , , ,, ,, , , , ' 0 I o I I o o o I I I 4,3.1 Pre In-wler INod(4"lldl Trilp & Heul Ficiiy "~d 05~07 I , ', e~NL~, ii u@Lqrt , , I , .... , , , I I I o o o I 4.3.2 C~b~c~ Two Cofferd~u I I o o I ¢ o o I e o o 1.3.3 Remove ~ ~m & TImb~ ¢..db 75d 07~W~ 11~? I o o o I o e o I o i I o i Remove ~ 0 ~maM~a~e ~ae 110d ~ 11~ I I i D I I I o o o I I o o o 112d 11~ I , fO I o o o ¢ o o o o o o I o , 0 o o i , fO lnnd 11~ ~ I , , , tt~17 ~l 1 I o ¢ * o o I o I I I I I° o e 4 o o , fo I ' ~ • ~ ', 45d O',rJOl,4)B OWO~,IOIB I i I o o o o ¢ o I ,, ,, , , , , , , I Re~o~e T1ml~r ~ Slle 24Sd 07JOIJ08 QIBJOI~D~ I I o o I o o o I o o i i s i~mm~ C~ Bfn AfI~4~N~m ~'~ eSd ~ CIWOTRO ,, , ,, : .----,.---.,----""-- l ¢ I • I o I I o o o I 1,3.t0 Rm~ove Roed & Bddgo kSendy I .... : : ," ,,- I I o o o I I o o I o I ,, ,- ¢3.11 C/neeA~rdl Rock11.~e , 1 1 et~Jee il el~4e 1 I i I , , , : : I i I I o I I I i I t3.t2 Ro~ado & Sr,~e Road,~mL.im I I I i f o I I I I L2.~2 Ck~e Tunnel 0 I I I I i I I i I e o I I i I 4.3.13 Remove PoweqhauoeA~cx~ Sb I I I i e I i o I I ~ 0 4,3.14 Renv:Ne Dtsl~0ullm & Swl~lywd/RoMare Sb ~d 0~1~ 1~ o i I ' 0 o o o o o ~ o o o ' fO s o o I I o ; o I ; I I I : ° I I o I I o o o o o o I I I o I o I o o o

Bull Run H),d~electric Proje~ Ponl~d General Electric Company FI~.C Project No. 47T 13 D~omm~s/o~n 8 P/~ | II | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m

Figure 2-I, continued. 0

2009 into ~011 ~012 M El Te~k liimne Dur~lan III III II1 III I PI-I8 - Pos"r.REMOVAL ACTTVTTIE8 zm d I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I | i.1 La~mw Ril~" Trap l Ha~l ~DI d It,¢~.¢1T iI,VIIRI I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I ~0 t I I I l I I I I I t I I I I I 130d 01J01J07 08/29~107 I I i I I I I I I t ~ ! I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I 0 L1.2 Declslan to In~al Trap 0 d 02/'28A~ 02J'28.1~8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t~ I I I I Q $.1.3 Feb/Procure 23 d 02/28A)8 03.G1Re I I I I Q I I I I I I t~ I I I I I I ~', | ~,~', ,, ,, S.1.4 In~ Low~ m,~r Tr~ D~e) 10d 04A)1~08 04~14J08 I I I I I I I I I I I I I | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ', ,, Q In~d Rh~ Bem~ 2d 04/15RG 04/18~i~ I I I I I I ! I I ! I I I I I I I I I ! S.2 Turl~ m:~mln~ 1]11 d 11All.Q7 11~1/12 I t ''' I' i i fo I I I I g o I I I I I I I I I fO I I I I ! U t244d t'I4H.CW I I 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I fO I I I I I I $ I I I I S.3.1 R~m 0 & 1 ~ntomg 783d 11 ~01A)7 I I I I I I ,; ...... I I I I | I I I I I I I I I I I I S.3.2 t~ech 3 Monlorh~ 1087d 11J01.107 I I I I M I I I I I I I I | I I I I I t I I I I I S.4 7e~d 83R3,ClG IIIGR2/11 I I I' m: 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I U Itmmr~r Ber,k Monlmln~ d 11.¢114e 113R3R~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I f I I I I I I I I / I I I I I t I I I S.6.1 ~,,- req'd) Rmm~Ir Be-~z ,14d 01.O1J08 02/2g~08 I I . N.QI.'Iill ¢m ~ '. I I I I I ) I I I I I t~ I I I I I I I I I t~ I I I Q S.S.2 IrmecURe~m~ mq'd) ~ Be-~k: 44d 01~01~9 03A]3A~ I I I Q I I I I I I I I I t~ I I I I I I I ¢ I I I Tra~elr~r ~N~b~" 111ghl~ il d lle.elR8 : m,elRe I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' '11t~1~314 0 i.7 Tren~m" ~ IJmdls 1Md 11,q~II4 I~'IU~ I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I t I I I fO I I r~ U Tranmrer Prqlm:t Lands d IIl~JIt,llll IDR4~II I I I I I I I $ I I I I I I I I I | I I I I

Bull R~ H~1~)olectric Proj(~ Portland C.('n(md BccU'ic ~y FERC Proj¢~ No. 477 14 Decomm~fum~I& Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

2.2 Marmot Dam Removal

Approximately 980,000 cubic yards of sediment have accumulated behind Marmot Dam. Sampling of the reservoir sediment, based on drilling a series of cores into the sediment wedge upstream of the dam and mapping of various sediment units, indicates that the reservoir sediment consists of two main units, with the pre-dam channel bed representing a third distinct unit. The uppermost unit ranges from approximately 6--18 feet in thickness and is composed of sandy gravel with cobbles and boulders, becoming thicker toward the darn. Below this upper layer is a layer of predominantly fine sediment (silty-sand to sand with gravel, ranging from 13-35-feet N thick).

PGE will completely remove the existing roller compacted concrete ("RCC') dam to the level of I the original river bed, the older timber crib dam just upstream, the canal inlet and headworks, and the fish ladder within one construction season, extending from July l to October 31, 2007. In order to accomplish this, the in-water work period will have to extend from July until the end of October. Non-in-water preparatory work will he done in May and June. Only as much sediment (sand, gravel, and cobbles) as is required for the planned demolition (i.e., that which is in the immediate vicinity of the RCC and timber crib dams) will be removed. In order to perform the demolition of the instream structures, a cofferdam will be placed a sufficient distance upstream to permit removal of the old timber crib dam, a portion of which was previously abandoned in place, and another cofferdam will be placed downstream of the RCC dam. The upstream cofferdam will be designed to withstand flows up to approximately 2,500 cfs, and will be designed to fail during high flows after dam removal is completed in October. The upstream cofferdam will require dewatering wells to maintain the cofferdam stability. These wells will be shut down (and possibly reversed) when the higher flows arrive in the fall to expedite the breaching of the cofferdam. The downstream cofferdam will either be removed

I prior to the failure of the upstream cofferdam, or will be designed to fail when the upstream cofferdam is breached during high flows after dam removal is completed in October.

I Stream flows will he diverted through the existing approach channel and canal during construction. If necessary to accommodate the 2,5(X)-cfs capacity desired, PGE will line the approach channel. This channel lining will also reduce the pumping requirements for the all cofferdam wells. A fish ladder/trap and haul system shall be constructed and operated by PGE during Marmot Dam removal activities, beginning when the Marmot Dam fish ladder becomes inaccessible/inoperable, and ending when the cofferdams are breached. This passage/trap and haul activity is described in Section 3.3. F'L~yto sixty cfs of the diverted flow will be used for attraction water at the fish ladder/trap. This attraction flow will be piped from the canal into the trap and cascade down the ladder to the strearrL Up to 600 cfs will be conveyed down to the a Little Sandy Dam and into the flume for power generation. The remainder of the diverted stream flow will spill back to the stream through the wing wall near the inlet to the canal. The minimum flow requirements (as stated in the current license) will be maintained below Marmot dam.

I Controlled blasting and excavators will be used to remove the RCC and timber crib dams and fish ladder. The concrete will be rubblized and stockpiled on-site in the laydown area adjacent to J the clam for a beneficial end use, such as road surfacing, structural fill material and/or concrete production. PGE will remove the minimal amount of sediment necessary to accomplish removal

ill Bull RLm Hydroelectric Pro~cct Portland General E]ec~c Company FERC Project No. 477 15 Decomm/s,do~g P/mr

all Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

of Marmot Dam. This approximately 30,000 cubic yards of excavated sediment will be placed on Bureau of Land Management ("BLM") land as shown on Exhibit F, Sheet 12 of the Surrender Application. The specific placement and treatment of the sediment will be determined jointly by the BLM and PGE during the preparation of the contract for the removal of the Project. The sediments will he contoured to blend with the surrounding area and to prevent erosion into waterways. The sediments will be covered with topsoil if needed and revegetated in accordance with the Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan described in Section u 3.2. All work on BLM land shall he subject to prior BLM approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.

The proposed excavation of upstream sediments is intended to he accomplished by employing track-mounted excavators, rubber tired loaders and off-highway end dump vehicles. The off-site sediment placement will be shaped by a track-mounted dozer. The existing sand/sediment m retention facility will be used as a sediment control facility for any runoff from the pile during the demolition process. If hazardous materials are found on BLM lands, PGE shall obtain the approval of BLM for the cleanup and disposal of such materials. Such approval shall not be w unreasonably withheld. No fill containing or previously containing hazardous material will be placed on BLM land without the prior written approval of BLM.

After the dam, structures and planned sediments are removed, the downstream fish barrier will be removed and the cofferdams will be breached to return the river flow to the streambed. Breaching of the upper cofferdam will he delayed until flows in the Sandy River reach approximately 2,500 cfs. If the downstream cofferdam has not already been removed by mechanical means, this flow will he sufficient to breach the downstream cofferdam as well. This approach will allow maximum sediment transport and timely creation of a passable channel m though the sediment.

As a part of the removal of Marmot Dam, PGE will also remove the fish screen and the fish w evaluator. The fish screen and fish evaluator areas will be filled, regraded, and replanted with appropriate species to blend in with the surrounding areas. Any associated concrete will he

I rubblized along with the dam concrete and disposed of in the same way.

Areas disturbed by the removal of Marmot Dana will be rcvegetated, and invasiveYexotic plants

III will be controlled pursuant to the Revagetation and Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan discussed in Section 3.2, and attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A. Erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented as necessary to protect the environment.

It These measures will remain in place as necessary until the vegetation has been established.

The road to Marw~t will remain in place and be transferred to BLM. The road will be rerocked with rubblized concrete from Marmot Dam. PGE and BLM will determine during the contract preparation phase whether the Marmot footbridge will be removed. If BLM does not affirmatively assume ownership of the footbridge, PGE will remove it.

i 2.3 Little Sandy Dam

I Little Sandy Dam will be removed in the July 1 - October 31, 2008, in-water work period without the use of cofferdams, temporary fish passage, and sediment remov.'. Controlled blasting and conventional air hammers and excavating equipment will be used to remove the all Bull Rtm Hydroelectric Project Portland Geaeral Elet~c ~y FERC Proje~ No. 477 16 Decomm/sxlon/ng P/an

rill Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

structure from both the upstream and downstream faces simultaneously. The concrete will he rubblized and spread on roads in the vicinity, subject to the prior approval of the appropriate agencies. All auxiliary structures will he removed. These materials will be recycled or sent to the landfill, as appropriate. Power lines and power poles to Little Sandy Dam will be removed. w In addition, the bridge deck and superstructure will he removed. However, the bridge footing will he broken up, but will remain in place to minimize ground disturbance. Natural barriers, such as log structures or boulders will he placed at bridge entrances to prevent vehicle access. The road between the bridge and the dam will he ripped up and seeded with appropriate species. The 12-inch culvert in the road will he replaced with a trench to control runoff and erosion and drain water across the decommissioned road, leaving the road in a free draining condition. The portion of the road between the county road and the bridge will remain in place.

Since there is minimal sediment stored behind the Little Sandy Dam (approximately 4000 cubic yards) and the Little Sandy riverbed is sediment poor, the sediments will he allowed to flush downstream with the natural flows in the river. The sediment will be reshaped to facilitate sediment transport and to minimize blockages in the river. The ancillary structures will he demolished and the upland area will he checked for contamination prior to reseeding.

Areas disturbed by the removal of the Little Sandy Dam will he revegetated, and invasive/exotic plants will he controlled pursuant to the Revegetation and Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan discussed in Section 3.2, and attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A. Erosion and sediment control measures for the upland demo work will he implemented as W necessary. Adequate measures will remain in place until the vegetation has been established.

2.4 Flume

The wooden portions of the flume will he removed and disposed of at a landfill. Flume material

W will he removed from the site as the flume is dismantled, although it may he necessary to set up a sortingflaydown area in the Roslyn Lake area. Any runoff from this area will he monitored to ensure that none of the chemicals in the wood preservatives are released. The area will he tested for contamination prior to closure.

Steel structures will be removed and recycled. The concrete footings will be left in place, except a that the large footings within the Little Sandy River will be removed during the low flow period. It is expected that there will be minimal disturbance to the hillside in the area of the flume. In areas that are disturbed, erosion and sediment control measures will he implemented as necessary. These measures will continue until the hillside vegetation has been established. The flume may be demolished by working from both ends. Material removed from the upstream end (Little Sandy Dam) will be transported to the Roslyn Lake sorting area. Most of the flume will he Iml dismantled with a crane sitting in the box of the flume and using the train on top of the flume to transport the material out. Helicopter removal may also be used if it proves to he economical. Earth retention structures along the flume will he left in place to maintain the slope stability and reduce site disturbance, except for those described in detail below. The concrete structures used to divert tributaries into the flume shall be notched or breached to the extent that physical processes are restored.

Specific removal activities involved in removal of the flume are summarized as follows:

d Bull Rim Hydroelectdc Projecx Po.lmd Geae~ Electric Coralx~y FERC Project No. 477 17 Decommissioning Plan roll Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

N Specific Work To Be Done For Flume Removal

Location/Flume Removal Activity stations flun~river crossing remove 4 large concrete footinss located in Little Sandy channel

Ilm 160-61 remove or notch 3' x 12' m'butary dam 155-100 remove wire baskets from larse gablon wall, leave rock "in place" 155-40 remove or notch 2' x 6' tributary dam aqp 145-20 remove or notch 2' x 5' tributary dam 135-100 remove or notch small tributary dam 105-50.1 remove a 6' section from 2' x 15' tributary dam I 65-20 leave small timber crib wall in place 60-45 remove concrete slabs from concrete lined channel 45-100 enlarge outlet trench to drain closed depression under flume a 40-115 remove or notch 4' x 20' tributary dam " Notch" as used above is defined as removing concrete dam material to conform to natural channel size and gradient. U

Areas disturbed by the removal of the flume will be revegetated, and invasive/exotic plants will I be controlled pursuant to the Revegetation and Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan discussed in Section 3.2, and attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A. Removal of the flume is expected to take 13 months. I 2.5 Canals

The bottom of the canals will be ripped, and the sides folded in. The canals will be backfilled and the area will be regraded to prevent ponding of water and to blend in with the surrounding

I areas. Hillside areas will be stabilized as necessary. Sediment removed from behind Marmot Dam will be used for fill as necessary. Four to six inches of soil will be placed over the fill prior to seeding. Areas disturbed by the removal of the canals will he revegetated, and invasive/exotie plants will be controlled pursuant to the Revegetation and Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan discussed in Section 3.2, and attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A.

Prior to ripping the canals and regrading, erosion and sedimentation control measures will be implemented. These measures may include silt fences, straw bale filtration, or other measures as approved by the County. Erosion and sediment control measures will continue, as necessary, until the vegetation has been established. The schedule allows 5 months for this work.

2.6 Tmmels

The entrances to tunnels 0, 2 and 3/4 will be blocked off with reinforced concrete walls at the portals. Any loose or unstable rock blocks at the portals will be scaled or bolted to assure long- term safety against rock fall. Tunnel 1 will have one portal with a louvered entrance to allow the

I Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland C,uneral Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 18 Decomm/ss/ordng P/an

all Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

at*$

tunnel to be used as bat habitat while still preventing human access. The bat-friendly entrance will be placed at the upstream portal (Sandy River side) of the tunnel. If practical, some of the canal concrete may be placed in the tunnels prior to closing them off. The drains at low points in tunnel 3/4 and tunnel 2 will be opened so that the tunnels remain drained. Drains will be placed at the low ends of tunnels 0 and 1.

If any erosion/sedimentation issues arise in conjunction with the tunnel closures, erosion and sedimentation control will be provided. Removal of the tunnel is estimated to take 7 months.

2.7 Rmlyn Lake

Roslyn Lake will he drained and regraded. The material used to construct the existing dikes will be used to fill in the lake. The buttress material adjacent to the west dike will either be sold or I reused on other PGE projects. The inlet and outlet structures will be removed. The concrete from these structures will either he rubblized or buried in the fill. The pipes from the City of Portland's water conduits will be capped offat the conduits and left in place. The penstock ends will be plugged with concrete and the penstocks will be left in place, as described in Section 2.8. Power to the intake structure will be removed, including the poles and wires. All docks and miscellaneous structures around the lake will be removed and either be recycled or sent to a landfill.

Erosion and sediment control measures for Roslyn Lake area will be implemented as necessary. W Adequate measures will remain in place until the vegetation has been established pursuant to the Revegetation and Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan discussed in Section 3.2, and

I attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A. A sedimentation control pond will be established at the northwest corner of the lake and a drainage ditch/swale will be provided to the pond. The final drainage pattern will be established to the northwest corner of the lake and will

i connect into the existing drainage ditch at this location. This will direct the area drainage into the pond located to the north of the lake. This pond has an established drainage back to the Sandy River.

2.8 Power House, Transformer Building, Shops, and Office Building

The powerhouse will be advertised for responsible parties to take ownership. If a responsible party is located the property will be deeded over to them in the condition agreed to. If no party is located then the powerhouse, tailrace, transformer building, shop building, and off~e building will be demolished using standard demolition techniques. Controls for the City of Portland powerhouses will be relocated to the Faraday Control Room. Removal will take about 10 months to complete.

The demolition will be accomplished by normal methods including jack hammers, heavy excavation equipment, and dump trucks. Prior to demolishing the complex, all asbestos will be tt removed in accordance with Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Agency ("OROSHA") requirements effective at the time of removal. Lead paint and other contaminants will be identified and handled in accordance with current requirements. Equipment and steel will be recycled. Concrete will be rubblized (unleas the lead paint on some of the concrete dictates that it be sent to a landfill) and used as road surfacing or recycled. Pavement will be recycled. The

rill Bull Rtm H?droelectric Project Pu.tJe~dGene~ ElectricCompany FERC Project No. 477 19 Deconunlsslonmg Plan all Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

removal of the tailrace will be done in the summer under low water conditions, eliminating the need to work in the water.

ARer the buildings have been removed, the subgrade will be tested for contamination. The cavity I left from the powerhouse and shop removal will be backfilled with material from the buttress at Roslyn Lake. The area will be regraded to blend in with the surrounding area and then replanted. Additionally, the site will he graded to allow for the construction and installation of one or more acclimation ponds.

Erosion and sediment control measures for the powerhouse complex area will be implemented as I necessary. Areas disturbed by the removal of powerhouse and related Imildings will be revegetated, and invasivedexotic plants will be controlled pursuant to the Revegetation and Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan discussed in Section 3.2, and attached to this I Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A. Adequate measures will remain in place until the vegetation has been established.

The penstocks will be abandoned in place. The penstocks will be filled with sand and the ends will be plugged with concrete. A drain will be installed in each penstock to provide drainage.

2.9 Switchyard

aml The switchyard will be removed. The Portland Hydro Project and Brightwood/Dunn's Comer transmission lines will be relocated so that the lines bypass the switchyard. Erosion and sediment control measures for the switchyard area will be implemented as necessary. Adequate

M measures will remain in place until the vegetation has been established. After the structures and pavement have been removed the subgrade will be tested for contamination. The area will be graded to blend in with the surroundings and planted. Areas disturbed by the removal of the

m switchyard will be revegetated, and invasive/exotic plants will be controlled pursuant to the Revegetation and Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan discussed in Section 3.2, and attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A.

2.10 Car B~m

~tm Ancillary structures and lands are principally confined to the area called the Car Barn, where the crew quarters, fueling station, treated timber storage, and maintenance equipment are housed. The area will be used as a staging area during Project removal. It will then be cleared of all buildings, rail tracks and debris and tilled, seeded and gated upon leaving and will probably be the last feature to be decommissioned. The work here should take about 90 days plus any additional time that may be necessary to perform remediation work for contamination.

m Buildings in the Car Barn area will be demolished. The pavement will be ripped up and recycled. Concrete foundations will be rubblized and used for filL Erosion and sediment control m measures for the Car Barn area will be implemented as necessary. Adequate measures will remain in place until the vegetation has been established. After the buildings, concrete and pavement have been removed the subgrade will be tested for contamination. There is some known oil contamination under the Car Barn itself. This contaminated soil will be removed and

a Bull Run Hych'oelc~'lnc P~ea Portland Ge~al ~¢ Company FERC Projc~:t No. 47"1 20 Deck& P/an

m Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

sent to an approved landfill in accordance with ODEQ regulations. The area will he backfilled, u regraded to drain and blend in with the surrounding area, and then replanted.

Areas disturbed by the removal of the Car Barn will be revegetated, and invasivedexotic plants will he controlled pursuant to the Revegetation and Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan discussed in Section 3.2 and attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A.

m 3. Mitigation Measures

3.1 Operations Prior to Removal a PGE will carry out or fend a number of studies that will begin prior to removal of the Project. There are two geomorphoiogical studies: one that will be conducted to provide information on which to base the "endpoint" determination described in Section 4.7, and another that will provide a geomorphoiogical context for considering the ecological impfications of Marmot Dam removal described in Section 4.1. PGE will also carry out the water quality study described in Section 4.2. In addition, PGE will provide funding for the Other Basin Monitoring and Research Program described in Section 4.9.

In addition to existing license conditions that protect ESA species, including minimum flows below Marmot Dam and payments to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife ("ODFW") for sorting fish, PGE will, beginning in 2005 and continuing until Marmot Dam is removed, W operate the Project so as to limit the canal level to 4.7 feet from February 15 until March 15. From March 15 and continuing for 8 weeks, PGE will operate the Project with canal levels at 4.2

N feet for 8 hours beginning daily at dusk. The canal will he operated at no more than 4.7 feet all other hours during this period. The initiation of the 8 week period nmy be adjusted (but not extended) at the request of the National Marine Fisheries Service CNMFS") and ODFW based on the information regarding the arrival of downstream migrating juvenile salmonids at Marmot dam.

tttm After May 31, the above canal level restrictions will no longer apply, although all other license conditions will continue to apply.

PGE will continue to fund the operation and maintenance of the fish ladder and fish trap at Marmot Dam until Marmot Dam is removed. This fending will be provided through an extension of PGE's existing agreement with ODFW, a copy of which is attached as Appendix A. In addition, PGE will continue to implement all terms and conditions of the current Project license, including, but not limited to, hatchery funding.

3.2 Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration

In order to control erosion; prevent the establishment and control the spread of invasiveJexotic species; and promote the establishment of native plant communities, PGE will revegetate some sites that are currently occupied by Project facilities and all areas disturbed by removal activities. Revegetation plans for various portions of the Project are described in the Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A.

Bull Rim H~IroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany FERC Project No. 477 21 Decomm~swn/ng P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

3.3 Fish Passage m While Marmot Dam is being deconstrocted it will still he necessary to provide temporary f'mh passage for upstream migrants. Prior to the start of cofferdam construction, which will block m upstream fish passage, PGE will construct, operate, nmintain, and evaluate a trap and haul facility at the location of the existing plunge pool. This is located within approximately ~A mile downstream of Marmot Dam on the right bank of the river. This location currently has attraction water (from the fish screens on the diversion canal) and road access. The conceptual design provides that a short temporary (fiberglass/plywood) denil ladder will be installed on the riverbank. Fifty to sixty cfs of attraction water and ladder water will he supplied through the J existing piping from the canal. A temporary wooden picket fence, using tripod type supports, will be placed in the river to divert the upstream migrants to the denil ladder and into the holding tank. PGE will consult with the agency members of the ESA Monitoring and Implementation I Team (Section 7.3) on final design specifications and construction details, and on the evaluation of the fish passage facility. A conceptual drawing of the fish passage facility is shown in Exhibit F, Sheet 10 of the Surrender Application.

ARer a sufficient number of fish have entered the tank (or on a predetermined schedule), the fish will be placed in a trailer and transported to a location upstream of the upstream cofferdam for release.

Ill 3.4 IESA Aquatic Habitat Impact Minlndzatton Measures

As noted above, habitat impact minimization actions will he implemented by PGE during a Marmot Dam removal. These will include single season Marmot dam removal; coffer dam removal at the end of the first in-water construction season prior to high winter flows; maximizing discharge to breach the cofferdam and cause rapid sediment scour;, shaping sediment banks to minimize dry season bank sloughing; providing fish passage during inwater dam removal activities; and providing minimum downstream flows into the Sandy River.

As discussed in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Biological Evaluation that accompany this Decommissioning Plan, these measures were adopted after careful evaluation by the DWG and are based on the detailed geomurphological evaluations conducted by Stillwater Sciences. g They reflect a determination that most aquatic impacts can best be minimized if the duration of inwater work is minimized, and termination of inwater work is orchestrated to coincide with and take advantage of high flows that can be expected to follow the inwater work season. m Thus, all work associated with removal of Marmot Dam will be completed during the low-flow period between July and November 2007. As discussed in the DEA, only as much sediment as is It necessary for removal of Manr~t Dam will be removed during this period. The coffer dam will be engineered to withstand flows less than approximately 2,500 cfs, which is intended to ensure that the flow that breaches the coffer dam, when removal is completed, will be sufficient to cause rapid sediment scour within the reservoir reach. Temporary fish passage is discussed in Section 3.3. Existing control structures will be used to provide minimum flows prescribed by current license conditions below the construction site to avoid any impact that might otherwise result from flow disturbances.

all Bull Rum HydroelectricProject Portland General ,Ek~c ~y FERC ProjectNo. 477 22 Decorators/on/rigP/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

In connection with site restoration monitoring described in Section 4.5, PGE will inspect the riverbanks above Marmot Dam for bank stability and oversteepening in the stored sediment. This inspection will take place in the January/February timeframe. The primary concern is for sloughing of the banks into the fiver that might cause fish passage problems in the summer or M low flow months. Such sloughing would be caused by loss of strength when the banks dry out in the summer.

I If areas with stored sediment are identified as unstable or oversteepened, PGE will take steps to recontour these areas. Several methods are available to recontour the banks including (but not limited to): I • Reshaping with heavy equipment in locations with equipment access; • Reshaping by hand if the area is inaccessible and limited in size; i • Reshaping with fire hoses; and • Reshaping with placement of small charges.

J Because temporary increases in the turbidity may occur when the banks are reshaped, this work will only be done in January and February, and in compliance with the 4011404 permits. If possible the work will be done during high flow events. PGE will work with the MIT prior to undertaking any reshaping of the banks. Since this work will place sediment into the river, the work will be required to be included in the 401/404 permits.

4He

3.5 Sandy River Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Program

u Because mainstem spawning of fall chinook may be adversely affected by sediment releases following dam removal, a fall chinook salmon conservation program will be f~nded by PGE and implemented by ODFW. Not later than September 1, 2007, PGE will enter into a grant or contract with ODFW to provide $25,000 to ODFW toward implementation of the Sandy River Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Program described in Appendix B.

3.6 Historic Preservation

II Because removal of the Project will adversely affect properties determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, PGE will undertake measures, described in a Memorandum of Agreement (attached to the Settlement Agreement as Appendix H) to be entered into among FERC, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the State Historic Preservation Officer, to minimize or mitigate for those adverse impacts. These measures include possible reuse of the Bull Run Powerhouse, recordation of and opportunities for the public to i tour Project facilities prior to removal; salvaging historically-significant architectural elements of certain Project features for public education, curation, or reuse; and protection of archaeological resources. FERC will implement the provisions of the Memorandum of Agreement by terms and m conditions incorporated into its orders governing decommissioning of Project works.

J Bull Rum Hydroelectric Project Pordand ~ ~c Company FERC Project No. 477 23 /X.coram/ss/oa/a8 P/aa Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

3.7 Navigation and Boater Safety

J The measures described in Sections 3.3 and 3.4 to ensure fish passage at~er dam removal will address boater passage as well. Restoration activities in the reservoir reach, particularly to create a natural angle of repose as opposed to vertical sediment walls, will also improve boater passage i and safety aRer dam removal. The needs for fish passage and the eventual return of the channel and banks to a natural condition are consistent with the navigation of the river after dam removal. I PGE expects that there will be a need for signage and condition communication for boaters, during deconstruction and once the dam is removed, while the river channel is still changing I rapidly. An important river reach is the approach to the reservoir, where boats may choose to stop in order to scout the reach. PGE will provide a simple sign such as the one now located above the Marmot Dam, that indicates a recomn~ndation to scout and a safe place to do so. el8 American Whitewater and Alder Creek will coordinate with PGE to communicate with the boating community about safety and passage issues.

I Portage facilities will be provided during decomtruction and a/~er the dam is removed, before the channel and banks are stabilized. The portage route will have to go around the entire construction area during removal of Marmot Dam. Once the dam is removed, and until the channel has stabilized, the portage will probably have to cover at least the same distance. A~er removal of construction equipment and debris, and once the channel has stabilized, the portage

real can be shortened.

Stream banks along the reservoir reach may be unstable for a number of years following dam

a removal. During that period, BLM may close the area to public access until slopes reach a natural angle of repose.

4. Monitoring

PGE will conduct the monitoring activities described in this section. Monitoring reaches are shown on Figure 4-1. Reports of the results of this monitoring will be provided to the Coordinating Committee described in Section 7.2 at its annual meeting, to the ESA Monitoring and Implementation Team ("MIT"), once it begins activity as described in Section 7.3, as well as Ill to the specific agencies as provided in this section. Data will be available to members of the Coordinating Committee on reasonable request.

a 4.1 Pre-removal Geomorphic Monitoring

Prior to removing Marmot Dam, PGE will conduct two geomorphological studies: one that will me be conducted to provide information on which to base the "endpoint" determination described in Section 4.7, and another, described in this section, that will provide a geomorphic context for considering the ecological implications of Marmot Dam removal. This study will build upon one-dimensional modeling performed by Stillwater Sciences by focusing on processes that affect sediment storage/routing dynamics at the scale of individual channel elements (pool run, and

IIII Bull Run Hydroelec~c Proje~ Porthmd General Electric Company FE~C Project No. 477 24 Decomm/ss/on/ng P/an am Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

riffle). The goal of the study will be to map sediment distributions and to develop linkages m between process descriptions and one-dimensional modeling results for the purpose of identifying 'sensitive' geomorphic units and developing post-removal monitoring/contingency plans. This study, which was initiated in the summer of 2002, is described in the document entitled, "Pre-implementation Analysis of Geomorphic and Ecological Impacts of Removing Marmot Dam on the Sandy River, OR: Proposal to Portland General Electric," which is attached to this Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit B. I 4.2 Water Quality

4.2.1 Pre-Remeval Tm'bidity Monitoring

High turbidity levels can be observed in the Sandy River during storm events, al~er landslide m events, and during hot summer weather, when glacial molt water washes fine particles downstrean~ Quantitative information on background levels will be collected to determine how project-related turbidity compares to background levels. Site-specific data rr~y be used to develop turbidity action levels in the 401 water quality certification for the dam removal activities (under the 404 permit).

m tKiE will monitor turbidity at two sites, one above and one below the Marmot Dam, using continuous monitoring equipment. Data will be collected for two years prior to dam removal, in order to include both summer and winter turbidity events. Site selection will be coordinated with other data colection, which means that monitoring sites will likely be established at existing stream gage sites above Marmot Dam and below the confluence with the Bull Run River. Monitoring will be initiated no later than August of 2003, so that sufficient data can be collected for evaluation in the 404 permit and the 401 water quality certification. Data collected from August through July will be submitted to ODEQ by January 1 of the following year.

all

J Bull Rtm Hydroelectric Project Portland General Elecuic ~y FERC Project No. 477 25 Deconm~.~nm 8 P/an dim I I I I • • I I I I I I I I l I I I I hh hh

Ul~t Sandy River FO Geomorphic reaches M

b~ FO

0 M~ t~ O O t~

I Mt~ O

F0 fl F0 < F0

O Sandy River. Geomorphic Reaches M ~ Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 t~ t~ O ~ Reach 4 O Reach 5 t~ , Dams

0 ~ Rum./Canals fl F0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Mles N Figure 4-1. Map of geomorphicreaches on Sandy River. I

I 0 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

m 4.2.2 Turbidity Monitoring During Structure Removal

The short-term level of impact on turbidity levels from removal activities will he controlled through best managemem practices identified in the 401 water quality certification. These practices will be used to minimize levels of turbidity that have chronic or acute effects on aquatic I life. Turbidity will be monitored upstream of and at a site close to but downstream of the construction areas for Marmot Dam, Little Sandy Darn, and Roslyn Lake. Sampling intervals will be at intervals no less frequent than every four hours, encompassing the workday and all occurring during times of peak activity. The exact scheduling criteria, sampling sites and data reporting requirements will be identified in the 404 permit and its associated 401 water quality certification. Turbidity monitoring will take place during the entire deconstruction period for dll Marmot Dam, Little Sandy Dam, and Roslyn Lake.

4.2.3 Post Removal Turbidity Monitoring ill Continuous turbidity data will he collected at five sites: one each above the Marmot and Little Sandy Dams, one each below the dams, and one downstream of all Project influence (below the I Bull Run confluence). This quantitative data will be of assistance in guiding the MIT with the turbidity issues identified as provided in the Sandy River ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingency

lIB Plan and Table, described in Section 4.6.

Turbidity monitoring will continue until the "endpoint" daf'med in Reach 3 is achieved as

m provided in Section 4.7. A shorter time period may be agreed to by PGE and ODEQ, once turbidity impacts are understood. However, this monitoring will occur for a minimum of two years aRer dam removal. PGE will monitor sites in the Little Sandy identified by ODEQ when Little Sandy Dam is removed, as water will he available in the downstream reach aRer the dam is removed.

al 4.2.4 Sediment Monitoring

The sediment currently stored behind Marmot Dam is expected to be washed into other river reaches once the darn is removed. The most sensitive beneficial uses affected by this movement are fish passage and fish habitat. These will be monitored as described in Section 4.6.

m 4.3 Stream Gages

Until Project removal is complete, PGE will fund the maintenance of the existing gage at Little Sandy River and the existing gage on Sandy River near Marmot. If gage relocation is necessary due to sediment issues, PGE will be responsible for the relocation of the gage. PGE will work with the U.S. Geological Survey ("USGS") and BLM to determine if the gage needs to be am relocated. At Marmot, PGE would be responsible for gaging until PGE is released from the basin by the MIT for ESA issues. Funding for Little Sandy gaging is PGE's responsibility until the Little Sandy Dam is removed. I

i Bull Rtm HydroelectricProject PortlandGeneral Elect:tic Company FERC ProjectNo. 477 27 Decommissioning Plan ill Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

4.4 Monitoring of Construction Impacts i PGE will undertake monitoring of construction impacts required by other permits and related to worker safety. PGE will also use required construction practices to identify, control and limit worker exposure to asbestos and paint that contains lead or PCBs. PGE will clean up any oil contamination that is discovered in accordance with applicable law and regulations. At a minimum, these practices will include the use of visual inspection and turbidity meters until 4ira vegetation has been re-established to monitor erosion, turbidity and sedimentation; pre- demolition identification of asbestos, lead paint, and PCBs, along with air monitoring during demolition to monitor the presence of asbestos, lead paint, and PCB; and pre- and post- demolition testing to characterize and eliminate oil contamination. All monitoring will comply with applicable EPA, ODEQ, OROSHA, and Clackamas County regulations.

altt 4.5 Site Restoration and Monitoring

Site restoration and monitoring will address four general areas of concern: bank stability in the areas behind Marmot Dam, erosion in areas that are not behind Marmot Dam or in areas that .are

m considered to be stable, revegetation of areas of erodable materials, and presence of noxious weeds in areas disturbed by removal activities. Restoration and monitoring on lands managed by BLM or the Forest Service will be conducted in consultation with the appropriate agency.

Bank Stability Restoration and Monitoring: Bank stability monitoring will determine whether the banks have reached the natural angle of repose and stabilized in a condition that will not create a hazard to the public and whether they are stable enough to have high probability of being re-vegetated. Bank stability monitoring will also determine whether the banks in the project area have the same general landscape character as the banks immediately outside the Iltea project area, and whether they have a natural appearance, which is defined by Landscape Aesthetics - A Handbook for Scenery Management #70 as "landscape character that express predominately natural evolution, but also human intervention including cultural features and process."

The sediment area behind the dam will be visited during times of high flows and during times of low flows to determine the stability of the banks. In unstable areas, measures will be taken to reconfigure the sediment to help achieve stability. These measures will include using high- pressure water hoses to erode the sediments, using heavy equipment to re-contour the sediments, I or other means. Bank stability restoration and monitoring will continue until banks have stabilized at the natural angle of repose, have the same landscape character as the banks above and below the Project area, and can be re-vegetated. ill Erosion Monitoring: As noted above, erosion monitoring will determine whether soil that was exposed during Project removal activities is eroding in areas that are not located behind Marmot I Darn, or that were considered to be stable. Areas where soils have been exposed during deconstruction will be visited immediately aRer the fhst major storm event. If erosion is occurring, corrective actions will be taken to prevent sediment from reaching waterways. m Corrective measures would include use of mulch with native grass straw, installation of sediment

Bull Rim Hydroelecuic Projecl PortlandC, eneral Elecu/c~y FERC ProjectNo. 477 28 Decomm/ss~nla& P/an di Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

barriers, construction of settling ponds, or other actions as indicated by site conditions. Erosion monitoring will continue until vegetation is re-established.

Revegetatlon Restoration and Monitoring: Revegetatlon monitoring will determine whether u the areas of erodable materials identified above have successfully revegetated. Areas that have been re-vegetated in accordance with the Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan attached to the Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A will he visited annually after the growing season to determine the extent of ground cover. This will continue for at least three growing seasons. If after three growing seasons, ground cover exceeds 90%, the area will be accepted as successfully re-vegetated. If the areas do not have at least 90% ground cover, monitoring will continue until ground cover reaches 90%, or PGE and the managing agencies concur that the 90% ground cover standard is not practical for the site. If the 90% ground cover standard is considered practical, then corrective action will be necessary for areas that do not i have ground cover exee~ing 60% after three years. Ground cover is defined as grasses, herbs, shrubs and trees. Ground cover will be determined using ocular estimates or standard techniques involving small plots. Areas not capable of sustaining vegetation will be subtracted from the m total area before determining percentage of total ground cover. Corrective measures will include reseeding, adding new plant materials, and adding soil supplements.

I Noxious Weed Monitoring: Noxious weed monitoring will be employed to determine if noxious or exotic weeds have invaded areas that were disturbed during Project removal activities. Area disturbed during deconstruction will be surveyed annually for noxious weeds. If noxious weeds are found they will be treated in accordance with the Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan attached to the Decommissioning Plan as Exhibit A. Monitoring will continue for three years after the completion of construction activities in the specific area being monitored.

4.6 ESA ][~sh Monitoring and Contingencies Plan

The following monitoring and contingencies plan was developed in order to minimize incidental take of ESA-listed fish species and reduce impacts of dam removal on fish habitat in the Sandy River Basin. PGE shall implement the monitoring and contingency actions specified in the Sandy River ESA Monitoring and Contingencies Plan (see Table 4-1, located at the end of

lit Section 4.6) to evaluate post-dam fish passage barriers and address the fish passage blockages in a rapid and effective manner. In addition, the table addresses habitat and water quality impacts. It is PGE's responsibility to implement the actions described in the attached table. The ESA fish

I monitoring and contingency measures and process are discussed below. As noted, habitat impact minimization measures include single season dam removal, coffer dam removal during the least impactful (i.e., high flow) season, maximizing discharge to breach coffer dam and cause rapid sediment scour, shaping sediment banks to minimize dry season bank sloughing, providing fish passage during inwater dam removal activities, and providing minimum downstream flows into the Sandy River. However, other than contingencies for fish passage blockage, no post-Marmot Dam removal actions are proposed to address habitat modifications in the Sandy River.

Table 4-1 identifies seven general categories of Marmot Dam rernoval impacts that may result in Im PGE's take of listed species or impact their habitat. Each impact is evaluated based on river reach, fish species, fish lifestage, and run-timing. PGE shall conduct monitoring actions as

4111 Bull arm Hyd~oel~'tnc Project Portland ~ H1~c~ic Company FERC Project No. 477 29 Decommlss~ia 8 Plan Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

described in Table 4-1. In addition, PGE shall implement contingency options as descrihed in I the table, in consultation with the Mrr, as described in Section 7.3.

Specific monitoring for each impact will be conducted by PGE during and after Marmot Dam removal. Once a contingency trigger has been identified via PGE or agency monitoring, corresponding contingencies will be performed by PGE to minimize incidental take of ESA fish species. The options available vary depending on the run timing of the species present at that time, as well as the magnitude of the impact and other environmental conditions. As described in Section 7.3, the MIT will provide guidance and recommendations to PGE after Marmot Dam removal.

The ESA Fish Plan Contingency Measures that PGE mey undertake fall into four general categories: mechanical removal of passage barriers, creating channel complexity, emergency fish m recovery, and lower river trap and haul. Each is described briefly below.

Mechanical Removal of Passage Barriers:

Passage barriers may he caused by different mechanisms in different locations. Barriers, if they do form, are most likely to occur either in the Reach 0, above Marmot Dam, or in Reach 1 below d the dam site. There are several ways the barriers may form. Above Marn~t dam barriers may form due to river bank sloughing into the river, buried debris being exposed, new debris depositing on its way through the reaches, or exposing a '%ard" spot in the sediment that does not erode as quickly. Barriers may take the form of a velocity barrier (shallow sheet flow over a wide area) that the fish cannot swim up, a physical barrier that fish cannot get past, or a drop barrier that the fish cannot jump. Barrier composition can be either debris (i.e, woody material from behind Marmot Dam) or sediment (boulders, cobble, gravel, sand).

N Selection of the best method to eliminate the barrier will depend on the type of barrier, the ability to access the barrier, and the river flows at the time. It is anticipated that the barriers will most likely occur during low flow periods. The possible methods to eliminate the barriers are as

all follows:

The preferred method to eliminate a barrier is to have crews manually remove the barrier with hand equipment. This will work in low flows for small barriers. It typically would require the use of shovels, picks, winches, and chain saws (for woody debris). This n~bod has the advantage of creating minimal environmental damage, it is easy and d quick to mobilize, and can be used to "surgically" remove the barrier. The disadvantage of this method is that it is limited to barriers that are relatively small in size, and personnel safety may become a concern.

l For larger barriers, where heavy equipment access is feasible, mechanical equipment such as a small trackhoe or spidcrhoe can he used to remove the barrier. The advantage of Ill this method is that is relatively easy to mobilize and would allow barrier removals that are significant in size. It would not necessarily require personnel to work in the water, so it is potentially safer. The primary disadvantage is the ability to access the barrier Ill location. It will possibly require the equipment to walk the riverbed to access the barrier.

/ Bull Rum Hydroelectric Project Portland General Ele~dc Company FERC P~ea No. 477 30 Decomn~ss/on~g P/an t Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

However this type of equipment is extremely adept at maneuvering in situations where the working surface is rugged.

For larger barriers where equipment access is not an option and manual removal is too I difficult, the barrier r~ay be removed by hydraulic means (i.e. a fnehose). This method would require pumping a stream of water at the barrier to break it apart or create a new channel. The advantage of this method is its ability move the sediment downstream relatively quickly and its ability to access locations where heavy equipment cannot reach. However, this method will need to be used with extreme care so that the turbidity it creates does not cause additional problems and that the sedimem that is moved out does not create an additional barrier downstream.

In situations where other methods do not work, small blast charges can he used for debris II type barriers. This method has the advantage of no accessibility issues. The disadvantages of this method are personnel and fish safety. For fish safety, this method should he used only in low water and if fish attempting to migrate can be moved away from the blast area. In addition, specialized personnel must he used to set the charges.

a • In areas that are inaccessible to heavy equipment and the barrier is too hard for manual removal by itself, a helicopter can he used to pick items too heavy for personnel to move.

J • Any or all of these methods can be used on a single barrier. Adaptation of the removal methods will he required for each barrier.

I Creating Channel Complexity:

One potential problem during sediment transport is the creation of a simplified streambed (i.e., a long, fiat section of river where the flow fans out). A simplified strea~ may present a passage barrier to fish due to lack of depth and/or high stream velocities. Two of methods have been identified to create channel complexity:

d• The first method that has been identified is to temporarily (for one season) anchor logs in the streambed and to relocate large rocks to create pools and riffles to assist the fish in g passing the area. The pools will give the fish resting places and jump pools. Placement orientation and spacing of the logs and rocks would need to be carefully planned to maximize benefit for passage. Log anchoring methods will be established taking into I consideration boater safety (no long-term boater barriers).

Channel complexity can also be established by creating a meandering channel through the streambed. Channel complexity can be created by excavating a channel by the methods discussed in mechanical removal section above.

Bull Run Hydroelectric Proj¢~ Portland Gene~ Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 31 Decomm/s.~n/ng P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Emergency Fish Recovery:

Following the removal of Marmot Darn, PGE will monitor the lower river for areas in which fish may be stranded. Once it has been verified that stranded fish are present, the MIT will be notified. If the fish are in immediate danger (high water temperatures, no freshwater input, rapidly dropping water levels or risk of predation or poaching) a recovery effort will begin as soon as practical. If fish are not in immediate danger and it appears the situation may correct itself or another high water event is imminent then a recovery effort would began at the discretion oftbe agency members of the MIT.

m Emergency fish recovery methods are situation specific and will depend on many factors, including immediate danger as described above, morphology of the area, life stage of the fish (i.e., if the fish are adults or juveniles), and the number of fish involved. If practical, the m preferred approach would be to reconnect the stranding area to the river allowing fish to leave on their own volition (see hand-excavation and heavy equipment excavation methods in Mechanical Removal, above).

If fish must be physically removed, a beach seine will be used to collect fish if possible (small numbers of fish may be dip netted directly). If the topography of the stranding area does not I allow for seining adults, fish will be captured by gill net. Fish will be removed from the gill net within 5 minutes of entanglement. Captured fish will be placed in buckets (juveniles) or transport tubes (adults) for transporting to the nearest safe location on the river. If the river can be safely I reached within 2 minutes adults will be carried in the transport tubes. If the transport time is greater than 2 minutes, depending on the terrain and distance to the river, adult fish may be transported in inflatable kayaks or large coolers partially filled with water.

Lower River Trap and Haul:

PGE will work with the MIT during the first winter following Marmot Dam removal to assess the need for a trap and haul facility. If agency members of the MIT determine (in Jan/Feb 2008) that the trap and haul facility may be needed for the spring of 2008, PGE will fabricate the picket I sections, build the floating pump station and the denil ladder, and install any items (i.e., cabling across the river, etc.) that would be necessary to install the picket sections. The goal would be to

a prefabricate the trap and pre-plan the deployment to a point that the trap and haul could be installed and operational within 2 days of being identified by the MIT as needed.

I The contingency trap and haul facility will be a "hardened" picket system, built on frames and including a cable system. The facility will be able to manage flows up into the 2,500-cfs range. A denil ladder with a trap/handling facility will be provided for fish collection. Pumped attraction water, as necessary, will be supplied to the ladder and the ladder entrance. Access to the trap and release site will be provided as necessary. A conceptual drawing of the contingency trap and haul facility is shown on Exhibit F, Sheet 1 ! oftbe Surrender Application.

PGE will consult with agency members of the MIT regarding the design of the trap and haul facility prior to Marmot Dam removal, as per the above paragraph. PGE shall complete the final I design and construction in consultation with the agency members of the MIT. Equipment and material suppliers and lead times will be determined as part of the engineering effort.

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric C~y FERC Project No. 477 32 Decom~'mssio~g P/an

I11 M l~s~ Plsqe Reich 0 Rm~h l Spr~ C~d~ Adu~s 1. Mcei~f integrity ofcoff~ Take likely Io I Blockage to (Apr-Nov with peak in dam dur~ fa.water ~nck occur fmm ulmn~m fish JQe-Sep~). O~-Oct) dam pelage delay or passage due to removal ope~c~, prim to blockage: sodimem White~ Steetheod fallrti~ - ifin-water work Pcalt Ml~ l~rled Flsh Pm~l~ Preble~: kfl~ two migra~cm delay. r1" depo~ion Adul~ (Nov- May period bms:hlng of coffer I. Compline gmclural block~ o~ days of pasmgc btockas¢, fl~c blockage will require high tufl~imty, irmues, eifl~erat wire peak in Peb-Apr). diu'n oc~rs, v~mal etber ml~a~V be~r~, u defined imme~e contingency action. PGE will notify all poor holding • m'ucmral memtorlng ac~inn required 5 by ESA sub-team crttea-Ll*,for over 2 members within 12 himr~ and solicit ConXingency guidance. cond~ion& e~. obsUr~ction o*" Cobe Adul~ days/we~ to identify any days dining izmk mllprlllfou. If 1~3Ewill impleme~ co~tingu~cy options recommended by high vale,clty (S~pt-D~ w~h Ink in potem~l p~uSe problems visual mcottoring observations by rmumn~ a~ency MIT membec~. However, if no reumrce o area~ ore= long Sept-~ov). until fall high flows besin. PGE (or other pa~y) indicate qency inpul is •vailabk, I~E will ~k~c~ and imple~t • d~ancex AJzo 1~ passaSe monitoring will po~mial existence of a migratory Con~tn~¢z:cyOption (~c Commge~ncyOp~i~, below). t~ Q includes side Buff Trout' U~m follow• 2 ~., below. bsme~, si~e-speafic im~agu b*nrt~r During and a~er pa~utse blockage removal ~ivilies, PGE Q channel dala (see fcetoc~c I ) will be •hall ~ofl the actions taken and resu]Is of lho~ serious to t~ lx~er~ 2. From hi~-Eow bceaching reflexed by PGE and recorded, the IVlITand make adjutmcnts Io tmplemen~on a~ng of the coffer dam to Feb 13 of to *'ecmuneodatica* o f resourcc asencles. Thls **feodbeck the followu~ year: Monitor 2. Complete gn~ural c~ oth~ loop" provide~ Ibe MIT with information to determine if the I one day/week [mlditiomd migratmy bmTiCru definod by ESA pusagc blcckagu ha~ been Successfully oddr¢~od or Q monitmmg ~ly(s) neces~my mb-tezm criteria for over 2 days wbe0u~ PGE mug rake ~lthlimal ~e blcckase ac~tons~ if I~XTierd~l~x~l to during ae~-[~slt mi~ If if bmrn~ exigs for vm*al monltori~g obscrvaflom by Nea-I'ca~ MtlFatt,m Period Esh I~ Pt-e~tem: Afro" fo 2 daysl. 1~3E(or other party) indi~ 2 days of pes~aSe blecksgc, the blockage will be fl potemial existence ofa mi~ ory immediate/y t~.viewod by the ~ ~ a decision on fo 3. Rnguinr m~mitodng (3 blm4e~, sile-q~ec~ficpeuagu ban'inr wheth~ or n~ • conlingem:y actwn is necessary during the dayr~week) will ~cur I~m data (see foomo~e I ) will be non-peak mien period. The MIT will coos/da the fo 15 to Nov 30 in the year collected by F~E and r~ord~L masnimde sad cbcunmances of the bhic~ the species/ following dam re~mval to lif~e~ pt~e~x at the time, fish m~n, ~ $U~g~h~ ide~O~ any pme~al pas~gu likely flow eve~a and wealh~ conditions, wat~ quality, and any o/her evvironrn~nlal factors deemed relevan~ lftbe M MIT defines thai • contingency a~inn it requm:d, tbe 4. Memhert of the MIT will ooti~ P~E oflh~ r~iremea[ to allevia~ the Fish Monitmm8 lmplemeamtm Passage problc~. The ~ aJso will recom~ the action o Team (MIT~ shall I~e~lcipalc to be takcm by PGE (*ce Conflnsency OpUon& below). M in an iniUalm~3itorth8 tripto During and after ;mmagcblockage removal activities, PGE ensure motoring ~1 report the actions taken and remhs of there actin~s to me~hod~ol~e~ Lre fie]d4e~od the MIT. This "feedback loop" pmvi~s Ihe MIT with for bo~ vimud ob~rvatiorm infor~ce to drA~nnine if the pax~q~e hic~l~tse ha~ been t~ ancl pessage Izm~er dma sttcccufolly ad~essed or whedier PGE mum take additional t~ collc~ion. MIT mefahers imssnge blockage actions. Q Q shall ~cca~lo~ally t~ ~lJcipale in monitorth~ Cm~ Opeem'.: i~ivitles. I. Mechan~ly remove s~ bl~clt~ when i~ 5. Afar the fu~ year of posl- work can be accvmplisbed safely. o dam removM Fish Psssnge 2. Add in~weam channel complexity (/.e.. ancho~d logs) to (3 moni~g, the MIT will channel nmghness and cre~e velocity breaks. fo refine the frequency of FiM~ (Nete: insm:am chan~el complexity action is • zmpcrr/, c~ Passage m~mxing events. single ~son acrioe, nm a permanent, hardened feature). 3. Emevguncy mlvagu aod transport of fish PU 4. Rapid deployment of a trap and haul facility. I

I Bull Run HydrcelecUic Proj¢~ Portlmd General Electric Company o r~ FERC Project No. 477 33 Decon~n~sioning Ptan ,, I I i It II il l l i i i I l I i l i i i Table 4-1, continued. (3

rn c~ I Rea~2 No rcgula~ scheduled Any blockase to be reporledto and Unknown. a~ Reach 2 is inacce/mbie. mo~itmia& Opportunistic di~ by MFr. oblet~diot~ doting ~S over~iihts. Reach 3 Sprm 8 Chinook Adults 1. Dertal bw Bew ImSed~ Dry-pedod ~ (dm,i~ O~ce a Comingency Trigge~ is identified via Momtorin8, the ~0 Reach 3 raUo~d¢: D, (Apt-Nov with peak in (A~l-Oct): Monitor fish Marm~ Dim r,meval p,~'ted) -.-.' mn-Uming of lisled ESA fish ~oeciet will dictate Ihe type of CO rl~ $ It~ main Jooe-Se~). l~uage problems der~n8 ~ Itemoval IP',e,de~ Contingencyrespond. channel bk3ckage recedin8 hydm~oh ~ 100 In upper ~each.and W'mter Steelhoad cfs inoremem, Ixtmt on 1. Complete smu:lurxi block•So o~ For ~uctond block•Be o~ other migrmory bant~ durin8 ul~m~n btock~e 0 Adults (Nov- May with Sandy R gage above Bull other migralm~ banier, at defined pink migr*ttm, the mine proceut as dascribed •here for of• s~de channel. peak m ~-A~). Run. from -.600 cfs down W by ESA mb-lelm crileria~, for ores 2 resches 0 and I *'Pink Mi~tfion Period Fish Pt~ase Anticilxttemain t~ 400 cfL O~e monttor~ Q days during I~.ak mllrmten. Prdi31em" (above) *halloccur. channel will Q CoCo Adults c~eck in retch 3 per elch 100 remain l~utlfl¢ in t~ (Selx-Dec wire ~xak in cfs incrcm¢ot 2. Com~eSe smK'mrxi or other For sln~cmntl blockage or othe~ migralory bame~ denng Iowea Reach 3. Sea-Nov). migrttory Im~ier, as defined by ESA nmt-I~ak migration, Ou: same ixoce~ as de~-tbed above Side channel may lnc:reases m flow over 600 cis sub-team criteria, for over 2 days for rcache~ 0 and I "Nee-Peak Migralio~ Period Fish CIU~ "il[i'l~ive I Q FallChinook Adul~a during Au$-Oc~ reds ~e Passage Problem" (above) shall occur. r~limnl~", creale (Asg-Dec with ixak in rao~ilm~ schedule smmcling. As Oct-Nov). da~'ihed above. 3. Uplxream blockaSe of tide For upuream blockase of slde c'mmnd ~ or ~mal hydrograph channel ~ wilh po~mlial Io mandmg of adults or juveniles ,~he mtrne process deu:e~, fo Bull Trout 2. Any time of y~ar: ftisdy aoJacx and strand fish iraothe datum'heal above for reach~ 0 and I "Nma-t~.ak Migratio~ • randing p~tential o Monitor once for all fish Iow~ portion oftha~ side clumnel Period Ft~h Pauage Pre~em" (above) shall occur. inc~re~cJ fo p*ssage proe~ernsand em-~ m~, e~'aeon ~fted. < manding in side cham~eh cuea~,~ o~t~m,: fO a~e~ flowt recede horn each 4. Aotoal unmdlng of adullsor 3.0(}0cfs (orIVeau~) eve.ms juvenilesin side channcls dm'l~l I. MechanicaLly remove side channel blockage if feuiNe. to lower, btse leve{s. 2. Add instream chtnnel complexity (L¢., anchored logs) to Mo~g to oc,cex a~ wat~- inae~e channel m~ghne~ and c~eate veloclty breaks (Note: M Icvds recede with initial inm~mn ci-mnnel complcxily action is • temporary, s~tgle visual daSe~mimu.ion o f r,easo~ action, n~ • porto•nero, hardened feature). whether • bloct~e 3. Emergency ~a/~aF of fish if fish become ~ in side o ~led by ledtmen[ channe~ M movcm~t daring 3,000 + cfs 4. Rapid deployment of trap and haul facilily. flOW evl~L

t~ t~ Q Q t~

0 (3 fO c~

PU I da* .,,d .,,d I Bull Run Hydroelectric Projec~ Portland Gena~ Electric ~y FERC Pro~ No. 477 34 Decomm~on.01g P/an | I I t ! | II i i I I I I I I I I I J

Table 4-1, continued. o

Sprm8 Chinoek Adu~s I. II~I~ low flow periods nr~.perSodmu.:l~e ¢d~-1~ Once a Coolingency Tri88~ is idcntified via Mouitortng. the Main cor.c~nI in (Apr-Nov with peak in (A~Od): Monitor fi~ Mltrmot ~ rl~ovll period) lind rtm~ming of l~ed ESA fish s{3ecles will dictate the type of Reach 4: side ~une-Scp~). pama~c problcms during Po~4)im Removld Perledm Cominge~ respame. channel zcrandin&

byd~ograph m IOO c'? Winu~ Steelhead cfs increments, based on I. Coa~ple~e M~I blockage or For ~uc~rtl blod~ge or other migrator,/l~aner dunng ~o Adulls (Nov- May wilh S~ R gage above Bull other migra¢o~ Imnier. as defined puk migration, the same ixoc~a ~ descrlbod above f~ peak in Feb-Apr). Ru~ ~em.-600 cf~ down ta by ESA sub-mua crlleria*, for over •eache~ 0 and I "Peak Mignmon Period Fish Ptsmge 400 c~s. One monitorm~ 2 days durtn8 peak mtsrutlon. Problem" (above) shall occur. Cobo Adulls check in reach~ 4 and 5 pe~ (Selx-Dec with peak in each I00 cfs Jr~eme~ 2. Cca~lme Mruc~azl or othe~ For stnk~ur~ blockage or c~bor migrawry barrier during o sept-Nov). migratory barries, as defined by ESA moo-peak milp~ion, Ibo same pmocss as descn'bed above t~ I n¢~s.s~ in flow over 600 cfs sub-lJ~srn cril erin. at nolt-pealt for reaches 0 and I ~lon-Pealk Milp~ion Pc~od Fish Q Fail Chinook Adults Pay.mtge occur. Q dur~g A~g-OcS resets fl~ mllvaeo~ ProOlem" (abovc) shall t~ (Aug-Dec ~h p~*k in mooim~g schedute Oct-Nov). 3. Upstream blockise of side I~r ups~eam btockase of ~de cham~ access, or sautl channel access, wilh p~entlal to s~andmg of adu]l~ c~ juvemles ,the ~ process as I Bull Trout 2. Aw~ time of ~m': falsety aurt~ and strand fish into tbo describod above for re*che~ 0 and 1 "Non-Peak Mil~atio~ Q Mo~ittx once for all fish lower portion of Outt side chainnet Period Fish Passage Problem" (above) shall occur. pesutSc pro~lenu and dm4n8 any mtgridio u period. smmdm8 in side charmeis co~ Opeo~: al~ flows recede from eac~ 4. Actual ~wanding of adults of fo o 3.000 cfs (or greater) cvems juvc~iles in side channels during 1. Mechanically remove side channel blocka~c if ~casib~e. fo to }ova, ~as~ }eveis. my zd~.utJon pealed 2. Add in~rc~rn channe~ coml~exity (i.e., anchored ~o~0 m Mo~or~ W occ~ as wa.~ h-~crease chan~ roughness and creale vclocily Ixcsks (Note: fo levds recede with imli~ in~eam channel complexily a~ion is • temporary, single determination of z~amn action, not • pertmmenL hardened feature). whe~ a blod~ge wu 3. Eme~er,cy ~]va~e of fish if fish become ~ in ~Ic created by sed~mem chanr~l~ M rnovem~t during 3.000 + cfs 4. Rapid deployment of~o and haul fmcility. flow event. o M All reaches: Ouunignltingjuvenile Covered by monitoring especially udnu3mds (Feb 15- ~om for Pas~e in reservoir tree. June 30) Reaches 0-5. rut~hes 1 lnd 3 t~ Trg~a~'y Reach 0. 1 and 2 beve no In~ fix Imadromy t~ mod~e: Q Sed~mem Q t~

will block o •~de channels (3 ~d ~b~mrles. fo NOTE: c~ channels ~dr~d in l~b Plz~ge I

Bull Run Hydroelec~c Projec~ Portland General Ekaric ~y FERC Projea No. 477 35 Deconon~a/on/n& P/an I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

Table 4- I, continued.

R~ach 3 A~l mlgnulng Check Cedar Creek Complc~ blockage, as defined by Mechanical removal of IMor.ka~ if feasible. Breed, *t~dlow mdmonid~ con6ueace wixh Sandy R, ESA sub-team c~]te~ of Cedar sheet flow or Cedar Creek, con~m~ with ne~h 3 RM~ ~eek m:cets Blockage a~ Cedar Creek reqmres immediate action to tubem'ftce flow at whi~ Mready ha* Xa~hery fish (up ted Pillage monitoring [above]. reopen tcce~, and the~by minimize sOaying of h~t~h~r~ u'~buuu'y mouth passage pn2~ms duwnmcam) Monitoring occurs d~dng fa~ during low Sandy at low flow~ de~cndlng Sandy R flows River flow pexiod~ [hetwee~ 600 to 400 cfs ~ or blockage a1~r 1()0 cft m~crr~ms] as wetl as hlgh-flow eve,re. high flow [3.000 cfs] eyelet Reach 4 All salmeaids(all Check mbum~ confluences Compline blockage, as defined by Once • potential tributary pammse p~o~orn is identified, the ]~htii1 COl~ ~ ma~tbs) with Sandy R, concurce~t ESA mb-~eam crit~ia. of uit~ary MIT will immediately be ccmaatedL The MIT will ~om/der aio~-s$ IO with m,ch 3 Rsh PatsaSe ac~eu for over 2 clays • e bloctaSe, dming of next flow event. ,qpecie~ llfeat~es uibuu~es is Bull Run River STH, CUTL CH~ moeiuxlng [above]. preseat at the time, fish rmltt~ion, mn ~'ngth, mi~'ation maintained d~ring Monltoring oco~,-sduring periodicity, wate~ quality, and impomnc~ of habdat, to pcskmigm~os Trout Creek PCHIN. COHO, STH, duscendiag SandyR flow~ detomin¢ i f a&litional re~lmn~e it necessary. If the MIT (both up and down CUTT [between 6~t to 400 cf~ in deAca'rames thai a commgmcy action it required, the MIT su'cam). 100 cf$ inoroncnls] as weJl u will no6fy FGE of the n~tt h'e.m~l to a]Icviatc the Tribatm7 GordOn FCH/N, COHO, STH, after high flow [3,000 cfs] Blockage Ixoblen~ The MIT also will recomme~l the aclio~ cuTr ~ve~s. [o be tsk~n by PGE (lee Cominscncy Optiocts uadur Fith PtmSe, above). COHO Buck Reach 5 Check Beaver Creek Co~qple~e I~oc~ as defined by Once a potential tributary passa~ problem it identified, the Bmidud channels All mlmeedds confluence and braided ESA sub-team c~teria, of ur~olm'y MIT will immediately be cont~ted. The MIT will consider cham~ are~ in Sandy R, access for over 2 days • e bt~kase, timing of next flow croat, species/llfeatages Beaver (l~cmial co~tn'n~ with nmch 3 FiJh presonl at the lime, fi~l mattmtlion, mn s~engtl% mii~tllon habitat reatorafion) CO~ Paslnge monitoring [above]. perio~clty, water quality, and impcv~nce of habital, to Momter~g occurs during dete~'~3e i f acklilJcmal respon~ it necextary. If the M]T d~cendi~ Sandy R flows de/ermines that a o~mingency acXion is required, the MIT [betwee~ 600 to 400 cfs tn will notify PGE of the requirer~m to alleviate the Tribt~an/ I00 cft mcrcmcals] as well as Blockage problem. 1"be MIT aim will recommend the I~tion afterhigh flow (3.000 cfs] m be take~ by PGE (*e~ Comlngency Optlons under Rsh event& Passage. above).

0 0 r~

o (3 fo

PU I ..d Bull Run HydroelecUic Proje~ Porthmd General EIec~c Company FERC ~ No. 477 36 Decomm~g P/an | | | It It | I I I ! I ! I I I I I I !

Table 4-1, continued.

,: .e ...... , - J

Reach 3 All mlmomd lifestqes Check Sandy River ~ at Blodotg~ based on ESA rob-team Onc~ a Sediment Depomtic~ at Mouth of Sandy problem is Reach 5: umd dining low flow low flows as hydrOl~ criteria+ of up and do~ fish identified, the Mrr will immedlatdy I~ convicted. The MIT depomion below Mmlth Of mlods dropl from 600 m 400 cf~ in from the Columbia River. will ccesider the blockage, timing of next flow e~, 1-84 trudge Olaf Sandy:. (~. ~00 cf~ merment~ (Saged sl~cics/lifealagca present at the time. fish maturation, nan rand and during above Bull Run) reed afler sa~enl~, migration period~, w~a~ qua~y, and iml~Mible sand low flow >3,000 cfs eventt. importance of Imbi1~. to del~m~ine if additional re*ponce is bar during low periods) may n~tatry, lftl~ MIT det~mincs that a comlng~ncy action ~rm'n~/faU ixevem fish is reqeired, the MIT will no[ify PGE of the r~quircrn¢~ to bascflowL Need l~Mage idkvia~ the Sediment Deposition at Mould1 of Sandy to ¢nmm~ the~ is a ~ The MIT also wifl recommend the action to be dnSlc passable taken by FGE (see Contmsency Optiomt undo" Fish PasmSe, maJn~em channel above). fc¢ fith to I:~ss. ~dlment Reach I and 2 Noee No~c

~,er St~mlall Bede: cxi~ing redds Reaches 3.4. and Incubating fidl None umkr ESA fish Depe~tion of ~un~ Chinook (sept - Jaa) re~um=~nts sedirne~s ov~ sedimcra lncul~flng wintor ¢xiging main~1~m moving aeaheed (Apt - t Sandy Rive* do~ Jdy) salmooids redds afler M~mm Dam is removed. Depoutlo~ may cau~ Io~ of eggdalevi~ Impact believed to I~ limited to r.ealm following dam removal Lmsof Reaches O. I and 2 All udmonkh Monilor ade channel Identify if side channels are no~- Once a po~emial side channel Ixx~cm is identified, the MIT Potential take M~m bleckage as per l~sh Paumse mmhle is to condder the fi~h usase, blockage, timing of next flow iuuc-advene Haldlat foe monitoang, above ¢vc~L migration poriodicit y. importance of habitat and mediflcation. - J~veale ~h: quality to determine cour~ of action, if any. The MIT also Howcvcf. wiU reconzmced the actloa to be taken by PGE (~ec is a greater Contingency Options under Fish Paua~e, above). cocccrn in Reach 0-2 Reach 3.4,5 AJl salmo~'~ Motor side chana~ ldemify if side channels arc non- Oaoc a p~oatial side channel problem is id~t lfled, the MIT Potential take l~oda~ as p©r Fith Pasa~ge wable is to com~dcr the fi~ usage, blockage, timing of neat flow fume-adverse ~g, above evem, migration periodicity, i~c of Imbtlat and water modification. Loss q~llRy to delJ~rmin¢ enur~ of action, if Imy. Thc MIT also of habitat is ti~ will recocamced the action to be taken by PGE (lee larl~ concern tMn Comtnllency Olxion* under Ftth Pauage, above). main~em pauase in reaches 3-5.

c¢

i da. ..d Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Porthmd General Elecsric Company FERC Project No. 477 37 Decomm/ss/oa/ng P/an 1 I I I1 II I I I I I I I I l l I I I t

¢3 Table 4-1, continued. | Wate~ Quality 0.t.3,po~hty 2, All sa.lmm~t* None. Continge.~.'y 1Y,Sge~ same u fish Contingenaca: mrne as fud~ patuq~ & hal~tat isme~ Passnge Ix~uq~e., Issue: (,5 pnsage & habilal issutm Io~ of redc~ Sed/memm~m ~0 "l'urtmm) O-5; and All m]moal~ Air identified tn tbe ODEQ Delay in pa~tge imo tributa~ie~ (see Enmre l~buutne~ are nol blocked fur fi/~ so they can move I~tenttal ESA take f-r po~mndly ~y monitoring plan. rno~ilo~ag sclion under Tribuu~ into Utll~Utrl~t to avoid Imbld condilio~s (fi~d~ndto duem ~o p(m- Columbia River in Blockage isme. above) Iribetatry I~snge monitoring and cominge~cies). n.u~d~ty~oud 13. con~m~ctlon plume suspended Pu u~climem.s. n~ 0 i ESA Seb-leam Criteria identifying polenl/al blockages in Ibe ma~lem: t~ Q Le~l~: X l~unge Im~er e~im if: Q benlltb ol'blccknge tt greater them 300' and velooily grealm than 2 ll/~c t~ Lenglh of blocknge is grlll~ than 20if, I1~ ~au1300', alld v,-Iocily grelu~ Ibam 3 ll/sec Lensth of bloOUIge ia grelle~ tlum 150', le~ Ihlm 200', ind valoctty grelter than 4 IVsec Lellgth of blocknge is greal~r Ihan 100', legl Ihaa 15ft, and valoc~y geater Ihan 5 tt/le~ I Lenglh of blockng¢ is greater Ihan 50', legs than 10ft, and velocity ~ than 6 ~sec Q Length of blocknge is greate: than 20', le~ llum 50', and vek3city grmte~ than 8 ft/~c Lenglh of blcck21ge is legit Ihltn 20' and vell3ctly gleater Iblm 11 tt/se~

De~: Migralory chanmd m~t have at lelllt • 10-inch-de~ Ihalweg ( deegetll portion of c~ol~ f,eclim) to be coos/daed Ill&sable flfo fo Iteight~ A ga,.snge harr~ exi~ if: Jump pool shallowe~ Ibm jump height fo Jump haight i$ gnUller thlm 4'

An ESA Monilorin8 lmplem~tatim Telm (MIT), al delcrlbed in Ser.lk~ 7~3 oflhe ~ontng ~ would be eslablishnd Io oversee the Sandy Rive~ ESA Fish Monitonng and Conlin~ Plan (ESA F~h Plan). M ) Mechanical Removal, ~alanel Coml~lexi W Enhancement. Emergency lalVag~ and Trap and Haul are de~rihad in Section 4.6 of the Decommisll/coing Plan.

• Bull Uout will also be prclecletl via ~ ESA momtoring and oom/ugenciel ~ Bull trout are nol known to oJrrenlly rcside in the Sandy Riv~ 8afan, but are ccca~o~al migranli into Ihc Sandy Rtvo; Basin from other 0 Columbia Rive~ tribelaries. M

t~ t~ Q Q t~

0 fl fo

Bull Rum Hyd~elec~c Project Portland Genend Elec~c Company FERC Project No. 477 38 Deconm~slon~n 8 P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

I 4.7 Monitoring Channel Complexity and Fish Passage to Determine PGE Endpoint

PGE will measure channel complexity as an indicator of potential fish barriers following the removal of Marmot Dam and to enable the MIT to determine when post-Marmot Dam conditions in the Sandy River have returned to baseline-type conditions. Channel complexity at four monitoring sites will he measured by PGE using the standard deviation of channel bed elevation, which will he surveyed annually for at least three years prior to dam removal, and continue annually after the dam removal until the risks of potential passage barrier formation becomes sufficiently small, as described in this section and in Exhibit C.

The monitoring plan includes one site in the Reservoir Reach, two sites in Reach 1, and one site I at the top of Reach 3. In the Reservoir Reach and Reach 1, the monitoring duration would he one year plus two consecutive years with (1) no barriers to fish passage, and (2) either improved channel complexity or channel complexity within the range of values prior to clam removal (i.e., I monitoring would he conducted for at least three years in these reaches). Reach 3 will he monitored for the duration of monitoring in Reach 1 plus two consecutive years with (1) no barriers to fish passage, and (2) either improved channel complexity or channel complexity I within the range of values prior to dam removal (Le., monitoring would he conducted for at least five years in this reach). Post-Marmot Dam Channel bed surveys will he supplemented by the ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingencies Plan's fish passage blockage monitoring to assess actual passage conditions in the Sandy River.

4.7.1 Strategy J

The best metric for assessing channel complexity is the standard deviation of channel cross section elevation. The standard deviation of bed elevation over two pool-riffle complexes will he used to quantify channel complexity over a reach. In areas where the channel is plane-hedded, or has very long pools, the monitoring reach will he 10 channel widths long, if possible. Because

m erosion and deposition will alter the channel complexity, bed elevation will be surveyed and the standard deviation of bed elevation will he calculated for at least three yeats prior to the removal of Marmot Dam to establish the natural range of pre-dam removal bed complexRy. FoLlowing dam removal, bed elevation will be surveyed annually during the summer low-flow season and the results will be compared with previous surveys. A decrease in the standard deviation of bed elevation reflects reduced channel complexity, which corresponds to an increased likelihood of am fish passage barrier formation. An increase in the standard deviation of bed elevation reflects increased channel complexity, which indicates a decreased potential for the formation of fish passage barriers. Following dam removal, if channel complexity has returned to its pre-dam lIB removal condition, or has improved for two consecutive years, PGE believes that the potential for fish passage barrier development caused by dam removal is low.

Exhibit C demonstrates how the standard deviation of bed elevation can be used for monitoring. Figure 2 in Exhibit C shows four hypothetical examples of the standard deviation of bed elevation following dam removal. In the examples in Figure 2, the standard deviation of bed I elevation was monitored for seven years prior to dam removal and another five years following

a Bull Run HydroelectricProject PortlandGeneral Electric Company FERC ProjectNo. 477 39 Decomm/ssion/ngP/an

/ Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

J dam removal. The conditions of the years following dam removal are briefly described in Table 1 in Exhibit C.

aml 4.7.2 Proposed Channel Complexity Monitoring

I At each monitoring site in the Sandy River, PGE will establish geo-referenced benchmarks that define the site's upstream and downstream boundaries, to ensure that the survey boundaries are consistent through time. PGE will survey the topography of the active channel in the defined monitoring site. Bed elevation will be surveyed annually with a Total Station. The Total Station survey will be a two-dimensional grid, and any significant changes in bed slope (i.e., changes of elevation greater than 1 foot) and important geomorphic characteristics will be noted. The J longitudinal spacing between grid measurements would be about 1/4 of the channel width. Perpendicular to flow, the survey would be conducted at 10-foot intervals and significant breaks in slope. PGE will also survey cross sections nested within the topographic surveys. These cross sections will be permanently benchmarked and extend onto terraces, rather than just in the active channel. These cross sections will be spaced 1-2 channel widths apart, depending on the site. Similar to the grid survey, points on each cross section will be surveyed at 10-foot intervals, and m also include any significant breaks in slope. Surveys will be conducted during the low-flow season in July to August.

I 4.7.3 Prepe~d ChannelComplexity Anniy~

The data from the surveys will be incorporated into a GIS database, to create a l-foot contour i map of bed elevation for the monitored reach. The survey data will be used to interpolate bed elevation at pre-defined 5-10 foot grid points, which will be used to calculate standard deviation of bed elevation. The interpolation process will ensure the consistency of the standard deviation calculation at different years even if the survey points are not exactly the san~e for different years. The interpolation and standard deviation calculation will be carried out by PGE with a

m computer program that will be developed in conjunction with the MIT, once the first set of survey data is available. 4.7.4 Proposed Monitoring Sites

Four monitoring sites on the Sandy River will be sampled by PGE where sediment transport

alia modeling indicated a greater potential for barriers to passage to develop.

Monitoring Site 1: the current reservoir reach between the upstream cofferdam and about t 1.5 miles upstream oftbe dam (RM 30 to RM 31.5). This reach encompasses two pool- riffle complexes and spans most oftbe reservoir area. Monitoring Site 2: immediately downstream of Marmot Darn for a total distance of m approximately ten channel widths (RM 29). This site has a plane bed morphology and therefore only one pool-riffle complex at this site. The channel planform is relatively simple in this reach, and the expected longitudinal variation in channel complexity is I small.

a Bull Run HydroelectricProject PortlandGeneral ElectricCompany FERC ProjectNo. 477 40 DecononlasioningPlan alto Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

I • Monitoring Site 3: close to Site 2, between about RM 29.3 and RM 29.6. This site also has a plane-bed morphology; therefore, only one pool-riffle complex will be included. Site 3 is located in a relatively wide portion of Reach 1. • Monitoring Site 4: between the exit of the Sandy River Gorge (RM 24.5) and the cascade upstream of Revenue Bridge (RM 24). This site contains two pool-riffle complexes and is

m bounded by the gorge and the cascade. A monitoring site was not selected in Reach 2 because it is very unlikely that sediment deposition will create a fish passage barrier in the gorge due to the steep slope and high channel conf'mement. These characteristics also make survey logistics very difficult. In addition, no monitoring sites were selected in Reaches 4 and 5, because sediment transport modeling indicated that there will be insignificant coarse sediment deposition in those reaches. m 4.7.5 Duration of Monitoring

Pre-removal monitoring will occur for at least three years, as described in Section 4.7. Post- removal monitoring in the reservoir reach (Reach 0) and Reach 1 will he conducted during the first year following dam removal and continue until there are two successive years with (1) no barriers to fish passage, and (2) either improved channel complexity or channel complexity within the range of values prior to dam removal as described in Section 4.7.1 (/.e., monitoring would be conducted for at least three years in these reaches). I

Monitoring in Reach 3 will occur at the same time as Reaches 0 and 1, but differs in the following ways. Once the monitoring program for Reach 1 has terminated (after a minimum of J one year plus two additional years of improving or stable complexity and no fish passage barriers as described above), two consecutive years of improving or stable channel corr~plexity and no

I barriers to fish passage would be required in Reach 3 (i.e., monitoring would occur for at least five years following darn removal) to achieve PGE's endpoint of ESA responsibilities. According to the model, Reaches 4 and 5 will not have significant coarse sediment aggradation

g and are very unlikely to have barriers to fish passage, and thus the monitoring of fish passage in Reaches 4 and 5 will be limited to monitoring and contingencies pursuant to the ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingencies Plan.

As provided in Exhibit C, using a mix of specific endpoint indicators and an adaptive management framework will allow PGE and the agencies represented on the MIT to adjust the

g endpoint monitoring duration based on observed conditions and survey data. This framework will be particularly useful in cases where the annual change in channel cross-section standard deviation is small, or the standard deviation is very close to the pre-dam removal values. As d provided in Exhibit C, PGE and the agencies can decide whether to terminate the endpoint monitoring program for Reaches 0 and 1 after Year 3 and, assuming Reaches 0 and 1 are complete, Reach 3 after year 5, or continue for at least another year based on field inspections. In Example 4 in Exhibit C, the standard deviation of bed elevation decreased in Year 4 to only slightly below the range measured prior to dam removal. The MIT can determine whetbe~ to terminate the monitoring program based on field conditions (i.e., it is obvious that passage

i barriers will not occur), even though neither condition for ending the monitoring program is met based on standard deviation of bed elevation by Year 5.

I Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Po~Im~ Gene~ Elec~cCompany FERC Project No. 477 41 Decommissioning Plan Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

4.8 Endangered and Threatened Terrestrial Species

The bald eagle and the northern spotted owl are protected terrestrial species that have the w potential to occur in the Project. Both bird species are listed as threatened. Project removal activities will be conducted to avoid impacts to these species.

Northern spotted owl disturbance could occur from March 1 to July 15. Project activities in this time period that occur within a ~A mile buffer around nesting northern spotted owls could constitute a taking of this species. Project blasting in this time period that occurs within a l-mile buffer around nesting northern spotted owls could also constitute a taking of this species. Decommissioning activities described below that are outside of this work window, or activities that occur outside the buffer area described above, will not result in take of northern spotted owl.

Northern spotted owls will be surveyed using the USFWS-approved survey protocol, which includes two years of field calling. A total of six field calling surveys will be completed (three atl per year), between March 15 and August 31, 2005, and 2006. These surveys will provide inforrmtion that is valid for years 2007 and 2008. If northern spotted owls are determined to be

I in the Project area, a nesting status survey will be necessary to determine whether nesting is occurring. The monitoring information will be used to adjust timing and intensity of decommissioning activities, to the extent possible, to avoid disturbance to northern spotted owls. The schedule described in Section 2.1 assumes that no spotted owls will be detected in the Project area.

I 4.9 Other Basin Monitoring and Research Program

¢m PGE will provide $300,000 dollars to be used for a program of monitoring before and after dam removal. The funding will be provided in 2 phases: $100,000 by January 15, 2005, and $200,000 by January 15, 2008. I The program will be developed using three tiers of monitoring activities. Tier One consists of management information that benefits or helps to guide future recovery or restoration decisions or activities in the Sandy or Little Sandy Rivers. Tier Two consists of rese~ch opportunities that are related to dam removal issues, but that will not provide information necessary for management of the resources of the Sandy or Little Sandy Rivers. These monitoring or research i efforts may provide information that could be applied to dam removal activities in other systems. Tier Three consists of research opportunities that have no identified need or connection to dam removal but which may be undertaken in the Sandy or Little Sandy Rivers. .t No later than April 2003, the Coordinating Committee will meet to discuss the plan for undertaking these other basin monitoring opportunities. This plan will include a process for all receipt and handling of funds provided by PGE; identification of monitoring activities to be undertaken and funded; funding of such activities; and handling of surplus funds, if any. The Coordinating committee will use Appendix C to this Decommissioning Plan as its starting point Ill for discussion.

alp Bull Run Hydroel~tric Project Porllm~l Ocnc~l EleclxicCompany FERC Proj¢~ No. 477 42 Decomm/s_~Tn/ngP/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Ill 5. Disposition of PGE Lands

PGE owns approximately 1,938 acres of lands in the Bull Run area of the Sandy River basin. Of this ownership, approximately 1,058 acres are operating property (or "Project Lands") associated with the Bull Run Project. Most of these Project Lands are the site of project facilities and will be involved in decommissioning. The remaining 880 acres of non-operating property (or "Non- N Project Lands") are not involved in decommissioning. Some of the Non-Project Lands are on or near the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers, while others are uplands removed from the rivers.

PGE will donate all lands, both Project and Non-Project, that it owns in the Bull Run area of the Sandy River basin, except for the lands associated with Roslyn Lake, to Western Rivers Conservancy ("WRC") to help establish conservation corridors on both the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers. PGE's donations of land to WRC are intended to ensure long-term management of the lands consistent with the objectives stated below; and to assist WRC in acquiring other private lands within the Sandy and Little Sandy corridors. The donated PGE lands will be m managed according to the following objectives:

a. Protect and restore riparian habitat. I b. Protect the integrity o f river ecosystems. c. Establish connections and corridors between habitat units for terrestrial wildlife. d. Provide low-impact public access to the rivers and lands, consistent with the above a objectives.

Ultimately, the land will he placed with a steward that will ensure the lands will be managed I consistent with the objectives in perpetuity.

all Depending on the size of individual transfers of Project lands, PGE may be required to seek Oregon Public Utilities Commission ("OPUC") approval prior to making the transfers. Transfers of Non-Project Lands do not require OPUC approval. Assuming that OPUC approval is

I required, PGE will apply for such approval no later than 6 months after completion of removal of structures on the parcel to be transferred. PGE will transfer its Non-Project Lands to WRC within 180 days of the FERC Order. Except to the extent required by ongoing operations or dam removal, PGE will manage the lands consistent with the long-term management objectives until they are conveyed to WRC.

a At the end of the disposition process, there will be two conservation corridors for aquatic species on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers. These conservation corridors will be managed to enhance recovery of anadromous species under the protection of the Endangered Species Act, as well as

m the more general goal of ecosystem health. Habitat protection and enhancement will combine with dam removal and flow restoration to increase the prospects for species recovery in the Sandy River basin.

6. Transfer of Water Rights

Im As part of the decommissioning process, PGE will initiate a process to convert its Bull Run Project hydroelectric Surface Water Registration to an Instream Water Right. ORS 543A.305. PGE's Surface Water Registration claims 800 cfs of water from the Sandy and Little Sandy all Bull Run HydroelectricProject PortlandGeneral Electric Company FERC Proje~ No. 477 43 Decommissioning Plan

Ill Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Rivers in connection with the Project. The statute allows such conversion, up to the full amount of the water right associated with the hydroelectric project, upon a finding by the Oregon Water Resources Department that the change will not result in injury to other existing water rights. In I addition, the Director has discretion under the statute to include measures to ensure the continuation of authorized water uses by other existing water rights even if such uses would not be injured by the conversion. ORS 543A.305(3). Within 90 days after power production ceases, PGE will assign its surface water registration claim of 800 cfs as outlined in the Agreement for Instream Conversion attached to the Settlement Agreement as Appendix J. The Agreement for Instream Conversion proposes conversion of 200 cfs year-round for the Little Sandy River, and a 600 cfs year-round for the Sandy River. Consistent with the terms of the Agreement for Instream Conversion, the instream water right will he conditioned to maintain up to 40 cfs of existing uses upstream from the Marmot Dam, up to 3 cfs of existing uses between Marmot Dam I and the confluence of the Sandy River and the Bull Run River, and 16.3 cfs of the City of Sandy's permit on the Salmon River.

7. Coordination Mechanisms

7.1 PGE Organization ma

The following PGE organizational structure (Figure %1) is intended to provide for the safe and effective removal of the Bull Run Project. Environmental and quality control monitoring will he provided throughout the decommissioning effort.

all

Figure 7-1. PGE organizational structure for decommissioning of the Bull Run Project.

d Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland Gena~l EMcuic Com~ny FERC Project No. 477 44 Deck& P/an

d Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

m 7.2 Coordinating Committee

As provided in Section 4 of the Settlement Agreement, implementation of the Agreement and N this Decommissioning Plan will he coordinated by a Coordinating Committee that may include one representative of each party to the Settlement Agreement. Decisions of the Coordinating Committee shall not, however, usurp the authority of the individual Parties or of agencies having J approval authority regarding specific measures required by the Decommissioning Plan or by any permits required for implementation of the Decommissioning Plan.

i PGE shall designate its representative on the Coordinating Committee as the Decommissioning Coordinator to oversee the coordination and implementation of Decommissioning Plan. The Decommissioning Coordinator will provide reasonable administrative and clerical support for the am Coordinating Committee. The Decommissioning Coordinator shall arrange an annual meeting of the Coordinating Committee as well as any additional meetings deemed necessary by the

g Coordinating Committee members to coordinate activities and inform the Parties concerning the status or implementation of this Agreement and the Decommissioning Plan. PGE shall provide members of the Coordinating Committee a minimum of 30 days' notice prior to any meeting,

Ill provided that meetings may he called on shorter notice if the circumstances require.

PGE shall prepare and file with FERC and the parties to the Settlement Agreement an annual

aN report on the activities of the Coordinating Committee and on the implementation of the Decommissioning Plan during the previous year. Filing of such reports shall commence upon the first anniversary of the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement and shall continue each year

i thereaRer until the decommissioning is complete.

I 7.3 ESA Mo~toring and Implementation Team

PGE will convene a Monitoring and Implementation Team ("M1T"), with representatives of PGE, I ODFW, NMFS, and USFWS to oversee the ESA fish monitoring and contingencies measures described in Section 4.6.

me 7.3.1 Structure and Function:

PGE, ODFW, NMFS and USFWS shall each designate a representative to the MIT, which will 411 oversee implementation of PGE's ESA fish monitoring and contingencies measures as provided in Section 4.6 and the determination of the monitoring endpoint as described in Section 4.7. The M1T will oversee implementation of PGE's protective measures for listed fish species, and will i use the most up-to-date information to make decisions regarding fish passage and other ESA protective actions. al Prior to removal of Marmot darn, PGE shall arrange for an initial monitoring trip to ensure that monitoring methodologies are field tested for both visual observations and passage barrier data collection. MIT members may also participate in periodic monitoring activities. at

Bull Run HydroelectricProject PortlandGeneral Elec~ic Company FERC Proj¢~ No. 477 45 Decorators/on/rigP/an

dl Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

m After Marmot Dam removal PGE shall convene an annual meeting of the MIT (approximately in May). All members of the Coordinating Committee will be notified of and invited to attend this annual meeting. PGE shall provide a written report at least 2 weeks in advance of the annual ! meeting summarizing information collected the previous year under the terms of the Decommissioning Plan and, as the Sandy River flows recede, the current habitat conditions and areas of greatest concern for fish passage and habitat impact for the upcoming low-flow season. I The MIT may decrease the monitoring periodicity set forth in Table 4-1 after the first full year following Marn~t Dam removal. In addition, members of the MIT can request that other parameters of the Sandy River ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingencies Plan be reviewed based I upon the results from the first year of monitoring. The M1T will strive to maintain the original level of ESA fish take minimization, while allowing for modifications in the monitoring activities. g PGE shall convene additional MIT meetings if Sandy River conditions warrant, if monitoring or contingency response data indicate a need for additional meetings, or if requested by another i MIT member. MIT meetings may be either face-to-face or via conference calls, as circumstances necessitate.

i Three PGE response categories, designed to minimize and/or alleviate impacts to listed fish species, are contained in Sections 4.6 and 4.7. The MIT will participate in these responses. These response categories include 1) immediate response; 2) deliberative response: and 3) a endpoint response. Each response category addresses different levels of impact urgency and has a different level of input from the MIT, as well as different dispute resolution processes.

i 7.3.2 Innnedlate Response

PGE shall implement Immediate Response actions when risk to adult listed fish species is m highest. Immediate Response actions occur when fish passage is blocked during peak migrations as defined in Section 4.6 for each ESA-listed fish species. Immediate Response actions are

iIm designed to minimize or alleviate impacts during the peak periods of aduR fish migrations. The migration peak period, as defined in the ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingencies Plan for each listed fish species, is believed to be the portion of the life cycle that BuLl Run hydroproject

I decommissioning poses the greatest risks, and the life cycle portion that could most benefit from rapid actions.

i If PGE's or another agency's monitoring identifies an Immediate Response need, PGE will notify all MIT members within 12 hours and solicit guidance as to which contingency option of those set forth in Section 4.6 to implement. However, if resource agency input is not immediately available, PGE will determine which contingency option to implement immediately. After Immediate Response activities, PGE shall report the actions taken and results of those actions to the MIT. This feedback loop provides the MIT with information to determine whether m the chosen contingency response was effective. PGE will implement actions until the impact is alleviated to the satisfaction of the resource agency MIT members.

dim

Im Bull Run Hydroelectric Proj~t Portland C,eaend Electric Company FERC Project No. 477 46 Deconm~s/on/ngP/an

de Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

-- 7.3.3 Deliberative Response

PGE shall implement Deliberative Response actions when risk to listed fish species is lower. a Deliberative Response actions are designed to minimize or alleviate impacts due to malnstem, side channel, and tributary fish passage blockage during the non-peak periods of adult fish migrations. The non-peak migration period, as defined in the ESA Fish Plan for each listed fish I species, is believed to be the portion of the life cycle that Bull Run Project decommissioning poses reduced risks.

I If PGE's or another agency's monitoring identifies a Deliberative Response need, PGE will contact MIT members within 48 hours and solicit guidance as to whether a contingency option set forth in Section 4.6 should be implemented. If the resource agency MIT members determine I that a contingency action is required, the MIT will notify PGE oftbe requirement to alleviate the problem. The MIT also will recommend which of the contingency options identified in the ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingencies Plan should be undertaken. If, despite PGE's efforts to contact all members of the MIT, a MIT recommendation is not forthcoming, PGE may proceed to implement appropriate contingency measures, relying on the guidance provided by the MIT members it has been able to contact. After Deliberative Response activities, PGE shall report the I actions taken and results of those actions to the MIT. This feedback loop provides the MIT with information to determine whether the chosen contingency response was effective. PGE will implement actions until the impact is alleviated to the satisfaction of the resource agency MIT I members.

7.3.4 Endpoim Response

PGE shall implement Endpoint Monitoring, as described in Section 4.7. Pre-Marmot Dam

m removal geomorphic monitoring will define Sandy River stable channel complexity; post- Marmot Dam removal Endpoint Monitoring will determine whether the Sandy River channel is approaching the pre-dam channel complexity conditions. As post-dam channel conditions

m approach pre-dam conditions, risk to ESA-listed fish species from Marmot Darn sediment release becomes reduced. Ongoing fish passage monitoring, implemented by PGE as part of the ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingencies Plan, will assist with validation of the Endpoint Plan, and J ensure risk is reduced to ESA-listed fish species. PGE shall provide a written report at least 2 weeks in advance of the annual meeting summarizing Endpoint Monitoring data to the MIT. In addition, PGE will seek concurrence from the MIT when it believes that the basic channel dim complexity requirements of Section 4.7 of the Decommissioning Plan have been completed (thereby beginning the final two years of monitoring.)

.at Further, upon completion of all monitoring components in Reaches 0, 1, and 3 of the Endpoint Monitoring, PGE will request concurrence from the MIT that all the criteria of the Endpoint Plan have been met. If the MIT concurs that PGE's Endpoint Plan responsibilities are complete, this at concurrence will be noted in the Certificate of Completion provided for in Section 5.4 of the Settlement Agreement. If the MIT does not agree that PGE has reached completion as provided in the Endpoint Plan, this disagreement will be subject to the provisions of Sections 7.5.5 and 7.7 at of the Settlement Agreement governing the resolution of disputes related to the Certificate of Completion.

4111 Bull Run HydroelectricProject Portland General ElectricCompany FERC ProjectNo. 477 47 Decomm/s.con/ng P/an

il Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

7.3.$ Roles and Responsibilities

I All MIT Members: Each MIT participant will designate primary and alternate members for the M1T process. These MIT members will be fully authorized to make the decisions required to / permit Contingency Actions to he undertaken by PGE. MIT decisions regarding Immediate Response actions will he made by consensus of those MIT memhers present. MIT decisions regarding Deliberative Response actions, Endpoint Monitoring decisions and any additional alJ decision made at annual meetings of the MIT will be made by all MIT members, provided that if a MIT member fails to respond after reasonable efforts to contact the member have been made or if a MIT member agency notifies PGE that it does not wish to participate in the decision, decisions may be made and actions taken in his absence.

PGE: PGE is the organizer and communications coordinator for MIT functions. PGE will m provide a one-month notice of annual meeting date and host the annual MIT meeting (May). PGE will provide the MIT with a written summary of annual monitoring results at least two weeks before the annual meeting. In addition, PGE shall provide field notes upon request. I During the annual meeting, PGE will report on any data collected, how PGE responded to contingency triggers, and any endpoint monitoring data. PGE will, upon new monitoring information that may trigger a contingency response, initiate unscheduled MIT discussions. am PGE will also develop a checklist to he used by PGE staff. The checklist will be used to ensure

a that other issues such as archeological sites, water quality and non-ESA species and habitats are considered, appropriate parties contacted, and necessary permits obtained when implementing actions under the Sandy River ESA Fish Monitoring and Contingency Plan in Section 4.6. PGE

Im will seek concurrence from the Coordinating Committee regarding the checklist.

Following the implementation of any action described in Section 4.6, the PGE Decommissioning Coordinator will prepare a summary email report to members of the Coordinating Committee. The email report will contain the date the action was taken, a brief description of the contingency measure implememed and the outcome of the measure, and the rationale for taking action.

i ODFW, NMFS, USFWS: These agencies will use reasonable best efforts to attend the annual MIT meeting. These agencies will provide PGE with an authorized contact person and current

N accurate contact information for scheduled and unscheduled MIT discussions.

11 Bull Run Hydroelecu'icProject Portlmd Genmd Electric Company FERC ProjectNo. 477 Decomm/s.v~CngP/an

t Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

I 7.4 Cost Summary

PGE will pay all costs associated with the decommissioning and removal of the Bull Run I Project. These costs are currently estimated to total $17,060,000, but can be expected to change as specific decommissioning plans are completed and bids awarded. PGE's obligation to pay these costs is not subject to a "cap," and implementation of this Decommissioning Plan is not aa contingent upon the final cost. The current cost estimate is broken down as follows:

F_,stlmted Cost a Activity Phase Pre-filing Activities $ 4,240,000

300,000 mlt (1) Pre-removal Monitoring (2) Permitting 810,000 (3) Interim Protective Actions 500,000 ¢mJ (4) Project Removal 9,500,000 (5) Post-Removal Monitoring and Contingencies 1,710,000

m Total Cost $17,060,000

d Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric C.omp~ny FERC Project No, 477 49 Decomm/sswa/a 8 P/an

Mira Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Exhibit A

Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland General Electric Company FERC Projec~ No. 477 Decomn~s/ontng P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

PORTLANDGENERAL ELECTRIC BULL RUN HYDROELECrRIC PROJECT DECOMMISSIONING

REVEGETATION, NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL AND SITE RE,.~ORATION PLAN

1.0 Introduction

Portland General Electric (PGE) currently owns and operates the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project under a license issued by the Federal Energy Commission (FERC). The expiration date for the current FERC license is November 16, 2004. On May 26, 1999, PGE announced its decision to surrender the license and to decommission the Project, rather than proceed with a reliceusing process. As a result, PGE will remove the project dams and ancillary structures and facilities. It is PGE's goal to remove all project feamr~ in a manner that minimizes environmental impacts and restores the site to a condition suitable for mixed use. The purpose of this document is to outline PGE's plans for revegetation and control of invasive/exotic species in areas now occupied by project facilities or disturbed by decommissioning activities.

2.0 General Locale

The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project is associated with three sub-drainages in the Sandy River Basin: the Sandy, Little Sandy, and Bull Run rivers. All three rivers drain the west slope of Mt. Hood, in northwestern Oregon. The Project facilities are located in Clackamas County, Oregon, about 30 miles east of Portland, Oregon, and near the town of Sandy, Oregon (Figure 1). The Project vicinity includes property owned by PGE and the City of Portland, as well as lands managed by the U.S Forest Service (FS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

The Bull Run Project is located in the West Slope Cascades physiographic province (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife [ODFW] 1993). Geologically, this province is characterized by volcanic activity, with soils derived from pyroclasitc parent material and igneous rocks. Most of the West Slope Cascades province, including the Project vicinity, is within the Western Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) vegetation zone (Franklin and Dyrness 1973). Elevations in the Project vicinity range from about 340 to 738 feet. The area is characterized by a wet, mild, maritime climate (Franklin and Dymess 1973), with precipitation averaging between 80 and 90 inches annually (Halverson et al. 1986). Summers are generally warm and dry (Halverson et al. 1986).

3.0 Project Description

The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project includes two diversion dems--btarmot Dam and the Little Sandy Diversion Damson the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers, respectively. Removal plans for the dams and other Project facilities and structures are currently in various stages of development and summarized below:

• Marmot Dam - Located at river mile (RM) 30 on the Sandy River, Marmot Dam is 47- foot high concrete-encased miler compacted concrete gravity dam. The main section of Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Sandy River Basin~xl Bull R~ H)'dro Proje~ boo.an .~v~

nmk~ ~ttl

I I.~ ~ I ~\ ""

I*l Tit

t 1~$45 tH

ILM

va|

IL~t t m i |H

Figure 1. Bull Run Hydroelectric Project vicinity.

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Revegetatiun, Noxious Weed Control and Site ~on Plan Page 2 of 14 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

the dam is 195 ft long. A concrete gravity-section wing dam on the north side of the dam extends downstream to provide an additional 140 feet of spillway and to direct water into the intake structure. There is a fish ladder on the south side of the dam. Approximately 980,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel have settled behind the dam over an approximately 1.5-mile reach, so there is no reservoir or storage capacity.

Removing Marmot Dam involves dismantling the dam in a single season and minimal sediment excavation. Concrete from the dam and fish ladder would be reduced to rubble and spread over established parking areas and roadways on BLM and PGE lands for a beneficial end use. A small amount of sediment would be removed from the riverbed, as requi_red for construction activities, and would probably be used as backftll material for removal and burial of the primary Sandy canal.

Following removal of Marmot Dam, the river channel through the area now occupied by the reservoir is expected to be highly unstable. It will likely take the river several years to incise to its new gradient, during which time mass bank wasting and chronic raveling may occur (Stillwater Sciences 2000).

Sandy Canal - Water diverted at Marmot Dam enters a series of concrete-lined canals and tunnels and a wooden box flume that discharge into the Little Sandy River just upstream of the Little Sandy diversion dam. Total canal length is 7,320 feet; the box flume is 575 feet long. Removal of the canals will involve ripping and folding the concrete lining. The canals will then be covered with fill material and soil, including river sediment removed during removal of Marmot Dam, and recontoured. The fill will be compacted, sloped to drain, and depressed to allow existing streams to cross without causing erosion.

Little Sandy Diversion Dam - The Little Sandy Diversion Dam is located at RM 1.7 on the Little Sandy River. The dam is 15.75 feet high and has 12-inch flashboards to minimize spill. The dam will be removed by controlled blasting, air hammers, and excavating equipment. The concrete will be reduced to rubble and spread on roads near the site. The amount of sediment behind the clam is minimal and there are no plans for sediment excavation and disposal.

Little Sandy Fhune - Water diverted at the Little Sandy Diversion enters a steel- reinforced, concrete water diversion control structure that regulates flow into the Little Sandy wood-box flume. The wood-box flume is 14,900 feet long, 14 feet wide, and 9 feet deep. It is constructed of pressure-treated lumber and is supported at 4-foot intervals along its entire length; support timbers are anchored to concrete footings. Timber ties along the top of the flume support steel rails for a standard-gage railroad track and a wood plank walkway. Diesel-engine "speeder" trains run along the tracks for maintenance and inspection; the tracks end at the "car barn", which is located near Roslyn Lake.

At the downstream end of the wood-box flume, water enters a reinforced concrete transition structure which discharges into a trapezoidal concrete-lined canal. These two

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Revegetation,Noxious Weed Control and Site Reslocafion Plan Page 3 of 14 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

structures combined are 850 feet in length and discharge into a tunnel which then connects to a 248-foot long concrete canal into Roslyn Lake.

A crane will be used to remove the wooden box flume. The crane will run within the flume, timbers will be bundled and transported via the speeder trains back to the car barn area. The longer timber support beams may be helicopter lifted from the site. The footbridge and the rails will be removed as removal activities progress from the diversion clam towards the car barn. There are no plans to remove the concrete footings. The amount of ground disturbance from removal activities associated with the box flume is therefore expected to be minimal. The short section of concrete canal will be removed using the same methods proposed for the Sandy canal. The canal will then be covered with fill and soil and recontoured

Roslyn Lake - Roslyn Lake is a 160-acre impoundment that is supplied with water from the Sandy and Little Sandy rivers via the Little Sandy flume and from the City of Portland's municipal water supply. Normal lake elevation is 655 feet; maximum depth is 20 feet. Earth dikes form the northwest, north, and northeast sides of the lake. The remainder of the lake is bordered by mid-successional mixed deciduous/conifer forests, riparian deciduous forests, and small wetlands (Tressler 2000).

Removal of the Bull Run Project dams, canals, and flumes will eliminate the water supply for Roslyn Lake. The lake will be drained, filled, and graded. Material from the existing dikes that form much of the lake will be used to fill in the lakehed. The inlet and outlet structures for the lake will be removed.

Other Facilities - Other facilities associated with the Bull Run Project include a powerhouse; two penstocks that carry water from Roslyn Lake to the powerhouse; a transformer building next to the powerhouse; an outdoor switchyard, a 57 kV transmission line extending 2.8 miles from the switchyard to a substation; a 12.5 kV distribution line, and a "car barn". PGE will dismantle and remove the powerhouse, transformer building, switchyard, and car barn and grade the sites. Concrete from these facilities will be reduced to rubble and used for fill or buried in backfills. The penstocks will be sealed and left in place. The transmission and distribution lines will be removed as necessary.

a 4.0 Revegetation Plans In general, PGE plans to revegetate some sites that are currently occupied by Project facilities and all areas disturbed by removal activities. The revegetation program has the following three general goals: (1) control erosion; (2) prevent the establishment and control the spread of invasiveJexotic species; and (3) promote the establishment of native plant communities. In addition, both the BLM and FS require revegetation of disturbed sites on the lands under their ! management. Most revegetation work would be done in the fall following the removal of Marmot Dam and project facilities. Seedlings are typically planted in either the spring or fall when there is enough moisture for establishment. Revegetation plans for various portions of the N Project are described in the following sections.

J Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Revegetafion. Noxious Weed Cont.31 and Site Restoration Plan Page 4 of 14

Ill Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

4.1 Areas Disturbed by Marmot Dam Removal Activities

Most of the disturbance resulting from the removal of Marmot Dam is expected to occur on land managed by the BLM north of the dam, in a disturbed area that currently includes a road, gravel parking lot, and grass. The climax plant community, or plant association (PA), in this area has been identified as western hemlock/Oregon grape/swordfern (Tsuga heterophylloJBerberis nervosa/Polystichum munitum) (Tressler 2000), hut the vegetation community that ultimately occurs on disturbed sites may he influenced by differences in sediment and soil particle size, water retention capabilities, and nutrient composition. PGE will revegetate disturbed areas on with a mixture of native tree, shrub, and herbaceous species. Since these are upland areas, potential tree and shrub species include Douglas-fir (Psuedotsuga menziesii), western hemlock, big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), vine maple (A. microphyllum), Oregon grape, salal (Gaultheron sbalion), and red huckleberry (Vacinium parvifolium). The f'mal list of tree and shrub species, as well as planting density, will he determined in consultation with the BLM.

In addition to shrubs and trees, a mix of herbaceous species will be hydroseeded onto areas disturbed by dam removal activities. The mulch used in the hydroseed mix should help control erosion while the herbaceous species establish. Blue wildrye (Elymus g/aucus), a native perennial grass, has apparemly been used successfully on a number of BLM restoration sites in the western Cascades and will likely he used in the hydroseed mix. Native legumes, such as clover (Trifolium spp.), lupine (Lupinus spp.), or vetch (Vicia spp.), will probably be included for their nitrogen-fixing capabilities. Several of the native strawberry species (Fragaria spp.) may also he included because they spread quickly and are tolerant of poor soil conditions. The final species mix, as well as application rate, will be decided in consultation with the BLM and may be contingent on the availability of seed and plant materials from the Bull Run drainage. PGE will take steps to identify and secure a source of commercially available native seeds at least two years in advance of decommissioning and seeding. All seed will be certified as free of noxious weeds. If suitable native seeds are not available, non-native annual species that do not persist may be used. In the event that it becomes necessary to seed with non-native species, PGE will over-seed the following year with native species if a suitable seed source becomes available.

4.2 Marmot Stream Bank and Riparian Area

The stream bank and riparian area in the vicinity of the current location of Marmot Dam, as well as for some distance up- and downstream, are likely to be very unstable for a number of years following dam removal. The banks along this reach will be subjected to mass wasting and raveling as the river incises a new gradient. PGE will monitor these areas up-and downstream of Marmot Dam, but plans to revegetate this area are premature. If necessary, revegetation plans will be developed in consultation with the BLM and Oregon Department ofFish and Wildlife (ODFW) after the river gradient at the Marmot Dam site stabilizes with river gradients up- and downstream, which could take several years to occur.

Bull Run Hydro ProjectDWG / RevegeURion and Exo~ic/InvasiveSpecies ConU'ol Plan Page 5 of 14 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

4.3 Sandy Canal and ~ Sandy Box Flume and Canal

The Sandy canal is currently bordered by shrublands and mid-successional mixed deciduous forest. Two climax vegetation communities occur in this area--qhe widespread western hemiock/Orngon grape/swordfern PA and the widespread hemlock/Oregon grape-salal PA. The canal area will revegetated with a mixture of grasses and forbs. The same herbaceous species seed mix selected for disturbed areas resulting from the removal of Marmot Dam will be used to revegetate the canaL Where possible, the canal will be hydroseeded; otherwise the seed will be hand broadcast. The few acres of canal on BLM land will also be revegetated with trees and shrubs. The small section of canal at the end of the Little Sandy box flume will also be revngetated with the same herbaceous seed mix.

The Little Sandy box flume is bordered primarily by mature conifer forest, mid-successional mixed deciduous conifer forest, and mid-successional deciduous forest. Despite differences in existing vegetation cover types, the entire area now occupied by the box flume is expected to eventually support a community of western hemlock/Oregon grape/swordfern. Very little ground disturbance is expected from removal of the Little Sandy box flume and it is assumed that any small bare areas under the flume will revegetate naturally from adjacent seed sources. Trees and shrubs will recolonize the existing corridor. PGE will, however, replant the corridor along the approximately 1.1 mile of FS land crossed by the flume with trees and shrubs. The mix of species and planting densities will be developed in consultation with the FS. The entire flume area will be monitored for three years to prevent the establishment of invasive/exotic species that inhibit revegetation by native species.

4.4 Liale Sandy Diversion Area

Lands disturbed by removal activities at the Little Sandy Diversion Dam will be rngraded and hydroseeded with the same mix of berbaceous species used to revegetate the area now occupied by the Little Sandy box flume.

4.5 Rostyn Lake

PGE intends to sell off its landholdings at Roslyn Lake for other uses after the lake is drained, filled, and graded. In the interim, bare soils at the site will be seeded with a cover species such as annual rye to prevent the establishment of exotic and/or invasive plant species following decommissioning.

4.6 Other Faciliaes

The powerhouse, transformer building, switchyard, and "car barn" will be demolished and removed, and the sites graded. PGE intends to hydroseed these sites with a grass and forb seed mix. Removal of the distribution and transmission lines is not expected to result in ground disturbance that will require revegetation.

Bull Run Hydro ProjectDWG / Revegetationand Exotie/InvasiveSpecies Control Plan Page 6 of 14 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

5.0 Exotic/lnvasive Species Control

Surveys conducted in the vicinity of the Bull Run Project identified 15 exotic/invasive species (Table 1). Three of these species----qansy ragwort (Seneciojacobaea), Scot's broom (Cyt/sus scoparius), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense)--are designated as noxious weeds by the Clackamas County Soil and Water Conservation District 0etter from S. Hudson, District Administrator, the Clackamas County Soil and Water Conservation District, Oregon City, Oregon, July 13, 1999). These three species, as well as six others found in the Project vicinity, are designated weeds on the State of Oregon Noxious Weed List. The most widespread exotic/invasive species in the Project vicinity is Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor). This species occurs near all Project facilities except the Little Sandy box flume. The access roads to Marmot Dam and disturbed area just north of the dam support the greatest variety of exotie/invasive species, including common tansy (Tanacetwn vulgare), which was not found anywhere else in the Project vicinity. Scot's broom was particularly common along the Little Sandy box flume. Table 1 shows the general distn'bution of the exotic/invasive species identified in the Project vicinity; additional information and a map can he found in Keany (2001).

53 Management Goals

Many of the exotic/invasive species that now oceur in the Project vicinity are not shade tolerant and therefore thrive in open disturbed areas, ineluding road and transmission line corridors. Controlling noxious weeds is therefore critical to the successful revegetatlon of disturhed areas with native species. The primary goal of the exotic/invasive species control plan is to allow for the eventual establishment of native plant communities in areas now occupied by project facilities.

£2 Priority Control Species

It is nearly impossible to control all exotic/invasive species present in the Project vicinity that may spread onto sites disturbed from removal activities. Revegetation will help limit the spread of some species but others are widespread in western Oregon and/or extremely aggressive. The priority for control activities will therefore focus on species that meet at least one of the following criteria:

• Species is present as new populations or outliers of larger infestations, especially if these are expanding rapidly;

• Species that out-compete natives and dominate otherwise undisturbed native communities; or

• Species that prevent or depress recruitment or regeneration of native species;

Based on these criteria, the following species have been identified for focused control efforts:

Giant Knotweed and Himalayan Knotweed - Giant, Himalayan, and Japanese knotweeds (Polystachyura sachalinese, P. polystachyum, and P. cuspidatum) are three closely related

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Revegetationand Exotie/InvasiveSpecies Control Plan Page 7 of 14 li l II II it t li i l l t l l t t t I 1 I hh hh

I11 P1

Table 4-1: General location of exoticJinvasive plants in the vicinity of the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. I Species Marmot Dam Aru Little Sand r Ar~ Bu~ Run Area Marmot Marmot $~dy R. Mm'm~ 1Atfle IAttie Sandy Lml¢ Sandy Little Bull Run Powerhem~ ~0 Dim& Dam Byp~ Flume& Sandy Diver~on R. Bypass Sandy R. Bn~m Roan Vicinity& Reser~oh" Access Rd Reach C4ms/ Diversion Acce~ Rd Reach Flume Reach Lake T-I~e ROW r1" Bouncing bet X Saposmr/a offic/na//s Bull thistle e X Cirsium vul[[are 0

Canada thistle s X X X X t~ Q Cirsium arvense Q Common tansy X t~ Tanacetum vulsare

English ivy X X I Hedera helix Q Evergreen blackben 3, X Rubus/ac/ah~ms Giant knocweeds X X fO 0 Polyl~onum sachalinese fO Himalayan knotweed ~ X < fO Polygonum polystachyum Himalayan blackben'y X X X X X X X X Rubus discolor Policeman's helmet X X M lmpmiens 81andulifem i Robe~'s geranium X X X 0 Geranium robertianum M SL John's-worts X X X X X X Hy/~r/cum/~rforamm Scot's broom s X X X X X X g~tisus scoparius t~ t~ Tansy ragworln' T X X Q Q Senecio jacobea t~ Trailing bla~kheffy X X X Rubus ur~/m~s Source: Keany 2000 0 i , B' designated weed - weeds of ccunomic inkoormn~ which arc regionally abundant, but which may have limited distribution. 0 •r Targ~ weed - a priority noxious weed d~signa~d by the State Weed Board as a target weed species on which the Oregon Depa~nent Agricultural (ODA) will fO c~ implement at sla~wid¢ management plan.

I Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Revegctafion, Noxio~ Weed Control and Site Restoration Plan Page 8 of 14 t~o Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

ornamental species that have escaped from cultivation and are becoming increasingly common along stream and rights-of-way in western Oregon and Washington. According to The Nature Conservancy O'NC), knotweed was first observed along the Sandy River as recently as 1996; since then hundreds of patcbes, some up to 0.5- acres, have been documented (TNC n.d). All three of the knotweed species spread primarily by rhizomes and thrive in open sunny areas on fiver cobble and in moist soil. They often spread when roots are moved by floods or in contaminated soil. These knotweeds form large clumps and can grow up to 12 feet tall, depending on the species. Their height and early spring emergence combine to shade out other vegetation and prohibit the regeneration of other species, thus reducing diversity and wildlife habitat value (Seiger 2000). In the Project vicinity, giant knotweed was found just downsueam of Marmot Dam and on PGE-owned land off Waterworks Road near the Bull Run powerhouse. Himalayan knotweed was recorded near the Bull Ran powerhouse.

Policeman's helmet - Like the knotweed species, Policeman's helmet (lmpat/ens 81andulifera) is found along streams and roadways, germinates early in the growing season, and grows up to 12 feet tall. This species, however, is more tolerant of shade, increasing its ability to colonize and persist in undisturbed sites. A single fruit from Policeman's helmet can contain 800 seeds; when mature, the fruit explodes, ejecting seeds up to 20 feet (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2000). This species, considered one of the "top 20" aliens in Great Britain, is extremely invasive. So far, its distribution in the Pacific Northwest is relatively limited, and in Washington it is designated for control by state law (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2000). In the Project vicinity, policeman's helmet was found on a sandbar jnst upstream from Marmot Dam, and adjacent to the Sandy River about 300 yards downstream of the danL The downstream location is along a small drainage adjacent to the fish holding pond.

Canada thistle - Canada thistle spreads primarily by rhizomes, at a rate of 3 to 6 feet per year, and can form dense clones. It competes with and displaces native vegetation, decreasing species diversity, and changing the structure and composition of some habitats. This species can occur in nearly every upland vegetation community and is a particular threat to riparian areas and grasslands (Nuzzo 1998). In the Project vicinity, Canada thistle occurs near both the Marmot and Little Sandy diversion dams. Both of these areas will be disturbed by construction activity and will support open riparian communities for a number of years following revegetation.

Scot's broom - Scot's broom is a very aggressive species that grows rapidly and forms nearly impenetrable thickets, and creates a fire hazard. It spreads primarily by seed; a single shrub will grow up to 3 feet its first year and can produce over 300 seeds during its second year. Although individual plants are relatively short-lived, Scot's broom seeds can remain viable for 80 years and are easily transported by animals, vehicles, and water (Hoshovsky 1998a). This species grows best in sandy soils in full sunlight. The sandy substrate of the sediment pile would therefore represent ideal growing conditions for Scot's broom. In the Project vicinity this

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Revege~tion, Noxious Weed Control and Site ~on Plan Page 9 of 14 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

species occurs in the vicinity of Marmot Dam, as well as near the Little Sandy Diversion Dam and along the upper portion of the box flume.

Himalayan blackberry - Himalayan blackberry is a fast-growing species that can quickly form dense thickets, particularly in wet areas. It can inhibit access to water by wildlife and displace native plant species. Thickets of blackberry can produce up 700 to 1,400 seeds per sq. foot, but it generally colonizes areas by regenerating from sections of root stock. Single canes can grow up to 20 feet per season (Hoshovsky 1998b). Himalayan blackberry readily colonizes disturbed areas, particularly wet sites. This plant is the most pervasive exotic/invasive species in the Project vicinity and occurs near most facilities. Con~olling this species is critical to the ultimate reestablishment of native vegetation communities in areas now occupied by Project facilities.

5.3 Proposed Actions for Priority Control Species

PGE will eliminate priority control species along access roads and in areas that will be dismrtw~ prior to the initiation of construction associated with the removal of Bull Run Project facilities. PGE will also monitor exotic/invasive species for 3 years following removal activities. During this 3-year period, control actions will focus on preventing the establishment of knotweeds, policeman's helmet, Canada thistle, Scot's broom, and Himalayan blackberry in areas now occupied by Project facilities. Detailed control plans for pre-construction and the monitoring period will be developed in cooperation with the USFS and BLM. Use of herbicides on federal land will require preparation of an Environmental Assessment(F_A). Preliminary control methods for each species are briefly described below.

Giant Knotweed and Himalayan Knotweed - PGE initiated control of the giant and Himalayan knotweed infestations in the Project vicinity in 1999 and 2000. The population of giant knotweed downstream of Marmot Dam was cut in 1999, but was reported to have reatveared in 2001. The stands of giant knotweed near Waterworks Road and Himalayan knotweed near Bull Run Powerhouse were mowed in July, 2000. According to TNC, cutting may be an effective way to eliminate Japanese knotweed because it results in a significant reduction of rhizome reserves. It does, however, need to be done repeatedly--probably at least three times during the growing season---to offset rhizome production (Seiger 2000). Shading, particularly in combination with cutting, may also be a useful way to control small stands of knotweed. Of the chemical control methods, application of glyphosate (Roundup, Rodeo) has been found to be very effective in controlling Japanese knotweed, especially when used in the fall when leaf reserves are being transferred to rhizomes. Repeated applications over several years may be necessary; as long as rhizomes remain in the soil, knotweed will return once management is relaxed (Seiger 2000).

Policeman's helmet - Policeman's helmet currently occurs in two locations near Marmot Dam that will probably not be affected by construction activities, but are likely to be dismd~ by the expected associated channel changes following dam removal. Since this species is an annual with a shallow root system, small

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Revegetatlon, Noxious Weed Cotttrol and Site Res~afion Plan Page 10 of 14 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

infestations can be easily removed by hand pulling, preferably before the plant flowers. Because seeds in the soil can remain viable for 2 years, follow up control is needed (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2000). To prevent policeman's helmet from spreading along the riparian areas near Marmot Darn during and aRer construction, the two known infestations will be hand pulled and monitored for 3 years. In addition, all areas potentially affected by dam removal activities will be surveyed for this species prior to construction; any infestations located will be pulled.

Canada thistle - Canada thistle occurs in only a few locations near Marmot and the Little Sandy diversion dams. Because this species is clonal and spreads vegetatively, it is very difficuR to control or eradicate (Nuzzo 1998). To prevent Canada thistle from spreading to sites disturbed by construction, control efforts will focus on eliminating the few existing populations of this species in the Project vicinity prior to facility removal activities. TNC recommends several herbicides including Clopyralid (Stinger or Transline), Clopyralid plus 2,4D (Curtail) and glyphosate (Roundup, Rodeo). Several applications are generally needed; fall application appears to be the best season. Herbicide effects may be enhanced if the plants are mowed or tilled prior to application (Nuzzo 1998). Canada thistle plants discovered on the sediment pile or in revegetated disturbed areas during the 3-year monitoring program would be spot-treated with herbicide. R should be noted, however, that the BLM is currently under a court injunction that prohibits the use of herbicides on BLM lands. Whether the injunction will be removed in time for decommissioning is unknown; if not, other means for controlling Canada thistle may be necessary.

Scot's broom - Compared to other locations in western Oregon, the amount of Scot's broom in the Project vicinity is low; it occurs primarily near the Marmot and Little Sandy diversion dams and along the eastern portion of the box flume. The best approach will likely involve a combination of methods and activities. The first step would likely involve control of existing infestations near Project facilities. These stands would be cut in the spring prior to seed-set and the cut stems would then be treated with herbicides to prevent resprouting (Hoshovsky 1998a). Scot's broom seedlings discovered in revegetated disturbed areas during the 3-year monitoring would be hand pulled.

Himalayan blackberry - Himalayan blackberry is ubiquitous in the Project vicinity and eliminating existing stands is probably impossible. The goal of the control program for this species will be to prevent ks establishment in revegetated disturbed areas. Annual mowing or cutting large existing infestations in the vicinity of disturbed sites during the 3-year monitoring program may retard the spread of blackberry and allow native species to establish. Seedlings discovered during monitoring of the revegetated sites would be hand pulled or spot-treated with herbicide.

Pcctland General Elec~ic 10/31/02 Con¢ol Plan Bull Run Hydroeleclxic Project (FERC No. 477) Page I I Terrestrial Wcckgroup Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

5.4 Proposed Actionsfor General Control of ExoticllnvasiveSpecies

In addition to the actions proposed for priority species control PGE will implement a number of measures during construction to reduce the spread of exoticJinvasive species in the Project vicinity. These measures were adapted from the Noxious Weed Best Management Practices for the Mt. Hood National Forest and include the following:

• Equipment operators will be taught to recognize the most common exotie/invasive species, particularly the priority control species, in the Project vicinity.

• Vehicles and equipment will be turned around in areas that are cleared of vegetation and routinely used as a pull-out or turn around sRe.

• Weed infested areas will not be disturbed by parking or blading.

• Equipment will be cleaned, either by knocking off soil clumps and vegetation or washing, prior to arrival on the construction site or when moving between sites.

• If work in areas not cleared of exotic/invasive species cannot be avoided, the activities will be scheduled in the winter or spring before plants have produced seed.

• If mulch is used, material will be selected that is likely to be free of exotic/invasive species. The BLM recommends native grass straw be use as mulch.

6.0 Estimated Costs

Estimated costs for the revegetation and exoticAnvasive species control programs are outlined in the following two sections.

6.1 Revegetation Program

Costs for plant materials are based on estimates from Emerald Seed and Supply in Portland Oregon, and Bosky Dell Natives in West Linn, Oregon (Tables 6-1 and 6-2). Sources are from western Oregon but not specifically the Sandy or Clackamas drainages. Collection of local seeds and seedlings would magnify costs considerably. The preliminary cost estimate for plant materials is $24,858 without contingencies for replanting or rmterials for revegetating riparian areas.

Ill Table 6-1. Plant material costs by Project hcility Project F,~4aty Acres Type d Planting Cog/Acre Teed Cost M~ Dam/Sandy c'~..1 (BLM) 4.0 Seed and SeedlinBs $687.60 $2,750 all Sandy ¢"~nal 11.4 Seed $312.60 $3~64 Little .e~nc)y,Diversion 2.0 Seed $312.60 $625 Little Sandy Box Flume Cr'S !anal) 2.7 Seedlings $375.00 $1,013 160 Seed $100.00 $16,000 Ill Roslyn Lake Oth~ Facilities 2.9 Seed $312.60 $906 Total ! 83.0 tu s

I Portland General Elec'a'ic 10/31/02Control Plan Bull Run Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 477) Page 12 Ten'estrial Wockgr~p •1 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Table 6-2 Sp,'~ co6ts b muting Total Area Coat Total pumt nema (ae) (per ~ or lb.) Cost Trees and Shrubs 375seedlings/at 6.7 $1.00 $2:12 Elym~ glnuru~ 20 lbsJac 19.3 $ 9.95 $4,040 Trtfollum spp. 5 IbsJac 19.3 $1.65 $168 l~ptnus spp. 5 lbsJac 19.3 $11.95 $1,213 Fragaria spp. 5 lbsJac 19.3 $ 6.95 $705 Vicia spp. 7 IbsJac 19.3 $1.55 $220 .b.nnfm| 25 Ibs/a¢ 160 $4.00 $16,000 Total' SZ4,SSS Cost pea" acre: $135.84

It is assumed that application of the hydroseed mixture is factored into construction costs. Planting trees and shrubs on 6.7 acres should only take a crew of two about 1.5 days. Assuming a rate of $26/hour, labor costs are therefore estimated at about $624.

Total estimated cost for the revegetation program is $25,482.

6.2 Invnsive/Exotlc Spedes Monitoring and Control Progrmn

The invasiveJexotic species monitoring and control program will be conducted over a four-year period. The program will include one year of activities prior to construction to reduce existing infestations and three years of monitoring and control actions post construction. Costs are estimated as follows:

• Pre-construction and years 2 through 3 post-removal: 2 weeks for a 2-porson crew per year, assuming a labor rate of $28/hour = $13,440.

• Monitoring the year following Project removal is expected to require somewhat less effort, about 1 week for a 2-person crew at a rate of $28/hour = $2,240.

• Herbicide costs are estimated to be $250 per year for 4 years -- $1,000.

Total cost for the invasivedexotic species monitoring and conb'ol program is estimated at $16,680.

7.0 Literature Cited

Franklin, J. F. and C. T. Dymess. 1998. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis. 452pp.

Halverson, N. M., C. Topik, and R. Van Viclde. 1986. Plant association and management guide for the western hemlock zone Mr. Hood National Forest. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. R6-ECOL-232A- 1986.

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Revegetation, Noxious Weed Control and Site Restoratiee Plan Page 13 of 14

m Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Herzog, P. and J. Randall. 1999. Element stewardship abstract for Centaurea solstitialis, Yellow Starthistle. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

Hoshovsky, M. 1998a. Element stewardship abstract for Cytisus scoparius and Genista monspessulanus, Scotch broom and French broom. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

Hoshovsky, M. 1998b. Element stewardship abstract for Rubus discolor, (Rubus procerus) Himalayan blackberry. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

Keany, J. 2001. Bull Run Hydroelectric Project - Threatened, endangered and sensitive plants and invasive/exotic species survey report. Draft Report prepared for Portland General Electric, Portland, Oregon.

Nuzzo, V. 1998. Element stewardship abstract for Cirsium arvense, Canada thistle, Creeping thistle, California thistle. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). 1993. Oregon wildlife diversity plan. Second Edition. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon.

Portland General Electric (PGE). 2000a. Draft decommissioning report for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. FERC Project No. 477. Portland General Electric, Portland, Oregon.

Portland General Electric (PGE). 2000b. Preliminary draft environmental assessment for the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. FERC Project No. 477. Portland General Electric, Portland, Oregon.

Seiger, L. 2000. Element stewardship abstract for Polygonum cuspidatum, Japanese knotweed, Mexican bamboo. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

Stillwater Sciences. 2000. Evaluation of geomorphic effects of removal of Marmot and Little Sandy dams and potential impacts on anadromous salmonids. Preliminary Final Report prepared for Portland General Electric, Portland, Oregon.

The Nature Conservancy. No date. Japanese knotweed.

Tressler, R. 2000. Bull Run Hydroelectric Project vegetation community mapping, riparian zone characterization, and snag/down woody material surveys. Draft Report prepared for Portland General Electric, Portland, Oregon.

Washington Weed Control Board. 2000. Written findings on policeman's helmet. httv;//www .w a.uov/am'/weedboard/weed infocmation/voliehelmiL html.*

at Bull Run HydroProject DWG / Revegetation,Noxious Weed Control and Site RestorationPlan Pase 14 of 14 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Exhibit B

Pre-implementation Analysis of Geomorphlc and Ecological Impacts of

I Removing Marmot Dam on the Sandy River, OR: Proposal to Portland General Electric

Bull Run Hydrc~lectric Project Pordand General FAcc~c Company FERC Project No. 477 DecorumS/on/rig P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION ANALYSIS OF GEOMORPHIC AND ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS OF REMOVING MARMOT DAM ON THE SANDY RIVER, OR PROPOSAL TO PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC

Stephen T. Lancaster, Asst. Prof., Dept. of Geosciences, Oregon State University Gregory Stewart, Grad. Res. AssL, DepLof Geosciences, Oregon State University

May 16, 2002

Summary

Marmot Dam on the Sandy River is cm'rently operated under a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license that expires in 2004. PGE has announced its intention to surrender its license, which would likely involve decommissioning and removing Marmot Dam and other facilities. The least-cost alternative for dam removal involves releasing approximately 750,000 - 1,000,000 cubic meters of fine and coarse sediment into the downstream channel, raising concerns over possible effects on downstream salmon habitat, water quality, and recreation.

Field observations and modeling by Stiliwater Sciences (2000) suggest that the bulk of the coarse sediment will deposit within 2.1 km (1.3 mi) of the dam, with additional significant deposition limited primarily to the area around Revenue Bridge. Fine sediment, however, will likely move quickly through the system, being stored only temporarily in bars and pool bottoms, with river- wide aggradation limited to the lower 10 km (6 mi).

We propose to develop a framework for the Sandy River that will provide a geomorphic context for considering the ecological implications of Marmot Dam removal. This study will build upon .a one-dimensional modeling performed by Stillwater Sciences by focusing on processes that affect sediment storage/routing dynamics at the scale of individual channel elements (pool, run, riffle). The goal of the study will be to map sediment distributions and to develop linkages between process descriptions and one-dimensional modeling results for the purpose of identifying 'sensitive' geomorphic units and developing post-removal monitoring/contingency plans. Proposal

Marmot Dam is a 13-meter (42 ft) high hydroelectricdiversion dam owned and operated by Portland General Electric(PGE) on the Sandy River. The Sandy River originateshigh on the slopes of Mount Hood and flows northwesterly for approximately 56 miles to its confluence with the Columbia River. Marmot Dam is located at River Mile (RM) 30 and drains approximately 670 km 2 (260 mi2), nearly half of which flows through unstable volcanic ash and rock deposits. The Sandy River has naturally high sediment loads that are periodically augmented by lahars originating from Mt. Hood.

In March of 2000, PGE notified the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that they were intending to decommission the project and remove existing facilities. Marmot Dam is currently filled to the dam crest with approximately 750,000 m 3 of fine and coarse sediment; and plans to remove the dam have raised concerns over the fate of the sediment and potential

Pre-implementationAnalysis of Geomorphicand Ecological Impactsof RemovingMarmot Dam Page lof4 Proposal to PGE

Ul Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

downstream impacts related to sediment deposition. In preparing the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Marmot Dam, PGE hired Stillwater Sciences (2000) to develop a one- dimensional numerical model of sediment transport following dam removal. The Stillwater model incorporates the latest techniques for routing a sand/gravel mixtme through a fiver channel, and results provide predictions of sediment transport over a range of temporal and spatial scales. Given a single-season dam removal, the model predicts as much as 4-m of gravel deposition immediately below the dam in the first year following dam removal, with up to 2-m of additional deposition occurring in the area around Revenue Bridge (RM 24) thereafter. The model predicts that fine sediment (.~sand) will be quickly routed through the system with no appreciable storage above RM 6, and approximately 0.4-m of aggradation in the lower 10 km (RM 0-6) in the f'Lrstyear (Stillwater, 2000).

One-dimensional models are excellent tools for predicting reach and width-average trends over long temporal and spatial scales, yet additional information is often required to determine the ecological and geomorphic implications of net cross-sectional change, especially where aggradation/degradetion is not significant. In natural rivers, uniform aggradation is only rarely exhibited; instead, sediment may be preferentially stored in particular channel elements. These channel elements may store sediment over long time periods, or may function as transient storage over short time periods. It is important to note that a lack of reach and width-average aggradetion is not necessarily correlated with a lack of ecological impairment. Preferential deposition of fine sediment into pools may significantly reduce physical and thermal refuge for salmon during the summer, yet may not represent significant aggradation in the one-dimensional case. Determining the ecological effects of dam removal requires understanding the three dimensional patterns of deposition and how those patterns change through time in response to changing hydrologic conditions.

In early October 2000, a large rainstorm produced a series of lahars on Mt. Hood that released more than 400,000 cubic meters of coarse and fine sediment into the upper reaches of the Sandy River (Stillwater Sciences, 2001; Tom Deroo pers. com., 2002). Since that time, these sediments have been working their way down the channel. Field reconnaissance during Winter 20(Y2 suggests that much of the fine sediment has already been flushed into the lower seven miles of the Sandy River, yet significant quantities of fine sediment are still actively being stored and reworked above that point. Although the 2000 iabar and removal of Marmot Dam are different in terms of the rates and timing of sediment export, the quantity of fine sediment released is similar for both cases. Thus, current patterns of fine sediment deposition should provide insight into the mechanisms affecting depositional patterns following dam removal.

We propose to develop a geomorphic framework for the Sandy River that will provide a context for thinking about the three-dimensional distribution of sediment in the channel following clam removal. As part of this effort, we will map sediment and velocity distributions along the Sandy River to determine where sediment is being stored and to identify processes that may be controlling depositional patterns. A primary goal of this mapping is to identify linkages between features identified in the field and Stillwater modeling results. It is our hope that the results from this study will be used in conjunction with modeling predictions and relevant ecological concerns to identify 'sensitive areas' where contingency/mitigation plans and future monitoring can be focused.

Pre-implementationAnalysis of Geomorphicand EcologicalImpacts of RemovingMarmot Dam Page 2 of 4 Propo~l to PGE Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Held Work

Data collected during Summer 2002 will be used to develop a general geomorphic framework for the Sandy and to identify sites where links between pattern and process can be more fully explored over Winter 2002/2003.

Summer 2002

During Summer 2002, we propose to map sediment distributions between Marmot Dam and the confluence with the Columbia River in order to identify the geomorphic structure of the Sandy River and patterns of deposition following the 2000 lahar.

Sediment distributions will be mapped at the scale of individual channel elements and will include estimates of the volume and type of storage (lateral bar, medial bar, transverse bar) for both the coarse and fine size fractions. In the active floodplain, above the summer low-flow waterline, sediment volumes will be calculated with simple geometric relationships for rectangles and trapezoids. Depth of fine sediment deposition will be measured by excavating a series of test pits. Differential GPS will be used for general mapping while individual features will be measured with an electronic distance measurement (EDM) device.

In the wetted area of the channel, fine sediment volumes will be calculated and the fraction of pool volume filled with fine sedtment will be determined using the V* index of Lisle and Hilton (1991). Surface mapping of pool area and depth estimated with sonar (or ADP) will be used to calculate residual pool volumes, while estimates of sand volumes will be calculated by diving into each pool, estimating the aerial extent of fine deposition, and determining an average depth of deposition using an avalanche probe or similar device. In riffles, where the bed may not be completely covered with fine sediment, sedimentation will be assessed using a grid system to estimate the percentage of the bed covered by fine sediment. Coarse sediment volumes will not be determined in the wetted area of the channel.

Because the canyon below Marmot Dam (RM24.5-28) is bedrock controlled with large boulder constrictions and numerous class IV rapids, no quantitative data will be collected in this reach. Instead, this reach will be considered qualitatively in terms its storage potential (behind boulder and log constrictions) and the potential for migration barriers to form following dam removal.

Winter 2002/2003

Field evidence suggests that the Sandy River is a dynamic geomorphic system in which the patterns of sedimentation are coupled with hydrologic conditions that ate non-uniform in both time and space. As such, a single summer of fleldwork limited to low flow conditions should reveal patterns of deposition, yet may not provide much insight into the processes affecting pattern formation.

Following the Summer 2002 field season, we propose to meet with interested parties to identify sites for monitoring over the winter. At each site, we propose to use monumented cross-sections and photogrametry to monitor changes in cross-sectional area, surface grainsize, overbank

Pre-implementatioa Analysisof Geomoq~hicand Ecological Impactsof RemovingMarmot Dam Page 3 of 4 Proposal to PGE Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

deposition, discharge, and velocity distribution on a bi-weekly basis throughout the winter, including the complete range of winter discharges. Velocity, discharge, and cross-sectional channel change will be determined using an acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADP) that will be pulled across the river on a static line. Mapping velocities in the field high winter discharges will provide insight into the conditions under which sediment is either mobilized or deposited and how patterns of erosion and deposition are correlated with specific hydrologic conditions.

In order to maximize the return on data collection at these sites, we hope to coordinate our efforts with researchers working on suspended sediment concentrations, hyporheic exchange, and/or ecological function.

Synthesis

Data collected over the Summer 2002 and Winter 2002/03 should provide a good geomorphic

m framework for thinking about the three-dimensional patterns of deposition on the Sandy River. This framework, combined with the Stillwater modeling efforts, is expected to provide more explicit predictions of sediment deposition following the removal of Marmot Dam. These predictions will help PGE more clearly communicate with agencies and the public regarding the nature of geomorphic change that may be expected following dam removal. If specific geomorphic or ecological concerns are identified, knowledge of operative geomorphic processes at a given site, as determined in this study, can be used to guide contingency and mitigation planning efforts.

References

Lisle, Tom, and Sue Hilton. 1991. Fine sediment in pools: An index of how sediment is affecting a stream channel. FHR Currents, R-5 Fish Habitat Relationship Technical Bulletin No. 6, December, 1991.7 p.

Sfillwater Sciences. 2000. Evaluation of geomorphic effects of removal of Marmot and Little I Sandy dams and potential impacts on anadromous salmonids. Preliminary final technical report Prepared by Stillwater Sciences, Berkeley, California for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon. I Stillwater Sciences. 2001. Observed geomorphic and ecological impacts of October 2000 labars on the Sandy River, OR. Prepared by Stillwater Sciences, Berkeley, California for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon.

Pre-implementationAnalysis of Geomoq~ic and Ecological Impactsof RemovingMarmot Dam Page 4 of 4 all ~I to PGE

m0 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Exhibit C

Fish Passage Monitoring Plan for the Sandy River Following the Removal of Marmot Dam (June 21, 2002)

Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland Genentl Electric Company FERC ProJect No. 477 Decomm/JsWn/agPlan Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Stillwater Sciences

2532 Durant Avenue, Sutto 2OI, Berketey. CA 94704 Phone (510) 848-8098 Fax (510) 848-8398

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

DATE: June 21, 2002

TO: Bull Run Project Decommissioning Working Group

SUBJECT" Preliminary fish passage monitoring plan for the Sandy River following the removal of Marmot Dam

Summary

This monitoring plan proposes to use channel complexity as an indicator of potential fish barriers following the removal of Marmot Dam. Channel complexity at four monitoring sites will be measured using the standard deviation of channel bed elevation, which will be surveyed annually for at least three years prior to dam removal, and continue annually after the dam removal until the risks of potential passage barrier formation becomes sufficiently small. We selected one site in the Reservoir Reach. two sites in Reach 1, and one site at the top of Reach 3. In the Reservoir Reach and Reach 1, the monitoring duration would be one year plus two consecutive years with (1) no barriers to fish passage, and (2) either improved channel complexity or channel complexity within the range of values prior to dam removal (i.e., monitoring would be conducted for at least three years in these reaches). Reach 3 would be monitored for the duration of monitoring in Reach 1 plus two consecutive years with (1) no barriers to fish passage, and (2) either improved channel complexity or channel complexity within the range of values prior to dam removal (i.e., monitoring would be conducted for at least five years in this reach). Channel bed surveys must be accompanied by reconnaissance trips to assess actual passage conditions in the Sandy River. Background

A meeting was convened on May 20, 2002 between ODFW, NMFS, USFWS, I'GE, and Stillwater Sciences to develop a monitoring plan for fish passage following the removal of Marmot Dam. Stillwater Sciences (2002a) described the theoretical basis of using channel bed complexity rather than the amount of aggradution as an indicator of the potential for future fish passage issues. During the meeting, the participants agreed on a general outline for a monitoring program, which is described below. This document describes the monitoring methods, monitoring locations, duration of monitocing, and the need for direct observation of fish passage conditions.

Strate /

Stillwater Sciences (2002a) described why channels with little bed complexity (e.g., channels that are wide and shallow) have the highest potential to impede fish passage, while complex channels Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

/:/sh pama~ rnonttonV~pqan for the Sandy R/v~ ,'b~o~n# b~e r~nova/oft4armot Dam

(e.g., channels with defined bars and a thalweg) am less likely to develop fish passage barriers. We further hypothesized that the rate of aggradation controls the channel complexity. For example, a rapidly aggraded surface is more likely to have a channel with a uniform bed than a slowly aggraded surface. If the aggradation occurs over a longer time period in which the river experiences a variety of hydraulic conditions, the channel will be able to recover at least part of its original complexity, and thus reduce the possibility of fish passage barriers. During the May 20 meeting, it was agreed that channel complexity rather than the amoum of aggradation should be used to assess future fish passage issues.

We believe that the best metric for assessing channel complexity is the standard deviation of channel cross section elevation. For example, the standard deviation of bed elevation is much lower for a rapidly aggraded surface (shown in Figure 1/%) than a slowly aggraded surface (Figure 1B). We propose to use the standard deviation of bed elevation over two pool-riffle complexes to quantify channel complexity over a reach. In areas where the channel is plane-bedded, or has very long pools, we recommend that the monitoring reach be 10 channel widths long, if possible. Because erosion and deposition will alter the channel complexity, bed elevation will be surveyed and the standard deviation of bed elevation will be calculated for at least three years prior to the removal of Marmot Dam to establish the natural range of pre-dam removal bed complexity. Following dam removal, bed elevation will be surveyed annually during the summer low-flow season and the results will be compared with previous surveys. A decrease in the standard deviation of bed elevation reflects reduced channel complexity, which corresponds to an increased likelihood of fish passage barrier formation. An increase in the standard deviation of bed elevation reflects increased channel complexity, which indicates a decreased potential for the fonv,ation of fish passage barriers. Following dam removal, if channel complexity has returned to its pre-dam removal condition, or has improved for two consecutive years, we believe that the potential for fish passage barrier development caused by dam removal is low.

To demonstrate how the standard deviation of bed elevation can be used for monitoring, Figure 2 shows four hypothetical examples of the standard deviation of bed elevation following dam removal. In the examples in Figure 2, the standard deviation of bed elevation was monitored for 7 years prior to dam removal and another 5 years following dam removal. The conditions of the years following dam removal are briefly described in Table I. Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

F-e~pma~e mon/mrkWp/an for the ~nd,/~ver ~Uow/n#U~e re'nov~ ofMa,'n'~t Uam

Table 1. Brief description of channel complexity for the examples given In Figure 2.

Year I Significantdecrease in channel complexity Continueddecrease in ~ctease in channel Ino'~.se in channel Continued decrease in channel complexity. complexityto within complexity. c~mn¢l complexity. Year 2 the range of pre-dam removal conditions. Increase in channel Continuedincrease in Decrease in channel Incr~se m channel ; complexity. channel complexity complexity. complexityto within Year 3 within the range of pre- the range of lae-dam dam removal removal conditions. conditions. Slight increase in Slight decrease in Continueddecrease in Decrease in channel channel complexity. channel complexity,but channel complexity. complexityto below the Year 4 still within the range of range of pre-dam pre-dam removal removal conditions. conditions. Continued increasein Incceasein channel Increase in charmel Incaease in cham~ channel complexity. complexitywithin the complexity. complexityto within Year 5 range of ixe-dam the range of pre-dam removal conditions. reraoval conditions.

These examples will he discussed further below in the "Duration of monitoring" section.

proposed channel complexity monitoring

At each monitoring site. we will establish geo-referenced benchmarks that define the site's upstream and downstream boundaries, to ensure that the survey boundaries are consistent through time. We will survey the topography of the active channel in the def'med monitoring site. Bed elevation will be surveyed annually with a Total Station. The TotaJ Station survey will he a two- dimensional grid, and any significant changes in bed slope (i.e. changes of elevation greater than I fl) and important geomorphic characteristics will be noted. The longitudinal spacing between grid measurements would be about 1/4 of the channel width. Perpendicular to flow, the survey wo~ld be conducted at IO-ft intervals and significant breaks in slope. We will also survey cross sections nested within the topographic surveys. These cross sections will be permanently benchmarked and extend onto terraces, rather than just in the active channel. These cross sections will be spaced 1-2 channel widths apart, depending on the site. Similar to the grid survey, points on each cross section will be surveyed at 10-ft intervals, and also include any significant breaks in slope. Surveys should be conducted during the low-flow season in July to August. Proposed channet complexity analysis

The data from the surveys will be incorporated into a GIS database, to create a l-fl contour map of bed elevation for the monitored reach. The survey data will be used to interpolate bed elevation at pre.defmed .5-10 ft grid points, which will be used to calculate standard deviation of bed elevation. The interpolation process will ensure the consistency of the standard deviation calculation at different years even ff the survey points are not exactly the same for different years. The interpolation and standard deviation calculation will be carried out with a computer program that will be developed in conjunction with the ESA subgroup, once the fast set of survey data is available. Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

.fetx~ R/vet ~fo~t~30~e raTJora/ot't4arrra/;Wn

Proposed monitorirg sites

We have selected four monitoring sites where sediment transport modeling indicated a greater potential for barriers to passage to develop.

• Monitoring Site 1 would be located in the current reservoir reach between the cofferdam and about 1.5 miles upstream of the dam This reach encompasses two pool-riffle complexes and spans most of the reservoir area. • Monitoring Site 2 would he located immediately downstream of the dam for a total distance of approximately ten channel widths. This site has a plane bed morphology and we therefore did not include two pool-riffle complexes at this site• The channel planform is relatively simple in this reach, and the expected longitudinal variation in channel complexity is small. • Monitoring Site 3 would he located close to Site 2, between about RM 29.3 and RM 29.6. This site also has a plane-bed morphology and is located in a relatively wide portion of Reach 1. • Monitoring Site 4 is located between the exit of the Sandy River Gorge and the cascade upstream of Revenue Bridge. This site contains two pool-riffle complexes and is bounded by the gorge and the cascade.

We did not select a monitoring site in Reach 2 because it is very unlikely that sediment deposition will create a fish passage barrier in the gorge because of the steep slope and high channel cunfinement. These characteristics also make survey logistics very difficult. In addition, no monitoring sites were selected in Reaches 4 and 5 because sediment tram-port modeling indicated the: tho'e will be it,significant coarse sediment deposition in those reaches. Duration of monitoring

According to modeling conducted by Stillwater Sciences (2002b), Reach 1 will aggrade in the fast year following Marmot Dam removal and will degrade continuously in subsequent years (Figure 3). We believe that post-removal monitoring in the reservoir reach (Reach 0) and Reach 1 should he conducted during the first year following dam removal and continue until there are two successive years with (1) no barriers to fish passage, and (2) either improved channel complexity or channel complexity within the range of values prior to dam removal (i.e., monitoring would he conducted for at least three years in these reaches). Prior to dam removal, channel complexity surveys should occur for at least three years. Based on the modelIng results, the highest aggradation rate in Reach 3 would occur in Year 3 following dam removal (Figure 3). To ensure that the highest rate of sediment delivery to Reach 3 has occurred, the monitoring period in Reach 3 should be based on the results of monitoring in Reach 1. Once the monitoring program for Reach 1 has terminated (after one year plus two years of improving or stable complexity as described above), two consecutive years of improving or stable channel complexity and no barriers to fish passage would be required in Reach 3 (i.e., monitocing would occur for at least 5 years following dam removal). According to the model, Reaches 4 and 5 will not have significant coarse sediment aggradation~ and are very unlikely to have barriers to fish passage, and thus the monitoring of fish passage in Reaches 4 and 5 should be limited to field inspection and be incorporated into the other monitoring actions identified and agreed upon by the ESA sub-team.

To further explain how to determine the length of the monitoring program, we will use the examples in Figure 2 (Tables 2 and 3). In Table 2, we assume that the data were collected in

• d ,( . .. 4 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

F/..~~ ,-non~o,"k'~p/an for U~e Sandy iTJver fo~,ving ~e removal of Narn~ Dam

either Reach 0 or Reach 1. In Table 3, we assumed that the data for the examples were collected in Reach 3, and the monitoring program for Reaches 0 and 1 terminated after Year 3.

Table 2. The end point for the examples in Figure 2 applied to Reaches 0 and 1, assuming that no fish barriers are observed

~:- .--.~'~, _: Monitonng could end after Monitoringshould end Monitoring should Mueitoglngshoald Year 4 due to (a)t; or after Year 3 due to (a) and c~tinue after Year 5 continue after Year 5 monitoring for an Co)'. because neither (a) nor (b) because neithex(a) nor (b) additional year if the OC~tI~. ¢3c~Jr$. difference is deemedtoo small by the Adaptive Managerr~t Team. (a) continued improvement in channel comple.r.ityfor two consecutive years after Year 1 (b) channel complexity improved to within the range of conditions observed prior to dam removal

Table 3. The end point for the examples in Figure 2 applied to Reach 3, assuming the monitoring program for Reaches 0 and 1 terminated after Year 3 and no fish barriers are observed in Reach 3.

:. :-:., • ~: - .:~=~ ...~ • .~...7i~,:., ~ ...... gmet~4 Monitoring should end Monitoring should end Monitoring should Monitoring should after Year 5 due to (c)2. after Year 5 due to (cO2. continue after Year 5 continue after Year 5 because neither(c) nor (d) because neither (c) net (d)

OCO~S. CO~IfS. 2(a) continued improvement in channel comple.6ty for two consecutive years after the terming/on of the monitoring program in Reaches 0 and 1 (b) channel complexity improved to within the range of conditions observed prior to dam removal for two consecutive years after the termination of the monitoring program in Reaches 0 and I

We believe the monitoring period proposed above provides an excellent ffan~work for PGE and the agencies to assess the duration of PGE's monitoring responsibility. Signifw.ant improvement, howevex, can be achieved by integrating the monitoring plan into an adaptive management framework. Using an adaptive management framework will allow PGE and the agencies to adjust the monitoring duration based on observed conditions and survey data. This will be particularly useful in cases where the annual change in standard deviation is small, or the standard deviation is very close to the pro-dam removal values. This can be demonstrated with Examples 1 and 4 in Figure 2. In Example 1, the increase in standard deviation between Years 3 and 4 is very small, and it is uncertain based solely on the data whether an improvement in channel complexity has occurred or ff the change is within measurement error. "I'lu'ough an adaptive management framework, PGE and the agencies can decide whether to terminate the monitoring program afiex Year 4, or continue for another year based on field inspections. In Example 4, the standard deviation of bed elevation decreased in Year 4 to only slightly below the range measured prior to dam removal. The Adaptive Management Team can determine whether to terminate the monitoring program based on field conditions (i.e., it is obvious that passage barriers will not occur), even though neither condition for ending the monitoring program is met based on standard deviation of bed elevation by Year 5. Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Fis~ 9,~Qe ~ ,dan ~" ~e Sand,/P./v~ f~iro~n# b~e r~n~,,a/of ~not Da'n

Proposed field inspection

Annual monitoring of channel bed elevation must be coupled with more frequent biological monitoring of migrating fish in the Sandy River to assess whether passage barriers have developed. Reconnaissance ~ps to assess passage conditions throughout the Sandy River should occur during the upstream fish migration season in the first year following darn removal, following peak flow events, and during critically low flows. Because of the reduced risks in the following years, the reconnaissance surveys may be conducted at reduced frequency and incorporated into the other monitoring actions identified and agreed upon by the ESA sub-team~ If passage barriers are observed during these reconnaissance trips, PGE will provide passage around the blocked are&

References

Stillwater Sciences. 2002a. Criteria for fish passage monitoring following the removal of Marmot Dam on the Sandy River, Oregon. Prepared by Stillwater Sciences, Berkeley, California for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon.

stinwater Sciences. 2002b. Sediment transport modeling following the removal of Marmot Dam with 125,000 and 300,000 cubic yards of dredging prior to dam removal. Prepared by Stillwater Sciences, Berkeley, California for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon

6 II hh hh

FO M

A. Rapid sediment aggradation B. Slow sediment aggradaUon 0

t~ 0 0 t~

I 0

FO fl FO < FO

0 M

t~ t~ 0 0 t~

0 fl FO

Figure 1. SchemaUc diagrams of sediment aggradaUon In the Sandy River following dam removal. I

I 0 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

.J |m~- -"

i !j J__/'; Jj J , i jl!

I l ! jL i

, ®! 1 li I I I I II I I I I I I I II II I hh hh

l"11

I k. k- w ...... 10 ][~ ..... 10 ,,,:l.le - "~ -1- ~ -:-~oz`*-om;..]. seal.e, , , , ...... ,._ FO )'1

t~ 0 0 t~

~)e . __ .,,_ / ,~ ...... " ]-- Yaaz` 3 I 0

FO fl FO < FO

r Yea.z- 6 I1~ . ..~ L .... .11 _ M " I r """ t" ~ -" ~'--" --"" "- : Yeaz` 7 __ 0 ~'~ ~' ...... _ ,-- ,~-_-: .....:~';=+-~:, ,..z` ._._-- M l., ~i:,,...,.. ,~.,, .,,, ~.,.,,. _ ~"'~ - w"" " ~ I~r~"r ~...... m~--.,.~ .. -r--- - "-~'~ .... :- '

...... _ Ye~ 9- t~ t~ 0 0 ...... Year 10 t~

0 fl FO

Figure 3. The predicted annual change in bed elevation following the removal of Marmot Dam under Alternative B. I

I 0 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Appendix A

dll PGE-ODFW Marmot Dam Fish Ladder Agreement

ill

i Bull Run HydroelectricPnYject Pordaad GeneralEMo0'ic Co*~ FERC ProjeclNo. 477 Oeconon~s/oc~gP/an

i Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

a MEMORANDUM

DATE: May 8, 2001

TO: Chris Wheaton, Regional Supervisor Ill Northwest Region, ODFW

Julie Keil, Director == FROM: Hydro Licensing and Water Rights, PGE

,m SUBJECT: PGE agreement with ODFW on staffing the Marmot Dam fish ladder and sorting facility

As you are aware, PGE will not be relicensing the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project al after our federal license expires in 2004. During the final years of the Bull Run Project, separating wild fish from hatchery fish at the Marmot Dam site will help in implementing ODFW's Sandy River Basin Plan. PGE has assisted in funding all this activity since 1999 soon after ODFW proposed to stop the migration of fin- clipped hatchery salmon and steelhead into the Sandy River above Marmot Dam.

I I believe this fish sorting is now a NMFS condition for ODFW to meet ESA requirements.

I Because of the time it takes to retool hatchery operations, fin-clipped hatchery salmon from out-of-basin brood stock, will be returning to the Sandy River in IIm significant numbers through 2006. For this reason, we are proposing to increase the funding to ODFW and extend it for the years 2001 through 2006. If PGE is operating the Bull Run Project after 2006, this agreement could be I extended at the discretion of ODFW and PGE. Similarly, if NMFS or ODFW's management goals for the Sandy River change, or PGE is not able to generate iio electricity at the Bull Run Project, this requirement could be terminated early.

II Page 1 of 3 May 8, 2001

am Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Our expectations for ODFW's operation of the sorting facility at Marmot Dam are based on two concerns. The first and most important concern is the personal safety of the ODFW staff operating the sorting facility. The fish trap should be operated by trained personnel and should never be operated alone.

The second concern is the safety of the fish using this fish ladder and trap. While properly trained staff will ensure that the fish are handled properly, I another concern is how long these fish will remain in the fish trap. With both federal and state ESA-protected populations of steelhead and salmon in this am river, extensive delays in the migration of wild fish would be unacceptable.

For the two reasons outlined above, PGE will provide funding so that two O qualified ODFW employees or one ODFW employee and a trained volunteer will be available to operate the Marmot Dam trap each time. For operational and safety reasons, ODFW will contact PGE's Bull Run gate tender once a week to coordinate the daily schedules on when ODFW will be at the Marmot Dam site.

4111 For the protection of the fish using the facility, PGE would like to have the fish trap at Marmot Dam operated six days a week. During times of the year when 411 PGE and ODFW biologist agree that five or less wild fish per day are expected to enter the trap, the ladder can be checked by ODFW every other. In either case, the fish counts should be reported to the PGE biologist every week. 4t

All wild fish should be released above the project or transported out of the trap i according to ODFW criteria each time the trap is operated. Hatchery fish will be transported according to ODFW criteria often enough to not impact wild fish

a entering the ladder.

PGE will provide the following equipment and financial assistance to facilitate m the operation of the fish trap at Marmot Dam. PGE will provide a 4-wheeler at the site for moving the fish trailer across the bridge. PGE will provide $55,000

a annually for each of the six years of this agreement.

PGE will ensure that the Marmot fish ladder and trap is operating correctly. In I the event of flood damage or sediment deposition in the fish ladder, PGE will move quickly to correct the problem. ODFW will not be responsible to move fish when the ladder or trap is damaged or when weather conditions make it I impossible to operate the trap.

i Page 2 of 3 May 8, 2001

all Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

a PGE does request that ODFW coordinate with the PGE fisheries biologist if it will be impossible to operate the trap for multiple days. PGE and ODFW can jointly determine if fish migration should be blocked at the ladder or passed upstream without sorting.

ODFW will be responsible to acquire state and federal ESA permits to handle the fish at this ladder and sorting facility. It will be the responsibility of ODFW to I meet reporting requirements of the state and federal agencies for operation of this ladder. ODFW will also provide the fish trailer for the safe transport of the Ill fish from Marmot Dam to the hatchery and other appropriate locations.

Finally, PGE will make this agreement retroactive. We will fund this position J from January 1,2001 as ODFW has been providing this service in 2001 although our previous funding agreement expired at the end of December of 2000. We would expect ODFW to move forward in a timely way to meet the other conditions in the agreement.

g If this agreement is acceptable, please sign both copies of this memo and send one of the copies back to me at PGE. Please contact John Esler at PGE to Ill coordinate the accounting information that will be needed to provide the funding for this position. Thank you and feel free to call me if you wish to

IIII discuss anything in this agreement.

J Julie A. Keil, Director Date Portland General Electric

ODFW agrees with this proposal from PGE to provide funding for the staffing of m the Marmot Dam fish ladder and sorting facility on the Sandy River. ODFW commits to meeting the performance conditions outlined in this agreement.

air

Date III Chris A. Wheaton, Regional Supervisor Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

all Page 3 of 3 May 8, 2001

dll Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

Appendix B

Sandy River Fall Chinook Conservation Program

9t Bull Run Hydroclcclric Project Poaland General Elec~c Company FERC Project No. 477 Decomm~s/on~ P/an Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

SANDY RIVER FALL CHINOOK SALMON CONSERVATION PROGRAM m FALL-SPRING 2007-08

Backgrgund: Removal of Marmot Dam in 2007 may pose adverse impacts to fall chinook salmon m that spawn in the mainstem Sandy River. Impacts to fall chinook salmon were discussed at length by the ESA sub-team, but monitoring and contingency actions have not been included in drafts of the ESA monitoring and contingency table, as it was believed that decommissioning all posed low risk to this fish species, and available methods to minimize impact appeared unfeasible or unnecessary. However, if our assumptions are incorrect, mainstem spawning of fall chinook has the greatest chance of adverse impacts from sediment release following dam removal. Therefore, PGE will fund ODFW to conduct the conservation efforts described in this program, and referred to in Section 3.5 of the Decommissioning Plan.

/ This conservation program includes several distinct tasks aimed at reducing the risk of adverse impacts to fall chinook salmon in the Sandy River, including collection and fertilization of adnlt fish; rearing and disease control of adult fish and their progeny held in the hatchery; monitoring I impacts to fall chinook salmon redds and subsequent emergence, and release and monitoring of hatchery-reared progeny.

II Collection, Spawning, and Rearing:

During fall, 2007, ODFW and PGE personnel will collect 10 to 20 pairs of adnlt fall chinook m salmon from the Sandy River in areas that may be adversely influenced by fine sediment deposition from Marmot Dam removal. Adult chinook salmon will be collected by seining fish from the spawning grounds and holding areas of the lower Sandy River. Captured adults will be

m U-ansported to ODFW's Sandy River Hatchery for holding, health profile, and spawning. Adults will be individually tested for Bacterial Kidney Disease (BKD) and later spawned at Sandy Hatchery by ODF"W personnel. The fertilized eggs will be then reared at Sandy Hatchery to pre- i smolt stage. A maximum of 100,000 fall chinook salmon will be incubated and reared by ODFW. ODFW will feed these fish and maintain their health until approximately late May.

Monitoring Redd Success:

Ninety-five percent of all fall chinook spawning in the Sandy River basin occurs in the Sandy River mainstem below Marmot Dam. To evaluate whether 2007 fall chinook salmon redds produce viable offspring, a monitoring program will be implemented during 2007. 2007 is the most likely year when mainstem spawning could be impacted by dam removal actions.

I PGE and ODFW biologists will implement the monitoring plan. Five transects will be placed in the Oxbow Park spawning area. Immediately after spawning occurs, and prior to dam removal, redds on each transect will be identified and sediment composition recorded via visual m observation. After darn removal and prior to fry emergence from re&Is, a second visual observation will be made of the five transects. Based on best professional judgment, biologists will determine whether there is a low or high probability of successful fry emergence. After fry

4 Fall Chinook Conservation Program Page I of 2

ma Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

emergence, ODFW may implement additional seine surveys to further document success or failure of the 2007 fall chinook salmon progeny.

Release and Monitoring:

m Fall chinook pre-smolts reared at Sandy Hatchery and released into the Sandy River (Oxbow Park) in 2008 may represent, depending upon impacts of Marmot Dam removal on spawning success, the majority of surviving 2007 Sandy River fall chinook salmon progeny. Pre-srnolts

I will be implanted with a blank coded wire tag and not externally marked such that the fish will not be intercepted in the fishery. In late May, 2008, ODFW will transport and release fall chinook salmon pre-smolts at Oxbow Park in the Sandy River. The unmarked hatchery fish will

I enhance the strength of the 2008 year class, and the blank coded-wire tag will be used to determine contribution of the hatcbery-reared wild fish to the spawning population through ODFW's carcass recovery monitoring program.

Estimated Costs: $25,000

15 Includes: Fish Disease Certification, Fish Marking, Fish Food, unforeseen cost. etc.

Donated Cost (ODFW): Trucking, Seining, Spawning, Feeding Fish, and some monitoring.

a NMFS will be consulted by ODFW to obtain necessary ESA permits.

Funding Mechanism:

roll PGE has agreed to fund up to $25,000 of the total cost of this program. ODFW will provide the remainder of program costs. By September 1, 2007, PGE will enter into a grant or contract with ODFW to provide $25,000 to ODFW to conduct the work described in this program. Any I money not spent during the grant period by ODFW will be returned to PGE.

all Fall Chinook ConservationProgram Page 2 of 2

II Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

. Appendix C

Ill Other Basin Monitoring Opportunities

all

dll Bull Run Hydroelectric Project Portland Gene~d ElecU'ic C~my FERC Project No. 477 /)ecomm~g PLan

J I l I I I ! I • l I I I I I i I I I I

BULL R~#YrroD~~~/~MtcE~f;Ol~t(31~lS~,.~T'#~G WEsO~G~ R°UP

Tier I Acllons - consists of managementinformation that benefits or helps to guide futurerecovery or restorationdecisions or activities in the Sandy or Little Sandy Hvers. Total cost for Group I is $946,000.

Area Issue Category Activity Justification Estimated Cost 0 0

U1 Sandy River Data Mgmt Data management for Data management and reporting is the cornerstone upon which rests $2,000/yr I Mainstem and Sandy River Basin much of the value and experience from the decommissioning of (salary and 0 Little Sandy activities Marmot Dam. Investigators and the public should have access to data resources) oh collected both prior-to and after decommissioning in order to fO 0 maximize utility of the collected data and products. These products are fO likely to include elecn'onic and/or hard copies of time series data, < spatial data, maps, reports, communications, and journal articles. A fO bibliography should be maintained of products that are generated in association with the decommissioning, with at least one copy of each

report kept at a central lihfaty, and with pointers to location of data. For 5 years: M Such a library could be housed either by PGE or one of the $10,000 participating agencies. 0 m M This task does not need to be large. It would likely require an ongoing but small commitment of time (2-3 weeks/yr) from a principal contact person, who would maintain the library and act as a liaison among investigators. It would also require a dedicated space for hard copies. t~ t~ A sUatagy for access to and duplication of the data would need to be 0 0 developed and agreed t o by the "Decommissioning Monitoring t~ Implementation Team"

0 0

PU I ..J ..J Bull Run Hydro ProjectDWG I Draft Monitoring Opportunitieswith Cost Estimates Pagel of 8 I 0 I I I I l I I I I I l I I I I I I I l

I--,

Tier 1 Actions, Continued M I

Area Issue Category Activity ~0 Color infrared Physical Annual infrared color Two sets of ortho-rectified, color, infrared aerial photographs; with f-.r photos and ~0 photo series, with two one set each for pre and post dam removal, taken during low flow O. orthow,ctification sets orthorectified. periods (scale: 1"= 700'). Additionally, annual color infrared aerial PU phons should be taken post-removal until PGE's "end point" is of two photo sets: $9%000 reached, to track system changes annually. These aerial photographs 0

can be used to track channel and riparian response to dam removal, t~ Q model validation, mapping of habitat and evaluation of habitat Q response. The annual photographs can be used to track changes each Annual photos t~ year and can subsequently be ortho-rectified in the future if needed. (no ortho- Series of photos can be used as an overall monitoring tool. I rectification) for Q 4 years: $20,000

fO 0 fO Water Quality Sueam flow hydrology, This task links with and is likely a sub-task for several components of $11,000 per fO temperatur~ other tasks. Sffeamflow data and selected water quality data are basic gaging station and complimentary to the evaluation of geornorphological, riparian, (O&M) (note habitat, and aquatic responses in affec~d reaches, including these stations are background conditions. Continued funding of all existing gaging already funded M stations at or near their cuffent locations is assumed. These include and operating. "Little Sandy River near Bull Run" (14141500) and "Sandy River near 0 Marmot" (14137000). M Water quality instrumentation (especially for temperature and ~$10,000 per turbidity) would be installed at these gaging stations, which primarily year for a t~ represent "background" conditions, and at 1-3 other locations combined t~ representing impacts from dam removal. Turbidity and temperature are turbidity & Q Q expected to be the parameters of greatest interest to agencies and those temperature t~ evaluating geomorphic and riparian responses. Real-time data would monitor (O&M) be made available online for management and maintenance purposes. For 3 years: Cost sharing opportunities may exist with USGS for operation of such 0 $30,000 0 stations. fO

PU I

Bull Run Hydro Pmje~ DWG / Draft Monitoring Opportunitieswith Cost E~rnates l~ge 2 of 8 I 0 I I l l l I l I I I I I I I I I I I I

nl M Tier I Acfion~, Continued ~0 I

Area Issue Category Ac~vlty (0 Fish Annual Spawning Spawning surveys track changes in populations trends; aid in 70,000/year for 3 OJ Surveys-basin -wide: ~opulation assessment and hatchery management via establishment of species ¢0 indexing information a Marmot Dam fish count surrogatefmdex; data can be used in using Area-Under-tbe- conjunction with oetmigrant trapping to assess restoration efforts, to Curve methodology over assess success in ensuring fish passage is available post- Marmot Dam $210,000 for 0 the long term removal, and to measure effects of downsUeam sediment pulse three years t~ Q following dam removal. Q t~

I Sandy River Physical Gcomorphic evaluations Monitoring proposal to address post dam removal geomorphic Geomorpbulogy Q Mainstem post-dam removal conditions (beyond current funding) and geomolphicchanges component of following dam removal, including routing of fine and coarse sediment. study :$75,000- fO Expand this investigation to post-dam removal monitoring of 100,000 / year for fl fO geomorphic changes in the Sandy River and Little Sandy River and four years: how those changes in the geomorphology affect/link to river function. $3S0,000 fO

Geomorph M In order to integrate the geomorphological and ecological effects of Ecological dam removal and describe biological effects, additional study efforts linkages studies 0 will examine riparian and aquatic habitats. Will likely require at least 50,000 for 3 M one year of pre-dam baseline information to be collected years: $150,000

t~ t~ $ l 0,000/year for Q Fish OuUnigrant Trapping for Juvenile and smolt production data exist for some tributaries, and these Q monitoring juvenile efforts should be continued. Futxue monitoring could be used to assess 3 years t~ prodactionl restoration efforts.

0 fl fO

PU I

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Draft Mmitoring OppoNunifies with Cost Estimates Page 3 of 8 I 0 r~ I I I I I l I I i l I I I l I l l I I

Tier I Actions, Continued M I

Area Issue Category fO Little Sandy Physical Baseline Geomo~hology Description/data on currentconditions with dam to provide the $50,000 for two River Evaluation baseline for the geomorphology and riparian response to flow year study increases following diversion removal. Currently not included in any baseline monitoring. Provides data for Future Management. t~ 0

t~ Q Q Fish Standard Habitat baseline Provide information on habitat above the dam to help determine $9,000 for one t~ survey appropriate management of this historically anadronm~s habitat- links year study

to recolonization study. I Q

$10,000 for a two fO Recoloniz~tion by Document re-establishment of anadromous fish populations in an area fl fO anadromous fish where now extirpated. Some funding anticipated from ODFW. year study fO

t~ (3 0 M

t~ t~ Q Q t~

0 (3 fO

PU I

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Draft Monitoring Oppornmities with Co~t Estimates Pase 4 of 8 I 0 l I I I I I I l I l I I l I l I I I I

Tier 2 Acflnm- consists of research opportunities that ~lat~-~dan~v~-~ues,~t ~ will n~ pro~de info~don n~ for " M management of the resources of the Sandy or Little S~d~)'iv¢~ ~er~n~nit~g or ~rch efforts may provide information that could be applied I to dam removal activities in other systems. Total cost for-4ff~OUl$-~t'~ ~0

Area Issue Category Activity Justification O. PU Mainstem Algae Algal and nu~ent Dam removal and rewatering will alter the hydrologic and sediment Costs depend on scope and details Sandy and study/evaluation transport regime. These physical processes, including hydrologic 0 of entities hh Little Sandy exchange through riparian and sueam-margin areas, detcrmin~ nutrient t~ performing Q conditions which in turn affect habitat and food resources for Q invertebrates and salmonids. Basic nutrient data are commonly desired studies. t~ but seldom studied in dam removal situations. Data are needed that Possibilities for Ph. D. or document the nutrient, organiccarbon, and algalresponses, if any, to I Q changes in hydrologic residence times and pathways, sediment Master's retention and sco~dng. These parameters support the base of the food candidates to do webs upon which salmonids and other species depend. studies under fO supervision from 0 Data from these studies will be relalcd to and link with data from other OSU and with fO tasks on habitat changes and ¢ffccls of removal on invertebrates and collaboration by fO salmonids. Data are needed both prior to (-2 yr) and following (-2 yr) USGS or others, dam removal, and from background and impacted reaches. Cost with selected data sharing opportunities are expected for portions performed by USGS. collected by agencies or M USGS. 0 M Two year study: tT0,000 t~ t~ Q Q t~

0 0 fO

PU I

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Draft Monitoring Oppommifies with Cost E~imat~ Page 5 of 8 I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l

Tier 2 Actiom, Continued M I

Area Category A(m ,ty fO Full 4-5 Water Quality Pre- and post- See previous writenp on streamflow and temperature. Additional c~ decommissioning constituents can be added to existing continuous monitors that will parameter ~O monitoring of water better allow determination of short and long term ecosystem responses monitoring constituents (temperature/ to hydrologic and sediment changes following dam removal. Real- stations -$25,000- pH, turbidity, specific time, online data will provide indications of changes in sediment 0 conductivity) transport (turbidity), riparian growth (temperature), hydrologic flow $30,000 per year, t~ including online Q paths (temperature and conductivity), and primary production (pH). Q Dissolved oxygen could be added though it is more difficult and access and annual t~ therefore more expensive to measure long term. Data would be linked data publication.

with sediment transpoR measurements to provide relationships I between turbidity and sediment concentration and allow calculations USGS costs for Q of sediment transport. two year study: o,0oo At least one four parameter station, located at the Sandy River below fO 0 Bull Run River (14142500), is suggested. Other stations, with a fO

minimum of temperature and turbidity, wonld be useful above and fO below Marmot Dam and the diversion dams on the Little Sandy River. Costs depend on Malnstem Mm,-io = Invertebrate community Invertebrates are an ecological indicator of water quality and overall scope and degree Sandy invertebrates response to habitat ecosystem health and recovery from sediment wave. Invertebrate data M changes, including also are directly important for understanding fish survival and habitat of taxonomic identification. changes in bed material. changes. Data will link to water quality studies and the existing and 0 potential future carcass/nutrient studies. At least one set of samplings, Average: $18,000 M above and within affected reaches, would be needed for each of 2 per year. for 3 years prior to and 2 years following dam removal. Cost sharing reaches opportunity with USGS. t~ Two year study: t~ Q eee Q t~

0 ?q" ~O c~

PU I

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Draft Monitoring Opportunitieswith Cost Estimates Page6of 8 I 0 I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I

M Tier 2 Actions, Continued I

Area Category FO Two year study: M Fish Baseline Study for Lamprey axe a species of coocern and considered in decline in the c~ lamprey: Columbia River Basin. Pacific lamprey am historically known to the $20,000 FO presence/absence, Sandy Basin. Little current information is available. Spawning determination of species surveys to identify areas of current use for two years, combined with pw,sont. information from o~Onigrant trapping would be an adequat~ starting 0 point. Some electro fishing may be needed. t~ 0 $3,000/year for 2 0 Assessment of Fine Semi-quantify fine sediment deposition via ocular observation in pool t~ Sediment Deposition in tails and riffles where fall chinook are likely to spawn before and , years (two man Fall Chinook Spawning dam removal, particularly fine sediment <0.85 mm in diameter. Data crew for few days to raft river I Habitat collected links to OSU geomorphology study (which is already 0 collecting such information) and the Fall Chinook Conservation collecting data Stra~gy. The data collection could be done in conjunction with other and write report) field work. FO 0 FO < Total : $6,000 FO

Costs depe on M Little Sandy Macro- Invertebratecommunity Invertebrates ave an ecological indica~ of water quality and overall scope and degree invertebrates response to dam removal ecosystem health and recovery from sediment wave. Invertebrate data of taxonomic 0 and rewatedng the also are directly important for understanding fish survival and habitat identification. M channel. (Baselinevs changes. Data will link to water quality studies and the existing and future conditions). potential future carcass/nutrient studies. At least one set of samplings, Average: $14,000 above and within affected rea-'hes, would be needed for each of 2 per year, for at years prior to and 2 years following dam removal. Cost sharing t~ least2 reaches t~ opportunity with USGS. 0 For 2 year study: 0 ro ,ooo t~

0 0 FO c~

I ~J ~J Bull Run Hydro Projec~ DWG / Draft Monitoring Opportunities with Cost Estimates Page7 of 8 I 0 It It I I t I l l I I I I l I I I I I l

Tier 2 Actions, Continued

Area im~ category Acth~ $5,000/year for a Fish Resident fish vs. Determine changes/impacts to resident populations after anadromous anadmmy (Genetics) fish arc m-established. Nccd baseline and two yeats post removal and 3 year study re-establishmcnt, which may not be sequential. Total : $1S,000 0

FO 0 0 Tier 3 Acflom- consists of research opportunities that have no identified need or connection to dam removal but which may be undertaken in the FO Sandy or Little Sandy rivers.

I Area Issue Category Activity Justification Q Mainstem Fish Bull Trout/Chum Individuals of these species am documented, although no populations o~

Sandy River Salmon: future restoration are thought to be established at this time. fO 0 opportunities for these fO listed species < fO Juvenile Habitat Information available indicates little rearing occurs here, but that it is assessment in lower mainly used as a migration corridor. Sandy River: M

0 M

t~ t~ Q Q t~

0 0 fO r~

Pnge 8 of 8 I Bull Run Hydro Pro'~ct DWG I Draft Monitoring Opportunitieswith Cost Estimates 0 Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

. Appendix D

Disposition of PGE Lands

Bull Run H~l~c ~j~ Pon~l Geeer~ ~c Company ~RC ~ No. 477 D~,~oe.aL~a~ 8 P~

i Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

I BULL RUN HYDRO PROJECT DECOMMISSIONING WORKING GROUP DISPOSITION OF PGE LANDS AGREEMENT

Summary

m 1. All lands, both project and non-project lands, owned by PGE in the Bull Run area of the Sandy River basin, except for the lands associated with Roslyn Lake, will be donated to help establish conservation corridors on both the Sandy and Little Sandy River. I 2. All of the donated PGE lands will be conveyed to Western Rivers Conservancy. PGE's donations of land to WRC are intended to accomplish two purposes: a. To ensure long-term management of the lands consistent with the objectives ,IN stated below; and b. To assist WRC in acquiring other private lands within the Sandy and Little Sandy corridors. i 3. The donated PGE lands will be managed according to the following objectives: a. Protect and restore riparian habitat b. Protect the integrity of river ecosystems c. Establish connections and corridors between habitat units for terrestrial wildlife d. Provide low-impact public access to the rivers and lands, consistent with the above objectives. g 4. The land will be placed with a steward that will ensure the lands will be managed consistent with the objectives in perpetuity.

m Description

Portland General Electric owns approximately 1,938 acres of lands in the Bull Run area of the a Sandy River basin. Of this ownership, approximately 1,058 acres are operating property (or "Project Lands") associated with the Bull Run Project. Most of these Project Lands are the site of project facilities and will be involved in decommissioning. The remaining 880 acres of non- operating property (or "Non-project Lands") are not involved in decommissioning. Some of the Non-Project Lands are on or near the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers, while others are uplands removed from the rivers.

I The PGE lands, on both the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers, are an integral part of the fiver ecosystem with high values for aquatic and terrestrial species alike, especially in light of the

m proposed removal of Marmot and Little Sandy River Dams. As planning began for project decommissioning, it was PGE's belief that their lands, both project and non-project lands, could be the core for conservation corridors on both areas that would serve the goals, not only of fish

a and wildlife habitat, but also public recreation for visitors from the nearby Portland metropolitan area.

With that in mind, in 1999 PGE consulted with several non-profit land conservation organizations to develop a strategy for conserving PGE's land base on the two rivers with maximum benefits for the public. As an outgrowth from these discussions, PGE entered into a Ill working relationship with the Western Rivers Conservancy. WRC made a commitment to acquire privately-owned lands on the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers which are interspersed with

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Disposition of PGE Lands Agreement Page 1 of 4

m Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20021115-0446 Received by FERC OSEC 11/12/2002 in Docket#: P-477-024

PGE lands in order to assemble continuous conservation corridors on both rivers. The lands surrounding Roslyn Lake were specifically excluded from this partnership, with PGE retaining control over disposition.

However, some of the lands directly on the Bull Run River associated with Roslyn Lake have some recreation and riparian restoration potential and may be conveyed to Western Rivers Conservancy. In that event, WRC will work to ensure the area is managed for recreation and restoration. A portion of the lands near Rnslyn Lake may be offered to the Portland Water Bureau to accommodate their interests in the area.

The objectives of the PGE/WRC parmership are the following: • Protect and restore riparian habitat on designated reaches of the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers • Protect the integrity of the river ecosystems • Establish connections and corridors between habitat units for terrestrial wildlife • Provide low-impact pubfic access to the rivers and lands, consistent with the above objectives.

Western Rivers Conservancy investigated options for permanent land stewardship and concluded that a partnership with the federal Bureau of Land Management would be the best course of action on the Sandy River. The BLM had a record of land stewardship and river management on the middle and lower Sandy River and had already established an "Area of Critical Environmental Concern" (ACEC) on the river. Discussions at the National, State and District levels revealed that the BLM shared the vision of a major riparian refuge which would also serve as a resource for low-impact recreation.

Working with the BLM, Western Rivers Conservancy mapped out and prioritized land ownerships along an 1 l-mile reach of the Sandy River (from Wildcat Creek to Revenue Bridge) and along a 5-mile reach of the Little Sandy (from the ML Hood National Forest Boundary to the confluence with the Bull Run). On the Sandy River, PGE owns 780 acres of land in three separate U'acts. The WRC identified 16 parcels of land owned by other private parties, totaling 1,851 acres that connect the PGE lands and complete the conservation corridor.

On the Little Sandy River, the WRC coordinated with the Mt Hood National Forest, which owns the headwaters of the river. Downstream from the National Forest boundary, PGE owns two tracts of land totaling 281 acres, including Little Sandy Dam. The WRC identified four additional privately owned parcels on the Little Sandy totaling 492 acres.

Beginning in 1999, Western Rivers Conservancy contacted owners of most of these lands along the Sandy and Little Sandy to identify willing sellers. Results were very encouraging. Few owners were absolutely unwilling to sell. Some were highly motivated. The WRC purchased an option on a 152-aere tract connecting the major PGE ownerships on the Sandy, a tract that had an approved building permit for a home overlooking the Sandy River Gorge.

WRC worked with the Oregon delegation to Congress to secure the first appropriation from the Land & Water Conservation Fund to enable the BLM to purchase lands on the Sandy River in

Bull Run Hydro Project DWG / Disposition of PGE Lands Agreement Page 2 of 4