PRE-APPLICATION DOCUMENT

BARBER DAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 4881

Submitted by:

Fulcrum, LLC Subsidiary of Enel Green Power North America, Inc. 100 Brickstone Square, Suite 300 Andover, MA 01810

and

Ada County, Idaho 200 W. Front Street Boise, Idaho 83702

November 30, 2018

Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ...... iv LIST OF TABLES ...... v ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ...... vi 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 PROCESS PLAN AND SCHEDULE (18 CFR §5.6 (D)(1)) ...... 3 2.1 Traditional Licensing Process ...... 3 2.2 Authorized Agent ...... 3 2.3 Proposed Communications Protocol ...... 5 2.3.1 Mailing Lists ...... 5 2.3.2 Document Distribution...... 5 2.3.3 Sensitive Information ...... 5 2.3.4 Meetings ...... 6 3.0 PROJECT LOCATION, FACILITIES, AND OPERATION (18 CFR §5.6 (D)(2)) ...... 7 3.1 Project Location ...... 7 3.2 Project Facilities ...... 7 3.2.1 Embankment Dam ...... 7 3.2.2 Spillway ...... 10 3.2.3 Impoundment ...... 10 3.2.4 Powerhouse and Intakes ...... 10 3.2.5 Tailrace ...... 11 3.2.6 Transmission Line ...... 11 3.3 Project Lands ...... 11 3.4 Current Project Operations ...... 11 3.5 Other Project Information ...... 12 3.5.1 Current License Requirements ...... 12 3.5.2 Summary of Project Generation ...... 13 3.5.3 Current Net Investment ...... 14 3.5.4 Compliance History ...... 14 3.5.5 Proposed Project Operation ...... 14 3.5.6 Dependable Capacity ...... 15 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE IMPACTS (18 CFR §5.6 (D)(3)) ...... 16

i November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.1 General Description of the River Basin ...... 16 4.1.1 Topography ...... 16 4.1.2 Climate ...... 18 4.2 Geology and Soils ...... 18 4.2.1 Geology ...... 18 4.2.2 Soils...... 20 4.2.3 Seismicity ...... 22 4.3 Water Resources ...... 26 4.3.1 Hydrology and Streamflow ...... 26 4.3.2 Sedimentation ...... 28 4.3.3 Water Quality Standards ...... 28 4.3.4 Total Maximum Daily Loads ...... 29 4.3.5 Existing Water Quality Data ...... 30 4.3.6 Water Use ...... 32 4.4 Fish and Aquatic Resources ...... 39 4.4.1 Existing Aquatic Habitat and Fish Communities ...... 39 4.4.2 Essential Fish Habitat ...... 43 4.4.3 Effects of Project on Temporal and Spatial Distribution and Any Associated Trends ...... 43 4.5 Wildlife and Botanical Resources ...... 43 4.5.1 Wildlife Resources ...... 43 4.5.1 Botanical Resources and Habitat Types ...... 52 4.6 Wetlands and Riparian and Littoral Habitat ...... 52 4.7 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species ...... 56 4.7.1 State and Federally Listed Species Habitat Requirements ...... 57 4.8 Recreation and Land Use ...... 57 4.8.1 Recreation ...... 57 4.8.2 Land Use ...... 60 4.9 Aesthetics and Visual Resources ...... 62 4.10 Cultural Resources ...... 63 4.10.1 Project History ...... 63 4.10.2 Cultural Sites ...... 64 4.10.3 Tribal Resources ...... 67

ii November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.11 Socioeconomic Resources ...... 67 5.0 PRELIMINARY ISSUES AND STUDIES LIST (18 CFR § 5.6 (D)(4)) ...... 70 5.1 Issues Pertaining to the Identified Resources ...... 70 5.1.1 Geology and Soils ...... 70 5.1.2 Water Resources Issues ...... 70 5.1.3 Fish and Aquatic Resources Issues ...... 70 5.1.4 Wildlife and Botanical Resources Issues ...... 70 5.1.5 Wetlands and Riparian and Littoral Habitat Issues ...... 71 5.1.6 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species Issues ...... 71 5.1.7 Recreation and Land Use Issues ...... 71 5.1.8 Aesthetics and Visual Resources Issues ...... 71 5.1.9 Cultural Resources Issues ...... 71 5.1.10 Tribal Resources ...... 72 5.1.11 Socioeconomic Resources Issues ...... 72 5.2 Potential Studies or Information Gathering ...... 72 5.3 Relevant Comprehensive Waterway Plans ...... 73 6.0 REFERENCES ...... 75

Appendices

Appendix A—Consultation/Correspondence Record Appendix B—FERC Order Issuing License Appendix C—Flow Duration Curves Appendix D—Project Photos Appendix E—Exhibit G Maps Appendix F—One Line Diagram

iii November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3-1. General Location of the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project ...... 8 Figure 3-2. Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Features ...... 9 Figure 4-1. Lower Boise River Subbasin (HUC 17050114) ...... 17 Figure 4-2. Geology in the Project Vicinity ...... 19 Figure 4-3. Soils in the Project Vicinity ...... 21 Figure 4-4. Seismic Events ...... 24 Figure 4-5. Map of Faults near Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project ...... 25 Figure 4-6. Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Mapping Zones ...... 27 Figure 4-7. Total Suspended Solids ...... 30 Figure 4-8. E. coli bacteria ...... 31 Figure 4-9. Total Phosphorus ...... 31 Figure 4-10. Water Temperature ...... 32 Figure 4-11. Irrigation Districts in Ada County ...... 33 Figure 4-12. Diversion Canals along the Boise River ...... 34 Figure 4-13. Boise River Project Reach ...... 41 Figure 4-14. Wetlands in the Vicinity of the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project ...... 53 Figure 4-15. Recreation in the Vicinity of the Barber Dam Project ...... 58 Figure 4-16. Land Use and Ownership in the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Vicinity ...... 61

iv November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1. Proposed Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Process Plan and Schedule ...... 4 Table 3-1. Summary of License Requirements ...... 12 Table 3-2. Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Average Monthly Generation ...... 13 Table 4-1. Average Climactic Data for the City of Boise, Idaho ...... 18 Table 4-2. Soils in the Project Vicinity ...... 20 Table 4-3. Seismic Events ...... 22 Table 4-4. Boise River below Lucky Peak Dam (USGS 13202000) ...... 26 Table 4-5. Boise River at Glenwood Bridge (USGS 13206000) ...... 26 Table 4-6. Water Quality Criteria and Standards for Designated Uses ...... 28 Table 4-7. Major Water Right Holders between Lucky Peak Dam and Glenwood Bridge ...... 35 Table 4-8. Fish Species Found in Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Area of the Boise River ...... 42 Table 4-9. Mammals Associated with Barber Pool Conservation Area ...... 43 Table 4-10. Birds associated with the Barber Pool Conservation Area ...... 45 Table 4-11. Wetland Descriptions and Acreage in the Project vicinity...... 54 Table 4-12. Protected Bird Species that may occur in the Project Vicinity ...... 56 Table 4-13. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Boundary ...... 65 Table 4-14. Population, Percent Change, and Density for the City of Boise, Ada County, and State of Idaho ...... 68 Table 4-15. Income Distributions for the City of Boise, Ada County, and State of Idaho ...... 68 Table 4-16. Distribution of Industries for the City of Boise, Ada County, and State of Idaho ...... 68

v November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Applicants Ada County, Idaho, and Fulcrum, LLC AU Assessment Unit BPCA Barber Pool Conservation Area CEII Critical Energy Infrastructure Information cfs cubic feet per second Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Commission Federal Energy Regulatory Commission CWA Clean Water Act EFH essential fish habitat EGPNA Enel Green Power North America, Inc. FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission IDEQ Idaho Department of Environmental Quality IDFG Idaho Department of Fish and Game IFPL Idaho Foundation for Parks and Lands ILP Integrated Licensing Process kW kilowatt Licensees Ada County, Idaho, and Fulcrum, LLC MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems mg/L milligrams per liter MW megawatt National Register National Register of Historic Places NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NOI Notice of Intent NWI National Wetlands Inventory PAD Pre-Application Document ppt part per thousand Project Barber Dam Project (FERC No. 4881) SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition SHPO State Historic Preservation Office TLP Traditional Licensing Process

vi November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey VAC volts of alternating current

vii November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Fulcrum, LLC, a subsidiary of Enel Green Power North America, Inc. (EGPNA), and Ada County, Idaho, are co-licensees (herein, Applicants or Licensees) of the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 4881) (the Project). The Project is located on the Boise River in Ada County. On December 23, 1983, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) issued its Order Issuing License (Major) for a 40-year license, which expires on November 30, 2023.

The Applicants are filing with FERC a Notice of Intent (NOI) and Pre-Application Document (PAD) to relicense the existing 3.7-megawatt (MW) Project, generally consisting of: (1) a 1,100-foot-long embankment dam ranging in height from 39 feet to about 32 feet; (2) a 400-foot- long, 25-foot-high concrete-capped timber crib spillway section; (3) a 75-acre impoundment with negligible storage capacity; (4) a powerhouse measuring 65 by 92.5 feet situated between the embankment and spillway sections and containing two 1.85-MW turbine/generator units; (5) 60 feet of underground transmission leading to a step up transformer; and (6) appurtenant facilities.

The filing of the NOI and PAD commences the formal relicensing process for the Project. The PAD is a tool for providing engineering, operational, socioeconomic, and environmental information pertaining to the Project that is reasonably available at the time the NOI is filed. The PAD supplies information to help identify and evaluate potential effects on the Project area resources resulting from continued Project operation. This evaluation will be documented in the license application to be prepared by the Applicants and filed with the Commission.

In developing this PAD, the Applicants compiled an initial list of stakeholders with a potential interest in the Project relicensing proceeding. In compliance with the Commission’s regulations governing the content of the PAD, the Applicants contacted appropriate state and federal resource agencies, Indian tribes, and interested public parties who may be concerned with any potential Project effect on the Boise River. The Applicants requested that all parties provide any relevant studies, data, and information related to the Project and ensure accurate contact information. Appendix A contains the questionnaire sent to potentially interested stakeholders requesting that information on the Project be provided for incorporation in the PAD, as well as the responses received. Appendix A also contains the relicensing distribution list, updated based on questionnaire responses.

Pursuant to 18 CFR § 5.8, the Commission will review this PAD and associated NOI. Within 60 days of the PAD and NOI being filed, FERC will issue notice of the commencement of the licensing proceeding and act on the Applicants’ request to use the Traditional Licensing Process (TLP). If FERC grants permission to use the TLP, within 30 to 60 days of the notice, the Applicants will hold a Joint Meeting with all pertinent agencies, tribes, and members of the public (collectively, the stakeholders) and include an opportunity for a site visit to the Project. Stakeholders’ written comments on this PAD and any study or information requests must be filed with FERC, with a copy to the Licensees, within 60 days of the Joint Meeting.

1 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

The information contained in this document was assembled based on the requirements set forth in 18 CFR §5.6(c) and (d) and is organized as follows: • Section 2—Process plan and schedule for all pre-application activities, 18 CFR §5.6(d)(1).

• Section 3—General description of the project location, facilities, and operations, 18 CFR §5.6(d)(2).

• Section 4—Description of the existing environment and resource impacts, 18 CFR §5.6(d)(3).

• Section 5—Preliminary resource issues and potential studies or information gathering needs associated with the issues, 18 CFR §5.6(d)(4).

• Section 6—Literature and information sources cited in the descriptions and summaries of existing resource data, 18 CFR §5.6(c)(2).

• Appendices:

­ Appendix A—Consultation/Correspondence Record ­ Appendix B—FERC Order Issuing License ­ Appendix C—Flow Duration Curves ­ Appendix D—Project Photos ­ Appendix E—Exhibit G Maps ­ Appendix F—One Line Diagram (filed separately as CEII)

2 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

2.0 PROCESS PLAN AND SCHEDULE (18 CFR §5.6 (D)(1))

2.1 Traditional Licensing Process On November 30, 2018, the Applicants filed this NOI and PAD to seek a subsequent license for the Project. Pursuant to 18 CFR §5.3, 5.5 and 5.6, the filing of the NOI and PAD begins the relicensing process and sets the schedule for further licensing activities.

Concurrent with the filing of this PAD, and in accordance with Section 5.3 of FERC’s regulations (18 CFR § 5.3), the Applicants are seeking approval from FERC to use the TLP in lieu of the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP) to license the Project. Following the filing of the NOI and PAD, FERC will publicly notice the documents, and stakeholder comments on the Applicants’ request to use the TLP are due within 30 days of FERC’s public notice. If FERC approves this request, as set forth in 18 CFR § 16.8(b)(3)(ii), the Joint Meeting with stakeholders described above and opportunity for a site visit must be held no earlier than 30 days, but no later than 60 days, following the date that FERC authorizes the use of the TLP. The Joint Meeting, which will likely occur in mid-March 2019, will provide stakeholders an opportunity to see the layout of Project facilities, understand the existing conditions, and participate in a question-and- answer session with the Applicants regarding the Project.

Table 2-1 presents a detailed process plan and schedule with an estimated timetable for the balance of the licensing process, based on FERC granting the Applicants’ request to use the TLP for this Project. The process plan may reflect deadlines that fall on weekend days (Saturday or Sunday). Weekend deadlines will default to the following Monday in accordance with Commission regulations. The process plan and schedule were developed in accordance with the regulations and incorporates the time frames set forth in 18 CFR §§16.8 and 5.8 and will be regularly updated throughout the relicensing process. Additional information regarding scheduling of events will be provided in subsequent notifications from FERC and the Applicants in accordance with Commission regulations.

2.2 Authorized Agent The exact name, business address, and telephone number of each person authorized to act as agent for the applicant: Kevin Webb, Hydro Licensing Manager Lorna Jorgensen, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Enel Green Power North America, Inc. Civil Division, Ada County Prosecuting 100 Brickstone Square, Suite 300 Attorney’s Office Andover, MA 01810 200 W. Front Street 978-935-6039 Boise, ID 83702 [email protected] 208-287-7700 [email protected]

3 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Table 2-1. Proposed Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Process Plan and Schedule

18 CFR Activity Responsibility Time Frame Deadline § 5.5, 16.6(b), 5.6, File NOI, PAD, and Request to use TLP Applicant 5 to 5.5 years before license November 30, 2018 16.7(d), and 5.3 expiration § 5.3(d)(1) Comment on TLP Request Stakeholders Within 30 days of TLP Request December 31, 2018 submittal § 5.8 Issue Public Notice of NOI, PAD, and FERC Within 60 days of NOI, PAD, and January 29, 2019 decision on TLP Request TLP Request submittal § 16.8(b)(3)(i)(B) Notify FERC of Joint Meeting and publish Applicant At least 15 days in advance of February 28, 2019 notice in newspaper Joint Meeting § 16.8(b)(3)(ii) Joint Meeting for consultation with Applicant Within 30 to 60 days of FERC’s March 15, 2019 agencies, tribes and interested public approval of TLP Request § 16.8(b)(5) Comment on PAD and submit study Stakeholders Within 60 days of a Joint Meeting May 14, 2019 requests § 16.8(c)(1) Develop Study Plans Applicant Following receipt of PAD May–July 2019 comments and study requests § 16.8(c)(1) Conduct Field Studies Applicant Following development of study July 2019–October 2020 plans § 16.8(c)(4) Summarize Study Results, develop draft Applicant Following conclusion of studies April 9, 2021 license application and distribute to stakeholders § 16.8(c)(5) Comment on Study Results and draft Stakeholders 90-day comment period July 8, 2021 license application § 16.8(d)(1) and Develop final license application and file Applicant No later than 2 years before November 30, 2021 5.17(a) with FERC current license expires Current license expires FERC 40 years after effective date of November 30, 2023 current license

4 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

2.3 Proposed Communications Protocol The Applicants are proposing a communications protocol to establish guidelines for effective participation and communication in the Project relicensing process. The primary means of communication will be meetings, formal documents, email, a website, and telephone. To establish the consultation record, all formal correspondence requires adequate documentation.

2.3.1 Mailing Lists A Commission licensing proceeding has two categories of participation and each requires different notification or frequency and type of communication. The first category, interested parties, is composed of a broad group of individuals and governmental and non-governmental organizations that have an interest in the Project and/or licensing proceeding; this group is generally referred to as stakeholders. The Applicants will maintain a mailing list of all stakeholders and will include both standard mailing addresses and available email addresses for distributing notices and documents for public review.

After the Applicants file their license application, FERC will establish an official Service List for the second category, those parties who formally intervene in the proceeding. Intervention is a formal, legal process governed by FERC’s regulations. Additional information may be found on FERC’s website at http://www.ferc.gov. Once FERC establishes a Service List, any written documents filed with FERC must be served to the Service List.

2.3.2 Document Distribution The Applicants will distribute, whenever possible, all documents electronically but may distribute hard copies of some documents for convenience or by request. Documents distributed by the Applicants will also be accessible at www.mcmjac.com/barberdamrelicensing.

If possible, the Applicants prefer to receive all documents electronically in an appropriate format. Email electronic documents to Mr. Kevin Webb at the address provided above. Hard copy documents may be mailed to the above address. In either case, all documents received become part of the consultation record and can be made available for distribution.

All formal filings with FERC will be accessible on the FERC eLibrary, the searchable electronic document database (http://elibrary.ferc.gov). Interested parties can register to receive notices of filings made to FERC specific to the Project (P-4881).

2.3.3 Sensitive Information Certain Project-related documents are considered to be Critical Energy Infrastructure Information (CEII) and restricted from public viewing in accordance with Section 388.113 of FERC’s regulations (18 CFR § 388.113). This information relates to the design and safety of the dams and appurtenant facilities. Anyone seeking information protected as CEII from FERC must file a CEII request. FERC’s website at: https://www.ferc.gov/legal/ceii-foia/ceii.asp contains additional details related to CEII. The Applicants will allow limited access to documents containing sensitive information regarding specific cultural and/or protected environmental resources to authorized entities.

5 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

2.3.4 Meetings The Applicants recognize that a number of agencies, groups, and individuals may want to participate in the licensing process for the Project and will work with all interested parties to develop meeting schedules that include locations and times that accommodate the majority of participants. The Applicants will follow the notification procedures for meetings as mandated by FERC regulations and may schedule additional meetings to enhance the consultation process, as necessary.

6 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

3.0 PROJECT LOCATION, FACILITIES, AND OPERATION (18 CFR §5.6 (D)(2))

3.1 Project Location The Project is located on the Boise River in Ada County, Idaho, approximately 6 miles southeast of downtown Boise. The Project site is within Sections 28, 29, 32, and 33, T3N R3E, at Latitude 43.560N and Longitude -116.122W. Barber Dam is located at river mile 58.9, approximately 4 miles downstream of Lucky Peak Dam, which is owned and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Figure 3-1 presents a Project location map.

3.2 Project Facilities The Project facilities were constructed by the Barber Lumber Company in 1904–1905 to provide a mill pond and power source for the company’s sawmill (Figure 3-2). The Barber Mill was periodically operated until it was dismantled in 1934. Ownership of the dam and abandoned powerhouse changed several times until the mid-1970s, when due to a failure to pay taxes, Ada County was statutorily required to take ownership of the Project facilities. The FERC Order Issuing License, dated December 23, 1983, allowed for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a new power project at Barber Dam, which involved restoration and modifications to the powerhouse to accommodate the new turbines. Fulcrum joined Ada County as co-licensee in 1989 and operates and maintains the Project facilities under a lease agreement.

The Project has an installed capacity of 3.7 MW and consists of an 1,100-foot-long, earthen embankment dam; a 400-foot-long, 25-foot-high concrete capped timber crib spillway section; a 75-acre impoundment with negligible storage capacity; two bulkhead gate-type intakes; two trash racks and a trash sluiceway; a powerhouse containing two 1,850-kilowatt (kW) generating units; a 100-foot-long, concrete tailrace; 60 feet of underground transmission (generator leads) leading to a step up transformer; and appurtenant facilities.

3.2.1 Embankment Dam The earthen embankment was originally a railbed that serviced the former lumber mill. The embankment dam abuts the northeast side of the powerhouse and extends approximately 800 feet to the northeast with a crest elevation at 2,792.2 feet North American Vertical Datum of 19881 and then an additional 300 feet with a crest elevation approximately at 2,785.5 feet. The embankment dam is approximately 14 feet higher than the crest of the spillway at the maximum crest elevation of the embankment.

1 All elevation data in this PAD are given in North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88).

7 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: ESRI (2018a) Figure 3-1. General Location of the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project

8 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: ESRI (2018b) Figure 3-2. Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Features

9 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

3.2.2 Spillway The timber crib spillway is approximately 25-feet-high above stream level, is 400-feet-long, and has a crest elevation of 2,778.2 feet. The timber cribs are rock filled and have been capped with concrete.

A 40-foot-wide section of the spillway adjacent to the powerhouse was repaired in 2008 to address excessive seepage through the timber crib. The repair consisted of driving sheet piling along the upstream face and constructing a reinforced concrete slab over the crest and downstream face of the spillway.

Rehabilitation work performed in 2014 and 2015 consisted of removal, repair, and replacement of deteriorated concrete on the upstream and downstream faces of the spillway and installation of a toe block.

3.2.3 Impoundment The impoundment surface area is approximately 75 acres at normal pond level of elevation 2,778.2 feet with an average depth of less than 4 feet. The area around the intake and trash racks has been excavated and dredged and is consequently as deep as 19 feet with normal water surface levels (Kleinfelder, 2016). The gross storage capacity is estimated to be 180 acre-feet at the normal pond level. As a run-of-river facility, the Project has no net useable storage capacity.

3.2.4 Powerhouse and Intakes The powerhouse is a one-story, reinforced concrete building that is 65 feet by 92.5 feet wide. It is situated between the embankment dam and the spillway. The original powerhouse was constructed in 1906, and in 1987, it was reconstructed and refurbished with modern generating equipment. The powerhouse rests on the original foundation, which is believed to consist of footings directly supported on bedrock.

The powerhouse contains two identical horizontal Kaplan turbines, each with a nameplate rated flow of 1,077 cubic feet per second (cfs) at a head of 24.7 feet. The turbines have adjustable wicket gates and turbine blades, which allow them to operate efficiently over a wide range of flows down to a minimum of approximately 250 cfs. Each turbine is coupled via a speed increaser to a 1,850-kW horizontal synchronous generator.

The powerhouse has two turbine/generator intakes. The intakes, which are constructed of reinforced concrete, taper to the interface of the steel inlet for the turbine. The intake trash racks consist of two sections of trash racks for each turbine/generator intake with spacing of 3 inches on center. A trash sluice was constructed along the south powerhouse wall to allow downstream disposal of debris from the intake trash racks.

Immediately upstream of the trash racks is a 57-foot-long, 18-inch-deep trench (referred to as a rock trap), which collects tumbling river debris to prevent it from piling up against the trash racks. A formal inspection in 2017 found evidence of significant damage occurring to the upstream lakebed and ground surface of the trench and a substantial amount of debris in front of the trash racks, having the potential to negatively affect power generation efficiency (MJA, 2018).

10 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

3.2.5 Tailrace The concrete-lined tailrace extends from the arched flumes at the lower level of the powerhouse to the right river channel and averages 68 feet in width, 100 feet in length, and 18 feet in depth as it carries the turbine discharge back to the Boise River. Approximately 100 feet past the draft tube exit are stoplogs guides into which metal stoplogs can be inserted to dewater the draft tubes.

3.2.6 Transmission Line Barber Dam’s transmission assets consist of 60 feet of underground generators leads running to a step-up transformer. The step-up transformer is rated at 5,000 kilovolt-amperes with a primary and secondary side of the transformer equal to 4,160/34,500 volts of alternating current (VAC). The high side leads of the step-up transformer run 60 feet overhead to a transmission pole structure owned by Idaho Power, which is the point of interconnection. Idaho Power designed and constructed the 34,500-VAC transmission line, which interconnects the Barber Hydro Station to the Idaho Power transmission grid. Idaho Power owns and maintains the 34,500 VAC line, the interconnection relays, and the reclosure disconnect switch on the high side of the step- up transformer.

3.3 Project Lands All of the Project structures and land immediately surrounding the dam and powerhouse are owned by Ada County. The impoundment is within the Barber Pool Conservation Area (BPCA), which is owned and managed by the Idaho Foundation for Parks and Lands (IFPL). Ada County and Fulcrum are currently revising the Project boundary to incorporate additional land rights recently or soon to be acquired for dam safety purposes.

3.4 Current Project Operations The Project is operated in a run-of-river mode using automatic pond level control of the turbine- generator units. The headpond level is maintained at the spillway crest so that all inflow is spilled upon unit trip or shut-down. Generally, the control system’s pond level setpoint (i.e., the water level that the system is programmed to maintain) is seasonally adjusted. During the irrigation season (April–October), the pond level setpoint is normally set just above the crest of the spillway, resulting in a small amount of flow passing over the full width of the spillway at all times and ensuring that water will immediately begin flowing over the spillway following an outage. During the winter (November–March), the pond level setpoint is normally lowered to 0.04 foot (~ 0.5 inch) below the spillway crest to prevent ice buildup on the surface of the spillway, which could damage the concrete. When inflows are greater than the turbines’ hydraulic capacity, all excess flows pass over the spillway.

The station can be remotely stopped, and in some situations, it can be remotely restarted. The turbine/generator units are protected for various electrical fault conditions and mechanical operating conditions and will “trip” offline if these conditions occur. When the units trip offline, the alert system and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system alerts the on-call operator. The operator then notifies Ada County, irrigation stakeholders, and the EGPNA operations center. The operations staff then responds to the plant to restart the units, if possible.

The operations staff monitors and inspects the trash racks for debris and trash buildup using the SCADA system to monitor plant and river conditions. The trash rack rakes are operated

11 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document manually on an as-needed basis, which typically varies seasonally. More frequent raking is usually required during spring runoff, which carries large woody debris, and during late summer and fall when aquatic macrophytes in the river break loose and can clog the trashracks. The operations staff separates and properly disposes of all human-made trash before releasing the remaining natural debris downstream through the sluiceway.

The operations staff also regularly visit the Project to monitor the powerhouse equipment and to observe the overall condition of the Project, including the embankment dam and timber crib spillway. During high flow conditions when flows exceed 6,500 cfs, more frequent monitoring of the Project is implemented.

3.5 Other Project Information

3.5.1 Current License Requirements FERC issued a major license for the Project by order dated December 23, 1983. The current license expires on November 30, 2023. Articles 1-23 are standard articles contained in FERC’s Form L-11 included as part of the 1983 Order Issuing License. In addition to the standard articles, the Project license includes the requirements summarized in Table 3-1. A copy of the license is included in Appendix B.

Table 3-1. Summary of License Requirements

License Requirement Description Consult with USFWS and Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) to Article 24 develop a wildlife mitigation plan, then file with FERC for approval. Consult with the Idaho State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to Article 25 develop a cultural mitigation plan, then file with FERC for approval. Within 90 days after completion of construction, file for FERC approval Article 26 revised Exhibits A, F, and G showing the Project as-built. At least 60 days prior to the start of construction, file with FERC’s Regional Article 27 Engineer and the Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation the contract drawings and specifications for pertinent features of the Project. Commence construction of the Project within 1 year of the date of issuance Article 28 of the license and complete construction within 2 years from the start of construction. Review and approve the cofferdam construction drawings and specifications, then file the drawings, specifications, and letters of approval Article 29 with FERC’s Regional Engineer and Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation at least 30 days prior to start of construction of the cofferdam. Within 6 months from the date of issuance of the license, file with the Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation for approval a report to Article 30 demonstrate that failure of the dam would not present a hazard to human life or cause significant property damage. At least 60 days prior to start of construction, file with the Director, Office of Electrical Power Regulation for approval revised Exhibit F drawings Article 31 showing the final design and a final supporting design report for the powerhouse.

12 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

License Requirement Description Article 32 Pay the United States annual charges. After the first 20 years of operation of the Project under the license, a specified reasonable rate of return upon the net investment in the Project Article 33 shall be used for determining surplus earnings of the Project for the establishment and maintenance of amortization reserves. FERC reserves the authority to order alterations of Project structures and operations to take into account the regional fish and wildlife program Article 34 pursuant to the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act. Article 35 Standard use and occupancy of Project lands article. Consult with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and Idaho Department of Health and Welfare to prepare an erosion and sediment Article 36 control plan, then file with FERC’s Regional Engineer and the Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation for approval at least 60 days prior to any ground disturbing activity or spoil disposal.

3.5.2 Summary of Project Generation Table 3-2 presents the Project’s average generation on a monthly and annual basis from 2008– 2017. The average annual generation of the Project for this period is 11,833 megawatt-hours. It is expected that the Project will continue to dependably produce similar annual generation averages.

Table 3-2. Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Average Monthly Generation

Month 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Jan 165.5 199.3 202.7 489.7 185.5 169.9 213.8 237.6 210.6 192.1 Feb 137.7 199.3 191.0 189.9 445.3 170.5 196.0 145.5 193.1 830.5 Mar 176.0 187.7 217.1 524.1 2,066.0 191.0 243.2 275.6 268.4 842.8 Apr 1,067.7 1,014.4 844.5 2,268.7 2,408.6 985.6 1,616.9 840.1 2,004.1 1,989.2 May 1,883.9 1,927.8 1,936.1 2,447.5 2,277.6 1,705.7 1,455.8 1,774.5 2,365.8 2,339.5 Jun 1,722.9 2,400.9 2,132.7 2,377.5 2,036.6 1,466.9 1,813.4 1,494.0 2,236.9 2,244.9 Jul 1,990.0 1,818.4 2,370.3 2,093.8 1,856.7 1,486.4 1,832.3 1,636.9 1,622.9 2,208.8 Aug 1,893.9 1,518.6 1,559.7 1,612.4 1,586.3 1,444.7 1,349.8 1,354.1 1,440.3 1,558.4 Sep 1,138.8 1,221.8 1,216.0 1,272.6 1,245.4 725.1 952.2 899.6 1,058.3 1,284.1 Oct 427.5 688.5 503.0 476.4 359.2 228.8 331.5 342.2 398.2 453.1 Nov 196.0 181.6 158.2 178.2 148.2 191.6 167.7 208.3 185.9 119.8 Dec 330.9 428.6 168.8 188.8 88.3 194.3 177.7 216.2 178.6 128.7 Yearly 11,131 11,787 11,500 14,120 14,704 8,960 10,350 9,424 12,163 14,192 Total

13 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

3.5.3 Current Net Investment Fulcrum’s current net investment in the Project is $ 2,688,968. This value should not be interpreted to be the fair market value of the Project.

3.5.4 Compliance History A review of compliance information, as per 18 CFR § 5.6(d)(2), shows that the Project has been in compliance with the terms and conditions of the current license, with the exception of a flow variation event in February 2015. Fulcrum notified FERC that the dam had tripped offline because of a power fluctuation on the Idaho Power grid, resulting in the cessation of water flow through the plant to the river downstream. Per the FERC Portland Regional Office construction requirements, the pond was being held at a low level to provide a margin of safety for construction on the spillway crest and water did not flow over the spillway crest for 7 hours, resulting in a lack of downstream flow until the pond elevation again reached the spillway crest. At the time, the primary alert system did not function because of operator error; it had not been activated when the operator left the site the previous evening. Because Fulcrum did not have back-up operator alert protocols at that time, this incident was considered a violation of Part 12.5 of FERC’s regulations.

To prevent an event like this from happening again, Fulcrum immediately implemented additional protocols to ensure the alert systems were active and correctly set every night while the impoundment was drawn down to complete construction on the spillway crest. These additional protocols were followed by additional powerhouse staff training, an increase to the alarm modes on the alert system, and an upgrade to the SCADA alarm system.

Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) surveyed the river downstream of the dam for incidences of fish kill or other wildlife impacts and concluded that the flow variation event did not substantially affect adult or most juvenile fish. In response to the flow variation event, Ada County formed an Environmental Advisory Board to select a fish habitat improvement project. The Applicants contributed a total budget of $45,000, plus undefined volunteer time, to the improvement project (Ada County, 2015). The improvement project included adding three engineered log jams and dozens of boulders to a 500-foot stretch of river between the Eckert Road Bridge and Barber Park’s boat ramp. The intent of these structures is to improve habitat complexity, which gives fish and aquatic macroinvertebrates more hiding, feeding, and resting areas, especially when flows are very high or very low. This is the first project of its kind in the Boise River (Cripe, 2016). Photos of this improvement project are included in Appendix D.

3.5.5 Proposed Project Operation The Applicants are not proposing any changes in operation compared to the current operations described in Section 3.4. The Project would continue to operate in a run-of-river mode. The Applicants are also not proposing any new or modified Project facilities.

14 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

3.5.6 Dependable Capacity Dependable capacity is generally defined as the amount of load a hydroelectric plant can carry under adverse hydrologic conditions during a period of peak demand, for example, during the low flow conditions typical of the winter non-irrigation season in the Project area (November– March). Under the current license and existing river flow patterns, the Project’s estimated dependable capacity is approximately 300 kW, which reflects the operation of a single unit at 250 cfs.

15 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE IMPACTS (18 CFR §5.6 (D)(3))

4.1 General Description of the River Basin The Boise River is a tributary to the Snake River in southwest Idaho. The Boise River Watershed is generally divided into three subbasins—the Lower Boise River (HUC 17050114), the North and Middle Fork Boise River (HUC 17050111), and the South Fork Boise River (HUC 17050113). Barber Dam is located near the upper extent of the Lower Boise River Subbasin.

The upstream limit of the Lower Boise River Subbasin is Lucky Peak Dam, 4 miles upstream of Barber Dam. The Corps constructed Lucky Peak in 1957 for the dual purposes of flood control (primary) and irrigation (secondary). It impounds 306,000 acre-feet in a 12-mile-long reservoir. Hydropower generation was added in 1988 by the Boise Project Board of Control (Corps, 2018). Big Bend Irrigation District currently operates the 101.25-MW hydropower project. However, the Corps controls flow releases to the powerhouse (FERC, 2018).

Approximately halfway between Lucky Peak and Barber dams is the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s (Reclamation) Boise River Diversion Dam, constructed in 1908. The dam diverts water west into the New York Canal, which serves distribution laterals and feeds Lake Lowell, and north into Penitentiary Canal, which distributes water to a small area of land east of Boise (Corps, 2002a). As much as 2,200 cfs of the flow from Lucky Peak Dam may be diverted into the New York Canal.

The greater Lower Boise River Subbasin drains 1,290 square miles of rangeland, forests, grazing and agricultural lands, and urban areas. The lower Boise River is a 64-mile stretch that flows in a northwesterly direction through Ada and Canyon Counties from Lucky Peak Dam to its confluence with the Snake River near Parma, Idaho. Major tributaries include Indian Creek, Sand Hollow Creek, Willow Creek, Five Mile and Ten Mile Creeks, and Mason Creek, all of which are below Barber Dam (IDEQ, 1999). Figure 4-1 shows the lower Boise River Subbasin and its tributaries. Several diversions are made from the lower Boise River for irrigation and other water uses, as detailed in Section 4.3.6.

4.1.1 Topography Topography of the lower Boise River is diverse and spans from the Boise Front Mountains and foothills to the Boise River Valley. The area is also characterized by the presence of several alluvial, step-like terraces both north and south of the Boise River and a lava plain including shield volcanoes and cinder cones in the southwestern region of the basin. Elevation in the river basin ranges from approximately 6,575 feet at Boise Peak to 2,200 feet at the mouth of the Boise River (IDEQ, 1999).

16 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Sources: USGS (2018a); ESRI (2018b) Figure 4-1. Lower Boise River Subbasin (HUC 17050114)

17 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.1.2 Climate The climate in Boise is primarily influenced by air currents from the Pacific Ocean. Summers are hot and dry with average high temperatures in the low-90s and less than half an inch of precipitation per month in July and August. Winters are generally cold with average temperatures in the 20s and 30s and approximately 6 inches of snowfall per month in December and January. Table 4-1 presents a summary of climactic data for the City of Boise (U.S. Climate Data, 2018).

Table 4-1. Average Climactic Data for the City of Boise, Idaho

State Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Average 38 45 55 62 72 81 91 90 79 65 48 38 High (ºF) Average 25 28 34 39 47 54 60 60 51 41 32 24 Low (ºF) Precipitation 1.22 0.98 1.38 1.22 1.38 0.71 0.31 0.24 0.59 0.75 1.34 1.54 (inches) Snowfall 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 (inches)

4.2 Geology and Soils

4.2.1 Geology The geology in the vicinity of the Project is largely characterized by alluvial deposits consisting of gravel, sand, and silt. Granitic rocks and porphyritic felsites dominate the lithologies of the gravel clasts (Figure 4-2). Most transported clasts come from the Idaho batholith and associated felsic rocks of the central Idaho Mountains. Of the transported clasts, 5 to 10 percent consist of gray unweathered basalt from Pleistocene basalt flows in the southwestern Boise River Basin. Well logs in the Project area suggest an average gravel thickness of about 8 meters (26 feet) overlying much older, finer grained sediments.

The Boise Terrace abuts the southwest side of the Project and consists of similar channel alluvium from the former Boise River deposited on the river-cut surface of the first terrace above the modern Boise River. The Boise Terrace is approximately 3 meters (10 feet) above the present floodplain and is generally correlated with the time of the most recent glaciation in the nearby mountains (approximately 20,000 years ago) (Othberg and Burnham, 1990).

The powerhouse structure is founded on a thick section of uniformly bedded volcanic tuff containing clasts of black glass (obsidian), crystalline feldspar, pumice, and scoria ranging from microscopic to approximately 5 millimeters in size. The beds vary in thickness from less than 5 centimeters to more than 1 meter, although most beds average 15 to 20 centimeters thick. The clasts are dominantly basaltic in composition, are angular in shape and are weakly consolidated in the beds except within the thick fine-grained beds where some welding is apparent and is similar to a flow rock composition (Kleinfelder, 2016).

18 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Sources: USGS (2017); ESRI (2018b) Figure 4-2. Geology in the Project Vicinity

19 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.2.2 Soils Major soil types found in the immediate Project vicinity include a Notus-LesBois complex in the floodplain and an Emerson-Jenness complex on the Boise Terrace. The Notus and LesBois series consist of somewhat poorly drained soils, while the Emerson and Jenness series consist of well-drained soils. All four soil types generally form in alluvium from granite and other acid igneous rocks. These soils are typically found in channeled floodplains, low terraces, and alluvial fans at elevations of 2,000 to 4,500 feet. Soil textures include silty and sandy loams. Table 4-2 names the soil units in the Project vicinity, as depicted on Figure 4-3 (NRCS, 2018a).

Table 4-2. Soils in the Project Vicinity

Soil Unit No. Soil Unit Name 38 Chilcott-Sebree complex, bedrock substratum, 2 to 4 percent slopes 71 Jenness fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 72 Jenness fine sandy loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes 129 Power silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 131 Power silt loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes 158 Rock outcrop-Trevino complex, 5 to 20 percent slopes 1001 Notus-LesBois complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes 1002 Ballentine-Eagle complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes 1004 Moulton-Notus complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes 1006 Flofeather sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 1007 Flofeather sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 1009 Bissell loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes 1012 Emerson-Jenness complex, 1 to 3 percent slopes 2000 Xeric Haplargids, 8 to 35 percent slopes 3042 Piercepark coarse sandy loam, 8 to 25 percent slopes 3066 Calciargidic Argixerolls-Xeric Haplargids complex, 35 to 65 percent slopes 3075 Breadloaf-Adelmann-Aldape complex, 8 to 25 percent slopes 3076 Adelmann-Barbermill-Breadloaf complex, 25 to 50 percent slopes 9002 Urban land-Ballentine complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes 9007 Urban land-Flofeather complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes 9009 Urban land-Bissell complex, 2 to 4 percent slopes 9995 Dams, earthen 9999 Water

20 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Sources: NRCS (2018b); ESRI, 2018b Figure 4-3. Soils in the Project Vicinity

21 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.2.3 Seismicity The immediate Project vicinity is characterized by relatively low to moderate seismic activity. Table 4-4 shows a complete list of seismic events greater than Richter magnitude 2.0 within 62 miles of the Project since 1984. No seismic events greater than magnitude 3.7 were recorded. Figure 4-4 shows the location of each listed seismic events (Kleinfelder, 2016).

The fault closest to the Project is the Squaw Creek Fault, which is in the Boise Mountains, northeast of Boise. It trends generally north from the east end of Black Canyon Reservoir for about 41 miles. The southern end of this fault is approximately 31 miles northwest of the Project site. Squaw Creek Fault is considered to have last moved during the late Halocene, less than 15,000 years ago. Figure 4-5 shows the faults located in southwest Idaho (Kleinfelder, 2016).

Table 4-3. Seismic Events

Depth Date Latitude Longitude Magnitude (kilometers) 09/15/18 44.325 -116.245 6.3 2.1 08/27/18 44.441 -116.055 5.7 2.3 03/14/18 44.006 -115.135 5.0 2.6 01/28/18 44.308 -115.520 6.6 2.0 11/03/17 43.882 -115.851 18.3 2.4 10/08/16 44.369 -116.190 5.0 2.6 11/05/15 44.384 -116.216 2.8 2.3 10/21/15 44.397 -116.179 5.4 2.1 08/24/15 44.399 -115.768 8.5 2.5 02/22/15 44.326 -116.120 15.0 2.0 04/19/14 44.259 -115.540 10.6 2.5 04/06/14 44.385 -116.327 16.1 2.6 03/06/14 44.101 -115.355 23.3 2.0 12/25/13 44.173 -116.344 6.5 2.4 12/11/13 43.808 -115.847 18.7 2.2 11/01/13 44.189 -116.405 9.9 2.2 10/15/13 44.357 -115.732 22.4 2.7 05/21/13 44.204 -115.411 9.0 2.7 05/07/13 44.371 -115.599 15.2 2.3 05/05/13 44.284 -116.240 6.3 2.6 11/12/12 43.364 -116.928 6.2 2.9 10/30/10 44.428 -116.069 11.3 2.5 08/21/10 44.336 -115.499 5.0 3.4 07/02/10 44.339 -115.523 5.0 3.2

22 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Depth Date Latitude Longitude Magnitude (kilometers) 05/13/09 44.317 -115.739 5.0 3.1 04/24/07 44.394 -116.166 5.0 2.9 04/24/07 44.411 -115.947 5.0 2.6 04/24/07 44.457 -116.176 5.0 3.5 03/04/07 44.340 -116.370 14.2 2.9 12/27/05 44.342 -115.778 5.0 3.2 12/26/05 44.438 -116.013 5.0 2.7 03/13/05 44.458 -116.057 5.0 2.8 12/27/02 44.436 -115.999 5.0 2.8 11/04/02 43.409 -115.426 5.0 3.5 08/03/02 44.372 -116.137 5.0 3.5 02/06/02 43.237 -115.231 5.0 2.8 09/26/00 44.300 -116.150 7.0 3.2 09/14/00 44.300 -116.150 7.0 3.7 09/05/00 44.360 -115.660 7.0 3.2 02/27/00 44.310 -116.250 10.0 3.1 04/06/95 44.401 -116.098 5.0 3.7 03/22/95 44.271 -115.529 5.0 3.3 09/22/90 43.974 -115.348 10.0 3.0 07/20/89 44.123 -116.990 -0.8 2.9 07/20/86 44.455 -116.033 5.0 3.6 07/20/86 44.415 -116.002 5.0 3.2

23 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Sources: USGS (2018b); ESRI (2018b) Figure 4-4. Seismic Events

24 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Sources: USGS (2018b,d); USGS and Idaho Geological Survey (2006); ESRI (2018b) Figure 4-5. Map of Faults near Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project

25 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.3 Water Resources

4.3.1 Hydrology and Streamflow In 1957, the Corps constructed Lucky Peak Dam and began regulating flow to the lower Boise River. Water releases from the reservoir are primarily managed for flood control and irrigation purposes. The Corps also controls flow releases to the hydropower project at Lucky Peak. Other management considerations include recreation, maintenance of minimum stream flows during low flow periods, and release of water to augment salmon migration flows in the Snake River. The Upper Boise River Subbasins above Lucky Peak Dam include the north, middle, and south forks of the Boise River and have a combined drainage area of 2,033 square miles (IDEQ, 2002).

Inflow to the Project is regulated by flow releases from Lucky Peak Dam minus any upstream diversions. The current flow management regime at Lucky Peak Dam began in 1984. The regulated annual hydrograph can be divided into three flow regimes. Low flow conditions, approximately 250 cfs, generally begin in mid-October when irrigation diversions end. The low flow period extends until flood control releases begin, sometime between the end of January and March. Flood flows generally extend through June, and releases for irrigation control flows from July through mid-October (IDEQ, 1999). Figure 4-6 shows the Federal Emergency Management Agency flood mapping zones for the Project area (FEMA, 2015).

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) operates a gage station on the Boise River just downstream of Lucky Peak Dam (13202000), approximately 4 miles upstream from Barber Dam, and another gage station at Glenwood Bridge (13206000), approximately 11 miles downstream from Barber Dam. Several irrigation districts divert water from the Boise River between Barber Dam and Glenwood Bridge. No major tributaries are located between Barber Dam and Glenwood Bridge. Tables 4-4 and 4-5 show the maximum, minimum, and mean monthly flows at each gage station from 1984 to 2017 under current regulated flow conditions.

Table 4-4. Boise River below Lucky Peak Dam (USGS 13202000)

Flow Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec (cfs) Maximum 6,950 7,030 8,880 9,770 11,500 12,300 8,010 4,610 4,600 4,600 2,000 3,020 Minimum 116 90 84 92 2,160 2,190 2,310 400 217 0 1 128 Mean 619 971 1,900 3,890 5,360 4,990 4,210 3,730 2,840 998 299 348 Source: USGS (2018c)

Table 4-5. Boise River at Glenwood Bridge (USGS 13206000)

Flow Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec (cfs) Maximum 7,020 7,130 8,100 8,540 9,130 9,250 4,480 1,520 2,390 2,360 2,170 2,380 Minimum 87 86 99 99 524 420 454 250 199 119 86 100 Mean 594 896 1,530 2,350 2,610 2,030 1,180 899 637 374 308 337 Source: USGS (2018d)

26 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: FEMA (2015); ESRI (2018b) Figure 4-6. Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Mapping Zones

27 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.3.2 Sedimentation Barber Dam was originally constructed in 1904 to create a log-holding pond and power- generating facility for the Barber Lumber Mill. Silt that came with the logs and sediments in the river became trapped behind the dam and accumulated over time, forming islands in the impounded area (Cripe, 2017). Sediment deposition was greatly reduced after construction of the Boise River Diversion Dam in 1908 and then Lucky Peak Dam in 1957 (Corps, 2002a). However, any sediment that accumulates behind the Boise River Diversion Dam is washed downstream to the Barber Dam impoundment when the gates at the base of the dam are opened after irrigation season (IDEQ, 1999). The area behind Barber Dam has been established as the BPCA. IFPL owns and manages the BPCA for wildlife conservation purposes.

4.3.3 Water Quality Standards The Clean Water Act (CWA) was established in 1972 as the foundation of modern surface water quality protection in the United States. Sections 303(a-c) of the CWA discuss the process by which all states are to adopt and periodically review water quality standards. The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ), Water Quality Division, is responsible for ensuring that the state’s surface, ground, and drinking water resources meet state water quality standards. Barber Dam is within Assessment Unit (AU) SW-11a_06 of the Lower Boise Subbasin, which consists of the Boise River from the Boise River Diversion Dam to river mile 50. The designated uses for AU SW-11a_06 are Cold Water Aquatic Life, Salmonid Spawning, Primary Contact Recreation, and Domestic Water Supply. Table 4-6 summarizes the water quality criteria and standards for these designated uses.

Table 4-6. Water Quality Criteria and Standards for Designated Uses

Designated Uses Criteria Standards Aquatic Life (Cold pH Within the range of 6.5 to 9.0 Water and Total dissolved gas Not to exceed 110% of saturation at atmospheric Salmonid Spawning) pressure at the point of sample collection Dissolved oxygen Exceed 6 milligrams per liter (mg/L) at all times. In areas used for spawning and during the time spawning and incubation occurs, the 1-day minimum shall not be less than 5 mg/L in intergravel water, with a 7-day average mean of not less than 6 mg/L. For the water column, the 1-day minimum shall not be less than 6 mg/L or 90% of saturation, whichever is greater. Temperature 22 degrees Celsius (ºC) or less with a maximum daily average of no greater than 19ºC. In areas used for spawning and during the time spawning and incubation occurs, temperature shall be 13ºC or less with a maximum daily average no greater than 9ºC. The temperature in lakes, including reservoirs with mean detention times of greater than 15 days, shall have no measurable change from natural background conditions. Ammonia 1-hour and 30-day average concentrations not to exceed, more than once every 3 years, the values

28 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Designated Uses Criteria Standards calculated using the equations specified in 250.02.d.i and 250.02.d.i.1 respectively. The highest 4-day average within the 30-day period should not exceed 2.5 times the 1-hour average. Turbidity Shall not exceed background turbidity by more than 50 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs) instantaneously or more than 25 NTUs for more than 10 consecutive days in waters below any applicable mixing zone set by IDEQ. Primary Contact E. coli Not to exceed a geometric mean of 126 E. coli Recreation organisms per 100 mL based on a minimum of 5 samples taken every 3 to 7 days over a 30-day period. When single sample values exceed 406, additional samples should be taken to assess compliance with the geometric mean. Domestic Water Radioactive Materials Not to exceed concentrations specified in IDEQ Rules, Supply IDAPA 58.01.08, Rules Governing Public Drinking Water Systems.

Agricultural and Industrial Water Supply, Wildlife Habitat, and Aesthetic designated uses apply to all surface waters of the state. Water quality criteria for these uses are generally satisfied by the general surface water quality criteria (IDEQ, 2013).

4.3.4 Total Maximum Daily Loads Section 303(d) of the CWA directs the states to identify waters of the state that do not meet water quality standards and to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) to bring those waters into compliance. IDEQ (2009) conducted a subbasin assessment of the lower Boise River in 1999 and developed TMDLs for sediment and bacteria that were approved by USEPA in 2000. IDEQ conducted a 5-year review of the subbasin assessment and TMDLs in 2009. The sediment and bacteria TMDLs are currently in place for the Boise River beginning 8 miles downstream of Barber Dam from Veterans Memorial Parkway Bridge to the Boise River’s confluence with the Snake River. An addendum approved by USEPA in 2015 established a TMDL for phosphorus in the Boise River beginning 28 miles downstream of Barber Dam from the city of Middleton to the Boise River’s confluence with the Snake River (IDEQ, 2015).

Section 305(b) requires states to bi-annually update the 303(d) list and submit to USEPA for approval. IDEQ meets this requirement by preparing Idaho’s Integrated Report (IDEQ, 2017). The 2014 report classifies the Boise River from the Boise River Diversion Dam to river mile 50 (AU SW-11a_06) as “fully supporting” primary contact recreation and domestic water supply designated uses but as “not supporting” cold water aquatic life and salmonid spawning designated uses due to low flow alterations and physical substrate habitat alterations. Habitat modification and flow alteration are not considered pollutants under Section 303(d). Instead, they are considered pollution, a broad concept that encompasses human-caused changes in the environment that alter the functioning of natural processes and produce undesirable environmental or health effects. Therefore, these AU-caused combinations are placed in Category 4c, Waters of the State Not Impaired by a Pollutant, and do not require a TMDL.

29 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.3.5 Existing Water Quality Data Limited water quality data are available in the immediate Project vicinity. The USGS gage station below Lucky Peak Dam (13202000) does not collect water quality data, and the USGS gage station at Glenwood Bridge (13206000) only collected water temperature data from 1997 to 2002. However, it appears temperature monitoring during this period was not continuous resulting in significant data gaps.

The City of Boise collects water quality data in compliance with the Boise/Garden City Area National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit (IDS-027561) for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) issued by USEPA on December 12, 2012. The city is required to ensure that discharges from the MS4 will not cause or contribute to applicable Idaho water quality standards. The permit identifies sediment, bacteria (E. coli), total phosphorus, and temperature as pollutants of concern.

The city’s annual report summarizes the water quality data collected at two sampling locations along the Boise River both downstream of Barber Dam—Veteran’s Parkway Bridge (RM 50.2) and Glenwood Bridge (RM 47.5). Total suspended solids, E. coli levels, phosphorus concentrations, and temperature data from 2000 to 2017 are shown in the figures below.

Source: BDPW (2017) Figure 4-7. Total Suspended Solids

30 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: BDPW (2017) Figure 4-8. E. coli bacteria

Source: BDPW (2017) Figure 4-9. Total Phosphorus

31 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: BDPW (2017) Figure 4-10. Water Temperature

4.3.6 Water Use The Barber Dam impoundment is within the Barber Pool, which is managed by IFPL for wildlife conservation purposes. Project waters also support limited recreation, and canoe portage at the Project allows users to safely bypass the dam. See Sections 4.5, 4.6, and 4.8 for more details regarding wildlife, wetlands, and recreational resources, respectively.

Water from the Boise River irrigates more than 350,000 acres of crops, pastures, and lawns and has been used for agriculture since at least 1864. Today, there are almost 400 surface water rights on the river below Lucky Peak Dam, which was constructed to store spring runoff for irrigation needs later in the growing season (BDPR, 2014). Several irrigation districts and companies divert water from the Boise River through diversion canals downstream of Lucky Peak Dam. Figures 4-11 and 4-12 show the boundaries of the irrigation districts in Ada County and the locations of the diversion canals relative to Barber Dam. Table 4-7 is a list of water rights by irrigation district and diversion location between Lucky Peak Dam and Glenwood Bridge. The list also includes water rights for other major water uses such as municipal water and aesthetics. Note that this list is not meant to be all inclusive of every water right or holder (IDWR, 2018). Irrigation districts downstream of Barber Dam have expressed concerns about impacts on their operations due to Project outflows.

32 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: Ada County (2011) Figure 4-11. Irrigation Districts in Ada County

33 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: IDEQ (1999) Figure 4-12. Diversion Canals along the Boise River

34 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Table 4-7. Major Water Right Holders between Lucky Peak Dam and Glenwood Bridge Diversion Water Priority Volume Owner Beneficial Uses Rate Right Date (AFA) (cfs) Diversion Dam, New York and Penitentiary Canals 63-251A 3/23/1900 Irrigation 218.24 -- Diversion to storage 1349.29 -- 63-301A 12/14/1903 Irrigation from storage -- 173,100 63-302A 6/16/1909 Irrigation 631.52 -- Reclamation 63-367 6/16/1909 Power 1500 -- 63-373A 4/1/1909 Irrigation 291.36 -- 63-2388A 8/18/1924 Irrigation 298.83 -- 63-32579 2/15/1929 Irrigation storage -- 4060 63-136 9/1/1864 Irrigation 20 -- 63-200A 8/20/1888 Irrigation 8.9 -- 63-233K 10/1/1887 Irrigation 1.2 -- Boise Project Board of 63-2392F 9/13/1927 Irrigation 7.65 -- Control 63-9206 1/6/1979 Power 597 -- 63-33329 1/8/2010 Power 80 -- 63-33599 11/15/2011 Power 117.2 -- Boise Kuna Irrigation 63-26671 5/1/1866 Irrigation 8 -- District Boise Kuna and New 63-372 3/23/1900 Irrigation 58.86 -- York Irrigation Districts Surprise Valley Diversion and Nearby Vicinity 63-198AJ 6/1/1877 Irrigation 0.4 -- Nampa & Meridian 63-199B 5/1/1878 Irrigation 169.6 -- Irrigation District 63-200B 8/20/1888 Irrigation 361.94 -- 63-30181 6/1/1864 Irrigation 0.2 -- Boise Valley Irrigation 63-147B 6/1/1865 Irrigation 3.97 892.8 Ditch Co Industrial 5 240 Micron Technology 63-12420 6/6/1997 Ground Water 3.34 162 Recharge Harris Ranch Owners 63-184 6/1/1869 Irrigation 2.24 504 Association 63-31409 11/16/2001 Municipal & GWR 20 -- United Water 63-31871 12/31/1963 Irrigation 35.21 9247.5 Barber Dam and Barber Pool Impoundment Fulcrum, LLC 63-10028 4/28/1983 Power 2000 1,445,400 Idaho Foundation for 63-17034 11/16/1904 Wildlife storage -- 360 Parks and Lands Ridenbaugh Canal 63-251C 3/23/1900 Irrigation 0.13 --

35 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Diversion Water Priority Volume Owner Beneficial Uses Rate Right Date (AFA) (cfs) 63-301C 12/14/1903 Irrigation 0.8 -- Reclamation 63-302C 6/16/1909 Irrigation 0.38 -- (Nampa Meridian for Settlers) 63-373C 4/1/1909 Irrigation 0.17 -- 63-2388C 8/18/1924 Irrigation 0.18 -- 63-198AJ 6/1/1877 Irrigation 0.4 -- 63-199B 5/1/1878 Irrigation 169.6 -- Nampa and Meridian 63-200B 8/20/1888 Irrigation 361.94 -- Irrigation District 63-2392B 9/13/1927 Irrigation 3.7 -- 63-30181 6/1/1864 Irrigation 0.2 -- Boise Valley Irrigation 63-31198 6/1/1865 Irrigation 0.11 24.7 Ditch Co 63-31833 6/1/1865 Irrigation 0.2 45 Drainage District #4 63-31936 8/13/1925 Irrigation 1.03 -- Bubb Canal 63-242B 5/1/1889 Irrigation 0.86 -- 63-243F 5/1/1889 Irrigation 0.02 -- Irrigation 0.42 -- 63-243G 5/1/1889 Mitigation 0.92 207 Irrigation 1.66 -- 63-280 4/1/1865 South Boise Mutual Mitigation by non-use 0.14 31.5 Irrigation Co 63-281 4/1/1865 Irrigation 0.5 -- 63-282 4/1/1870 Irrigation 0.3 -- Irrigation 0.6 135 63-283A 4/1/1870 Mitigation by non-use 0.1 22.5 63-284A 3/1/1889 Irrigation 0.84 -- 63-2392E 9/13/1927 Irrigation 2.25 -- Rossi Mill Ditch 63-148C 6/1/1865 Irrigation 9.13 -- 63-149A 6/1/1865 Aesthetic, Wildlife 40 -- 63-150 6/1/1865 Irrigation 0.8 -- 63-185A 6/1/1871 Irrigation 0.74 -- South Boise Water Co Aesthetic 0.01 -- 63-185B 6/1/1871 Irrigation 0.99 -- Mitigation by non-use 0.06 -- 63-2392C 9/13/1927 Irrigation 1.5 -- 63-2392D 9/13/1927 Irrigation 0.3 -- Boise City Canal Aesthetic 6.35 -- Boise City Canal Co 63-20041 6/1/1866 Aesthetic storage -- 46.44 Diversion to storage 6.35 --

36 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Diversion Water Priority Volume Owner Beneficial Uses Rate Right Date (AFA) (cfs) Irrigation 29.25 -- Mitigation 0.09 21 Municipal 0.68 -- Stockwater 0.17 -- Boise Valley Irrigation 63-147D 6/1/1865 Irrigation 0.79 190 Ditch Co Drainage District #2 63-31937 7/13/1923 Irrigation 3.01 -- Marden Water Treatment Plant 63-169F 6/1/1868 Municipal 0.81 199 63-243E 5/1/1889 Municipal 3.3 682 United Water Idaho 63-243H 5/1/1889 Municipal 0.93 172 Inc. 63-12055 9/8/1993 Municipal 24.8 -- 63-31409 11/16/2001 Municipal & GWR 20 -- 63-31871 12/31/1963 Irrigation 35.21 9247.5 Settlers Canal 63-251B 3/23/1900 Irrigation 0.73 -- 63-301B 12/14/1903 Irrigation 4.49 -- Reclamation 63-302B 6/16/1909 Irrigation 2.1 -- 63-373B 4/1/1909 Irrigation 0.97 -- 63-2388B 8/18/1924 Irrigation 0.99 -- Aesthetic storage 0.06 22.7 63-230L 10/17/1884 Irrigation 97.31 -- Aesthetic 0.18 35.5 Aesthetic storage -- 5 Settlers Irrigation 63-230M 10/17/1884 Irrigation 0.6 135 District Irrigation from storage -- 5 Irrigation storage -- 5 63-231D 6/1/1891 Irrigation 73.055 -- 63-257 4/1/1883 Irrigation 1 -- Fairview Acres Water 63-121 6/1/1886 Irrigation 13.4 -- Users Association 63-122 6/1/1891 Irrigation 0.54 -- 63-124H 6/1/1864 Irrigation 0.14 -- 63-199A 5/1/1878 Irrigation 0.4 -- Farm Credit Services 63-230E 10/13/1884 Irrigation 0.06 -- & Farwest 63-161CD 5/1/1866 Irrigation 1.14 -- 63-161CE 5/1/1866 Irrigation 0.2 -- Irrigation 0.6 135 63-164A 6/1/1866 City of Boise Aesthetic 0.8 189 63-164C 6/1/1866 Municipal 0.9 --

37 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Diversion Water Priority Volume Owner Beneficial Uses Rate Right Date (AFA) (cfs) 63-32816 5/1/1866 Irrigation 0.02 -- Esther Simplot and Bernadine Quinn Riverside Parks 63-32350 8/30/1956 Municipal storage -- 560 City of Boise 63-32351 8/30/1956 Municipal storage -- 140 63-32352 8/30/1956 Municipal storage -- 220 Thurman Mill Canal 63-135 6/1/1864 Irrigation 3.3 -- 63-176 6/1/1869 Irrigation 1.6 -- 63-193 6/1/1876 Irrigation 0.44 -- 63-210 6/1/1880 Irrigation 2.4 -- 63-211 10/20/1880 Irrigation 0.9 -- 63-221 6/1/1883 Irrigation 0.9 -- Thurman Mill Ditch Co Aesthetic storage 0.16 -- 63-250 7/1/1895 Diversion to storage -- 23.9 Irrigation 0.5 -- 63-30125 6/1/1865 Irrigation 1.86 -- 63-30129 6/1/1872 Irrigation 2.1 -- 63-30130 6/1/1868 Irrigation 15.48 -- 63-30131 6/1/1882 Irrigation 6 -- Irrigation 2.15 -- 63-192 6/1/1876 Aesthetic storage -- 26.3 Diversion to storage 0.15 -- Irrigation 0.37 -- Warm Springs Ditch 63-216C 6/1/1889 Aesthetic storage -- 4.7 Co. Diversion to storage 0.03 -- Irrigation 4.73 -- 63-19425 6/1/1882 Aesthetic storage -- 57.8 Diversion to storage 0.33 -- Drainage District #4 63-31936 8/13/1925 Irrigation 11.42 -- Farms Union and Boise Valley Canals 63-120G 6/1/1864 Irrigation 1.8 -- 63-123C 6/1/1864 Irrigation 8.4 -- 63-124Q 6/1/1864 Irrigation 0.1 -- 63-125J 6/1/1871 Irrigation 0.26 -- Farmers Union Ditch 63-126F 6/1/1891 Irrigation 0.08 -- Co. 63-165M 6/1/1866 Irrigation 1.69 -- 63-198AG 6/1/1877 Irrigation 3.12 -- 63-248 7/2/1894 Irrigation 110 -- 63-297 7/2/1894 Irrigation 54.46 --

38 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Diversion Water Priority Volume Owner Beneficial Uses Rate Right Date (AFA) (cfs) 63-21729 5/20/1926 Irrigation 1.8 -- 63-2360 7/19/1921 Irrigation 1.2 -- Aesthetic 0.17 -- Aesthetic storage -- 43.8 Diversion to storage 0.71 -- Boise Valley Irrigation Irrigation 48.8 10,146.50 Ditch Co. 63-31832 6/1/1865 Irrigation from storage -- 14.5 Irrigation storage -- 14.5 Mitigation 0.05 8.8 Mitigation by non-use 0.32 67 Capitol View Irrigation 63-123E 6/1/1864 Irrigation 7 -- Inc. 63-18700 2/17/1929 Irrigation 0.91 -- Drainage District #2 63-31937 7/13/1923 Irrigation 31.02 -- Source: IDWR (2018)

4.4 Fish and Aquatic Resources

4.4.1 Existing Aquatic Habitat and Fish Communities The Boise River is a major tributary of the Snake River and drains an area of about 4,100 square miles. The headwaters of the Boise River originate in the Sawtooth Mountains of Idaho at elevations in excess of 10,000 feet. It flows in a westerly direction for about 200 miles to its confluence with the Snake River near Parma, Idaho. The Boise River has three major mainstem reservoirs—Anderson Ranch, Arrowrock, and Lucky Peak Reservoirs—and one large off-stream impoundment—Lake Lowell. The four large reservoirs have a combined storage capacity of 1,143,249 acre-feet, and the storage is used for irrigation, flood control, recreation, hydropower, and instream flows.

Because of its wide range in elevations, geographic features, and water uses, the Boise River has a variety of habitat types and fish species. The basin has major population centers in the state (Boise, Caldwell, and Nampa), has greater than 350,000 acres of irrigated cropland, and is home to some of Idaho’s earliest mining, logging, and hydroelectric developments. Historical human- caused impacts have severely degraded aquatic habitat in some parts of the basin.

The Project (RM 59) is located in the lower Boise River segment of the Boise River Watershed, which begins at Lucky Peak Dam and flows for 64 miles to its confluence with the Snake River. This reach includes a variety of urban and agricultural settings and has been heavily affected by associated land and water uses (MacCoy, 2004). Flows are regulated for both agricultural demands and flood control, and the regulated flows have altered the channel throughout this reach. From the mouth of the Boise River upstream to Star, Idaho (RM 39), low summer flows and poor water quality affect sport fish production. This section of river, however, supports a warmwater fishery for largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, and channel catfish. From Star upstream to Lucky Peak Dam, which includes the Project reach, the river changes from a

39 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

warmwater to a coldwater fishery. Mountain whitefish make up the bulk of the game fish biomass with hatchery rainbow trout, wild rainbow trout, and brown trout supporting the bulk of the fishery. When available, surplus hatchery Chinook salmon adults are stocked in the summer, and hatchery steelhead adults are stocked in the fall, creating intense fisheries in this reach (IDFG, 2013). The Boise River, however, is no longer accessible to anadromous species, which currently ascend the Snake River as far upstream as the Hells Canyon Dam (constructed in 1967). Hells Canyon Dam is located more than 100 miles downstream of the Boise River’s confluence with the Snake River. The Hells Canyon/Oxbow/Brownlee Dam Complex does not have fish passage facilities for passing fish upstream of the complex.

The Project reach of the Boise River extends from Boise River Diversion Dam, located about 2.4 river miles upstream of Barber Dam, to a low-head diversion dam located about 0.6 river mile downstream of the Project near the Eckert Road Bridge (Figure 4-13). Existing habitat in the upstream segment within approximately 1 mile of Boise River Diversion Dam transitions from shallow riverine riffle/run to deeper run, entering the backwater from Barber Dam. The former shallow impoundment associated with Barber Dam (constructed in 1904 to create a log-holding pond to support the nearby Barber Lumber Mill [Corps, 2002a]) has mostly filled in with sediment, and the Boise River flows through multiple channels around islands in the former impoundment area (Figure 4-1). These channels are primarily run habitat with a sand/gravel substrate, becoming more lacustrine closer to the dam. The Project impoundment has an area of 75 acres at the normal pool elevation of 2,778.2 feet and averages 4 feet in depth. The 0.6-mile downstream segment of the Boise River downstream of Barber Dam is primarily riffle/run with a substrate of gravel/cobble. The Boise River downstream of the diversion dam at the Eckert Road Bridge supports substantial recreational fishing and boating/floating.

IDFG, USGS, Trout Unlimited, and Braun and Walser (2011) conducted several fisheries surveys on the lower Boise River including the Project reach since 1974; they are summarized by Boise River Enhancement Network (2016). These surveys demonstrate that although the Project is located in the lower reach of the Boise River most heavily affected by humans, the Project vicinity still supports a coldwater fishery consisting of both wild and hatchery rainbow and brown trout, but mountain whitefish dominate the coldwater fish community. However, IDFG creel surveys found that wild trout compose only a minor portion of the angler harvest in the lower Boise River (less than 5 percent), while hatchery rainbow trout compose 40 to 60 percent of the harvest (Boise River Enhancement Network, 2016). IDFG (2017) recently conducted an electrofishing survey in the lower Boise River within the Project vicinity: from the Boise River Diversion Dam to Barber Dam and from Barber Dam to the East Parkcenter Bridge, about 2 miles downstream of Barber Dam. During the survey, IDFG found wild juvenile rainbow trout in both reaches, although higher numbers were found downstream of Barber Dam. IDFG (2017) also reports that hatchery rainbow trout dominated the angler harvest with the wild trout population underutilized by anglers. No threatened or endangered species of fish have been reported for the lower Boise River (IDFG, 2018). The Boise River is within the historical range of the federally listed threatened bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), but none have been reported in the lower Boise River.

40 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: ESRI (2018b) Figure 4-13. Boise River Project Reach

41 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Table 4-8 lists the common and scientific names of fish species reported in the Project reach of the Boise River. Table 4-8. Fish Species Found in Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Area of the Boise River

Common Name Scientific Name Resident Species Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni Rainbow trout Oncorynchus mykiss Umatilla dace Rhinichthys umatilla Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae Redside shiner Richardsonius balteatus Chiselmouth Acrocheilus alutaceus Bridgelip sucker Catastomus columbianus Largescale sucker Catastomus macrocheilus Mottled sculpin Cottus bairdi Shorthead sculpin Cottus confusus Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Stocked Species Steelhead trout Oncorynchus mykiss Rainbow trout Oncorynchus mykiss Brown trout Salmo trutta Chinook salmon Oncorynchus tshawytscha Sources: Corps (2002a); MacCoy (2006); IDFG (2013)

4.4.1.1 Mussels Specific mussel surveys were not identified for the lower Boise River, but review of A Guide to Southern Idaho’s Freshwater Mollusks (Lysne, 2009) found that several species of snails and clams, including some invasive species, may occur in the lower Boise River. However, no threatened or endangered mussel species have been reported for the lower Boise River (IDFG, 2018).

42 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.4.2 Essential Fish Habitat The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act requires federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service on all actions that may adversely affect essential fish habitat (EFH). Because all anadromous species are blocked from upstream passage at the Hells Canyon Dam on the Snake River, no EFH is located in the lower Boise River or in the Project area, and no EFH consultation is required.

4.4.3 Effects of Project on Temporal and Spatial Distribution and Any Associated Trends Project operations have minimal effects on the fishery resources in the lower Boise River. Instead, the operation of the large upstream reservoirs (Anderson Ranch, Arrowrock and Lucky Peak) control the flow regime of the lower Boise River, managing these flows for irrigation, flood control, recreation, and instream flows. Flows released from these upstream reservoirs are passed through the Project on a run-of-river basis because the Project has minimal reservoir storage capacity and the capability to regulate flow releases. Barber Dam is one of several dams on the lower Boise River, most of which are used for irrigation diversions and flood control, so aquatic habitat on the river is already segmented in multiple locations. While Barber Dam blocks the upstream movement of resident fishes in the short river reach downstream of the dam, these species do not require upstream passage to complete their life history requirements, and, in fact, recent fishery surveys show continued natural production of wild trout. The Project does not obstruct the downstream movement of resident fishes; downstream-migrating fishes can pass over the spillway or through the powerhouse turbines. The lower Boise River, including the Project vicinity, supports a substantial recreational fishery.

4.5 Wildlife and Botanical Resources

4.5.1 Wildlife Resources The area around the Barber Dam impoundment is generally known as Barber Pool and is considered a unique habitat for a variety of wildlife, including fish, waterfowl, birds of prey, gamebirds, aquatic furbearing animals, and small and large mammals. The 425-acre BPCA, which includes the 75-acre Barber Dam impoundment, was the subject of a 2002 Corps study that documented the BPCA wildlife resources and wildlife habitat (Corps, 2002a,b). Several species of deer and elk are known to use the Project vicinity during migration periods and the winter (Table 4-9). Table 4-9 presents a list of the predatory mammals and a number of small mammals found in the area of the BPCA (Corps, 2002a). Idaho state-listed sensitive species are marked with an asterisk (IDFG, 2017).

Table 4-9. Mammals Associated with Barber Pool Conservation Area

Common Name Scientific Name Vagrant Shrew Sorex vagrans Little Brown Myotis* Myotis lucifugus Long-eared Myotis Myotis evotis Silver-haired Bat* Lasionycteris noctivagans Big Brown Bat Eptesicus fuscus

43 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Common Name Scientific Name Hoary Bat* Lasiurus cinereus Townsend’s Big-eared Bat* Corynorhinus townsendii Long-legged Myotis Myotis volans Western Small-footed myotis* Myotis ciliolabrum Pallid Bat Antrozous pallidus Mountain Cottontail Sylvilagus nuttallii Black-tailed Jackrabbit Lepus californicus Least Chipmunk Tamias minimus Yellow-bellied Marmot Marmota flaviventris Townsend’s Ground Squirrel Spermophilus townsendii Fox Squirrel Sciurus niger Townsend’s Pocket Gopher Thomomys townsendii American Beaver Castor canadensis Deer Mouse Peromyscus maniculatus Merriam’s Shrew Sorex merriami Bushy-tailed Woodrat Neotoma cinerea Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum Meadow Vole Microtus pennsylvanicus Western Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys megalotis House Mouse Mus musculus Coyote Canis latrans Red Fox Vulpes Common Raccoon Procyon lotor Long-tailed weasel Mustela frenata Mink Mustela vison Ermine Mustela erminea Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus American Badger Taxidea taxus Western Spotted skunk Spilogale gracilis Striped skunk Mephitis River Otter Lutra canadensis Bobcat Lynx rufus Cougar Felis concolor Mule Deer Odocoileus hemionus

44 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Common Name Scientific Name White-tailed Deer Odocoileus virginianus Elk Cervus elaphus Source: Corps (2002a)

The Project vicinity supports a diverse avian population including waterfowl, gamebirds, birds of prey, songbirds, and shore and wading birds. More than 200 bird species have been documented in the BPCA (Corps, 2002b). Table 4-10 presents a list of birds found in the BPCA. Idaho state- listed sensitive species are marked with an asterisk (IDFG, 2017).

Table 4-10. Birds associated with the Barber Pool Conservation Area

Common Name Scientific Name Common Loon* Gavia immer Western Grebe* Aechmophorus occidentalis Eared Grebe Podiceps nigricollis Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps Red-necked Grebe Podiceps grisegena American White Pelican* Pelecanus erythrorhynchos Double-crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus Great blue Heron Ardea herodias Black-crowned Night Heron Nycticorax American Bittern* Botaurus lentiginosus Great Egret Ardea alba Snowy Egret Egretta thula Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis Green Heron Butorides virescens Canada Goose Branta canadensis Greater white-fronted Goose Anser albifrons Snow Goose Chen caerulescens Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Northern Pintail Anas acuta American Wigeon Anas americana Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata Gadwall Anas strepera Blue-winged Teal Anas discors Cinnamon Teal Anas cyanoptera Green-winged Teal Anas crecca

45 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Common Name Scientific Name Wood Duck Aix sponsa Redhead Aythya americana Canvasback Aythya valisineria Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula Barrow’s Goldeneye Bucephala islandica Bufflehead Bucephala albeola Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis Common Merganser Mergus merganser Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni Cooper’s Hawk Accipiter cooperii Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus Rough-legged Hawk Buteo lagopus Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Osprey Pandion haliaetus Prairie Falcon Falco mexicanus Merlin Falco columbarius American Kestrel Falco sparverius Wild Turkey Meleagris gallopavo Blue Grouse Dendragapus obscurus Sage Grouse* Centrocercus urophasianus California Quail Callipepla californica Mountain Quail* Oreortyx pictus Gray Partridge Perdix Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus

46 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Common Name Scientific Name Sandhill Crane* Grus canadensis Sora Porzana carolina American Coot Fulica americana American Avocet Recurvirostra americana Killdeer Charadrius vociferus Long-billed Curlew* Numenius americanus Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularia Willet Catoptrophorus emipalmatus Greater Yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Black-necked Stilt Himantopus mexicanus Least Sandpiper Calidris minutilla Western Sandpiper Calidris mauri Wilson’s Phalarope Phalaropus tricolor Common Snipe Gallinago California Gull* Larus californicus Ring-billed Gull* Larus delawarensis Franklin’s Gull* Larus pipixcan Herring Gull Larus argentatus Caspian Tern* Sterna caspia Forster’s Tern Sterna forsteri Rock Dove Columba livia Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura Yellow-billed Cuckoo* Coccyzus americanus Barn owl Tyto alba Western Screech Owl Otus kennicottii Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus Long-eared Owl Asio otus Short-eared Owl* Asio flammeus Boreal Owl Aegolius funereus Northern Saw-whet Owl Aegolius acadicus Northern Pygmy Owl Glaucidium gnoma Western Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia Common Nighthawk* Chordeiles minor

47 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Common Name Scientific Name White-throated Swift Aeronautes saxatalis Vaux’s Swift Chaetura vauxi Black Swift* Cypseloides niger Calliope Hummingbird Stellula calliope Black-chinned Hummingbird Archilochus alexandri Broad-tailed Hummingbird Selasphorus platycercus Rufous Hummingbird Selasphorus rufus Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus Lewis’s Woodpecker* Melanerpes lewis Red-naped Sapsucker Sphyrapicus nuchalis Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tryrannus Western Kingbird Tyrannus verticalis Say’s Phoebe Sayornis saya Least Flycatcher Empidonax minimus Dusky Flycatcher Empidonax oberholseri Olive-sided Flycatcher* Contopus borealis Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii Cordilleran Flycatcher Empidonax occidentalis Hammond’s Flycatcher Empidonax hammondii Western Wood Pewee Contopus sordidulus Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor Cliff Swallow Hirundo pyrrhonota Bank Swallow Riparia Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis Violet-green Swallow Tachycinata thalassina Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata Stellar Jay Cyanocitta stelleri Black-billed Magpie Pica Clark’s Nutcracker* Nucifraga columbiana

48 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Common Name Scientific Name Common Raven Corvus corax American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos Black-capped Chickadee Parus atricapillus Mountain Chickadee Parus gambeli American Dipper Cinclus mexicanus Red-breasted Nuthatch Sitta Canadensis Brown Creeper Certhia Americana House Wren Troglodytes aedon Canyon Wren Catherpes mexicanus Rock Wren Salpinctes obsoletus Winter Wren Troglodytes Bewick’s wren Thryomanes bewickii Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris Gray Catbird Dumetella carolinensis American Robin Turdus migratorius Swainson’s Thrush Catharus ustulatus Hermit Thrush Catharus guttatus Varied Thrush Ixoreus naevius Sage Thrasher* Oreoscoptes montanus Townsend’s Solitaire Myadestes townsendi Mountain Bluebird Sialia currocoides Western Bluebird Sialia mexicana Golden-crowned Kinglet Regulus satrapa Ruby-crowned Kinglet Regulus calendula Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea American Pipit Anthus rebescens Bohemian Waxwing Bombycilla garrulus Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum Northern Shrike Lanius excubitor Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus European Starling Sturnus vulgaris Plumbeous Vireo Vireo plumbeus Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus Cassin’s Vireo Vireo cassinii

49 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Common Name Scientific Name Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus Orange-crowned Warbler Vermivora celata Nashville Warbler Vermivora ruficapilla Tennessee Warbler Vermivora peregrina Magnolia Warbler Dendroica magnolia Black-throated Blue Warbler Dendroica virens Townsend’s Warbler Dendroica townsendi Black and White Warbler Mnioltilta varia Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia Yellow-rumped Warbler Dendroica coronata American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapillus Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas Yellow-breasted Chat Icteria virens Wilson’s Warbler Wilsonia pusilla MacGillivray’s Warbler Oporornis tolmiei Western Tanager Piranga ludoviciana House Sparrow Passer domesticus Western Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta Yellow-headed Blackbird Xanthocephalus Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus Brewer’s Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus Great-tailed Grackle Quiscalus mexicanus Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula Brown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater Green-tailed Towhee Pipilo chlorurus Bullock’s Oriole Icterus bullockii Northern Oriole Icterus galbula Black-headed Grosbeak Pheucticus melanocephalus Evening Grosbeak Coccothraustes vespertinus Lazuli Bunting Passerina amoena House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus Cassin’s Finch Carpodacus cassinii Black Rosy Finch* Leucosticte atrata

50 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Common Name Scientific Name Gray-crowned Rosy Finch Leucosticte tephrocotis Pine Siskin Carduelis pinus American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis Lesser Goldfinch Carduelis psaltria Spotted Towhee Pipilo maculatus Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis Lark Sparrow Chondestes grammacus Chipping Sparrow Spizella passerina White-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia American Tree Sparrow Spizella arborea House Sparrow Passer domesticus Brewer’s Sparrow Spizella breweri Vesper Sparrow Pooecetes gramineus Black-throated Sparrow Amphispiza bilineata Fox Sparrow Passerella iliaca Lincoln’s Sparrow Melospiza lincolnii Swamp Sparrow Melospiza Georgiana White-throated Sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis Golden-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia atricaphilla Harris’ Sparrow Zonotrichia querula Dark-eyed Junco Hybci gtenakus Red Crossbill Loxia curvirosta Source: Corps (2002a)

The BPCA also provides habitat for a variety of amphibians and reptiles. Several amphibian and reptile species listed by USFWS as species of concern may be found in the BPCA. These species include Woodhouse’s toad (Bufo woodhousii), western toad (Bufo boreas), northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), Columbia spotted frog (Rana lutieventris), common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), night snake (Hypsiglena torquata), rubber boa (Charina bottae), striped whipsnake (Masticophis taeniatus), and ground snake (Sonora semiannulata) (Corps, 2002a). Of these, western toad, Woodhouse’s toad, northern leopard frog, and Columbia spotted frog are listed as sensitive species in the state of Idaho (IDFG, 2017). A 2002 survey by the Idaho Conservation Data Center found only the western toad and common garter snake in the BPCA (Corps, 2002a).

51 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.5.1 Botanical Resources and Habitat Types The riparian vegetation present in the Project vicinity provides habitat and foraging ground for many of the wildlife species listed in Section 4.5.1. As described in Section 4.6, forested, scrub- shrub, and emergent wetlands are all located within the Project vicinity. Forested wetlands consist of willow, locust, cottonwood, aspen, and poplar trees along the Boise River in the Project vicinity. The predominant tree on both sides of the river and on the islands in Barber Pool is black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa). Smaller shrubs include chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), and wild rose (Rosa sp.) (Bloom and Ada County, 1981). Palustrine scrub-shrub vegetation consists of coyote willow (Salix exigua) and yellow willow (S. lutea). The palustrine emergent vegetation is dominated by cattails (Typha latifolia) with some reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and sedges (Carex lanuginose) (Corps, 2002a).

Riparian vegetation is generally confined to the areas immediately adjacent to the Boise River, and outside that area, the land generally consists of pasture, crops, and residential development (Bloom and Ada County, 1981). Shrub-steppe vegetation is found in these areas away from the river and is composed mainly of gray rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus) and cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum).

4.6 Wetlands and Riparian and Littoral Habitat Wetlands are transitional lands between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water (USFWS, 2003). Wetlands must have one or more of the following three attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes (plants specifically adapted to live in wetlands); (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric (wetland) soil; and (3) the substrate is nonsoil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year (USFWS, 2003). Types of wetlands are classified according to their hydrologic, geomorphic, chemical, and biological characteristics.

Wetlands in the Project vicinity were mapped using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) (USFWS, 1981). Types and location of wetlands in the Project vicinity are shown on Figure 4-14. A total of 97.4 acres of wetlands is present in the Project vicinity. The majority of these wetlands are classified as Riverine (68.8 acres), followed by Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetlands (28.4 acres). A small amount of Freshwater Emergent Wetlands (0.2 acre) and Freshwater Pond (0.1 acre) are also present in the Project vicinity. Table 4-11 presents detailed wetland classifications and total acreages.

52 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Sources: USFWS (2018); ESRI (2018b) Figure 4-14. Wetlands in the Vicinity of the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project

53 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Table 4-11. Wetland Descriptions and Acreage in the Project vicinity.

Total Wetland Type Code Description Acres R—Riverine: This type includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats contained within a channel, with the exception of wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergent, emergent mosses, or lichens. 3—Upper Perennial: This type is characterized by a high gradient. There is no tidal influence, and some water flows all year, except during years of extreme drought. The substrate consists of rock, cobbles, or gravel with occasional patches of sand. The natural dissolved oxygen concentration is normally near Riverine R3UBH 64.2 saturation. The fauna is characteristic of running water, and there are few or no planktonic forms. The gradient is high compared with that of the Lower Perennial Subsystem, and very little floodplain development exists. UB—Unconsolidated Bottom: This type includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats with at least 25% cover of particles smaller than stones (less than 2.4 to 2.8 inches), and a vegetative cover less than 30%. H—Permanently Flooded: Water covers the substrate throughout the year in all years. R—Riverine: See above. 3—Upper Perennial: See above. US—Unconsolidated Shore: This type includes all wetland habitats having two characteristics: (1) unconsolidated substrates with less than 75% areal cover of stones, boulders, or bedrock and; (2) less than 30% areal cover of vegetation. Landforms such as Riverine R3USC 3.2 beaches, bars, and flats are included in the Unconsolidated Shore class. C—Seasonally Flooded: Surface water is present for extended periods especially early in the growing season, but is absent by the end of the growing season in most years. The water table after flooding ceases is variable, extending from saturated to the surface to a water table well below the ground surface. R—Riverine: See above. 4—Intermittent: This type includes channels that contain flowing water only part of the year. When the water is not flowing, it may remain in isolated pools or surface water may be absent. Riverine R4SBC 1.3 SB—Streambed: This type includes all wetlands contained within the Intermittent Subsystem of the Riverine System and all channels of the Estuarine System or of the Tidal Subsystem of the Riverine System that are completely dewatered at low tide. C—Seasonally Flooded: See above.

54 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Total Wetland Type Code Description Acres R—Riverine: See above. 5—Unknown Perennial: This type was created specifically for use when the distinction between lower Riverine R5UBH < 0.1 perennial, upper perennial, and tidal cannot be made from aerial photography and no data is available. UB—Unconsolidated Bottom: See above. H—Permanently Flooded: See above. P—Palustrine: This type includes all nontidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses or lichens and all such wetlands that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean-derived salts is below 0.5 part per thousand (ppt). It also includes wetlands lacking such vegetation but having all of the following four characteristics: (1) area less than 20 acres; (2) active wave-formed or bedrock shoreline features lacking; (3) water depth in the deepest part of basin less than 8.2 feet at low water; and (4) salinity due to ocean-derived salts less than Freshwater 0.5 ppt. Forested/Shrub PFO1/USA 20.4 FO—Forested: This type is characterized by woody Wetland vegetation that is 20 feet tall or taller 1—Broad-leaved Deciduous: This type has woody angiosperms (trees or shrubs) with relatively wide, flat leaves that are shed during the cold or dry season; e.g., black ash (Fraxinus nigra). US—Unconsolidated Shore: See above. A—Temporarily Flooded: Surface water is present for brief periods (from a few days to a few weeks) during the growing season, but the water table usually lies well below the ground surface for the most of the season. P—Palustrine: See above. Freshwater FO—Forested: See above. Forested/Shrub PFO1A 6.4 Wetland 1—Broad-leaved Deciduous: See above. A—Temporarily Flooded: See above. P—Palustrine: See above. SS—Scrub-Shrub: This type includes areas dominated by woody vegetation less than 20 feet tall. The species Freshwater include true shrubs, young trees (saplings), and trees Forested/Shrub PSS1A 1.5 or shrubs that are small or stunted because of Wetland environmental conditions. 1—Broad-leaved Deciduous: See above. A—Temporarily Flooded: See above.

55 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Total Wetland Type Code Description Acres P—Palustrine: See above. EM—Emergent: characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes, excluding mosses and lichens. This vegetation is present for most of the growing season in most years. These wetlands are Freshwater PEM1C 0.2 usually dominated by perennial plants. Emergent Wetland 1—Persistent: This wetland type is dominated by species that normally remain standing at least until the beginning of the next growing season. This subclass is found only in the Estuarine and Palustrine systems. C—Seasonally Flooded: See above. P—Palustrine: See above. UB—Unconsolidated Bottom: See above. Freshwater Pond PUBHh 0.1 H—Permanently Flooded: See above. h—Diked/Impounded: These wetlands have been created or modified by a human-made barrier or dam that obstructs the inflow or outflow of water. Source: USFWS (1993)

4.7 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species The USFWS iPaC system was used to identify species listed as threatened or endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act and critical habitat for any listed species that may exist in the Project vicinity (USFWS, 2018a). Two species are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in the Project vicinity—yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) and slickspot peppergrass (Lepidum papilliferum). No critical habitat for either species is located in the Project vicinity.

Nine bird species that are protected under either the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection act may occur in the Project vicinity. Table 4-12 presents these bird species and the breeding season for each species Idaho state-listed sensitive species are marked with an asterisk (IDFG, 2017).

Table 4-12. Protected Bird Species that may occur in the Project Vicinity

Species Breeding Season Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) December 1 to August 31 Brewer’s Sparrow (Spizella breweri) May 15 to August 10 Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) December 1 to August 31 Green-tailed Towhee (Pipilo chlorurus) Breeds May 1 to August 10 Lewis’s Woodpecker* (Melanerpes lewis) April 20 to September 30 Olive-sided Flycatcher* (Contopus cooperi) May 20 to August 31 Sage Thrasher* (Oreoscoptes montanus) April 15 to August 10

56 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Species Breeding Season Williamson’s Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus May 1 to July 31 thyroides) Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax trailii) May 20 to August 31

4.7.1 State and Federally Listed Species Habitat Requirements Habitat requirements for each federally listed species occurring in the Project vicinity follow.

The yellow-billed cuckoo lives in wooded habitat with dense cover and water nearby, including woodlands with low, scrubby, vegetation, overgrown orchards, abandoned farmland, and dense thickets along streams and marshes. In the Midwest, the yellow-billed cuckoo can be found in shrublands of mixed willow and dogwood and in dense stands of small trees such as American elm. In the central and eastern United States, the yellow-billed cuckoo nests in oaks, beech, hawthorn, and ash. In the West, this species often nests in willows along streams and rivers, and nearby cottonwoods serve as foraging sites (USFWS, 2018b).

Slickspot peppergrass occurs in specialized habitats known as slickspots, which are mini-playas or natric (high sodium soil) sites with distinct clay layers. Slickspot peppergrass tends to be highly reflective, is usually relatively light in color, and occurs dispersed throughout the sagebrush-steppe ecosystem in southwest Idaho. More than 90 percent of the occupied slickspot peppergrass habitat occurs on federal lands with the remaining occupied habitat owned by the state of Idaho private land owners. Slickspot peppergrass grows only in the sagebrush-steppe habitats of southwestern Idaho, including the Snake River Plain, Owyhee Plateau, and adjacent foothills (USFWS, 2018c).

4.8 Recreation and Land Use

4.8.1 Recreation The Project is located in northern Ada County, which encompasses greater than 1,000 square miles in southwestern Idaho and is the most populous county in the state, having an estimated population of more than 450,000 people (Ada County, 2016). Boise’s abundant outdoor recreational opportunities and four-season climate make it one of the most desirable locations to live in the Intermountain Northwest Region for outdoor enthusiasts.

The Boise River flows through downtown Boise and provides a scenic waterway in a metropolitan corridor that provides recreational access along an extensive riverside greenbelt trail system (Figure 4-15). The Boise River Greenbelt is a paved non-motorized urban pathway that runs along the river for most of its linear distance from Lucky Peak Dam downstream to the city of Eagle, Idaho. The Greenbelt diverts from the river near the Eckert Road Bridge downstream of Barber Dam to Warm Springs Avenue and away from the Project vicinity.

Upstream of the Project, the Lucky Peak State Park recreation area, including Sandy Point Park, is popular with recreationists and provides boating, fishing, biking, walking, and swimming.

57 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Sources: City of Boise GIS (2018a,b); IDPR (2018); ESRI (2018b) Figure 4-15. Recreation in the Vicinity of the Barber Dam Project

58 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Several large developed parks and facilities extend from just downstream of Barber Dam to the city of Eagle along the Boise River. Barber Park, owned and operated by Ada County, is a multi-use area with rafting access to the river. Downstream of Barber Park, a “ribbon of jewels” park system—Maryann Williams, Ann Morrison, Julia Davis and Esther Simplot Whitewater parks—managed by Boise Parks and Recreation resides along the river through downtown Boise and provides large open grassy areas, picnic shelters, and restrooms. These parks are used year-round for events and festivals. Not along the river, but just southwest of the Project area, the Simplot Sports Complex provides a large area for soccer and football fields and has restroom facilities (Figure 4-15).

Downstream of the Project on the north side of river near Eckert Road Bridge is where the conceptual Alta Harris Park is proposed to be located. Plans for this park include relocating the Greenbelt adjacent to the park and closer to the Boise River and the Project between the Eckert Road Bridge and Warm Springs Avenue.

Currently, the Project features available for public recreational use include a canoe/kayak takeout and stairway located at river right (north) of the powerhouse and intake and a graveled portage footpath trail that traverses up and over the embankment dam and then skirts outside the fenced area from the north abutment to downstream of the tailrace area. Public access to the powerhouse, intake, and dam is restricted by a fence for security and public safety reasons. In addition, a safety cable with grab lines is strung across the river channel upstream of the intake to assist boaters who may be drawn toward the intake as they approach the portage take-out. The portage trail is popular with local walkers and fishermen to access the river downstream of the Project. Power plant operations staff reports that the canoe portage gets little use, most of which occurs on weekends. The Project was exempted from FERC Form 80 recreation use reporting requirements per FERC Order dated April 10, 1997, after reporting no use in March 1997.

Management of the shoreline and lands surrounding the Barber Dam impoundment is directed by IFPL’s Barber Pool Conservation Area Master Plan, which serves as the guiding document for future management of the BPCA and excludes further development on the river upstream of Barber Dam to the Highway 21 Bridge (Corps, 2002b). Existing landowners on the south side of the Project, and users of the existing canoe and kayak portage near the powerhouse can access the BPCA on non-motorized boats (Figure 3-2).

59 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

The Project vicinity is not located within or adjacent to a National Wild and Scenic River System waterway, and it is not under study for inclusion in the National Trails System or Wilderness Area. Further, the Boise River is not designated as part of, or under study for inclusion in, the National Wild and Scenic River System and it is not a state-protected river segment.

4.8.2 Land Use The Project area is located along the Boise River in an area classified as Parks/Open Space (Ada County, 2007) surrounded by urban residential housing developments. The existing Project boundary encompasses the immediate area of the dam, powerhouse, and tailrace area downstream of the dam, and approximately 1 mile upstream into the BPCA. The Project facilities and most of the immediately surrounding Project lands are owned by Ada County and are leased by Fulcrum. IFPL owns and manages most of the land surrounding the Barber Dam impoundment as part of the BPCA. In addition, Ada County and Fulcrum are currently revising the Project boundary to incorporate additional land rights recently or soon to be acquired for dam safety purposes.

The BPCA is a locally important wildlife viewing and habitat area that supports a population of wintering bald eagles and has quality wetland, riparian, and shrub-steppe habitat that is home to more than 200 species of birds and 60 species of reptiles, amphibians, and mammals (Corps, 2002a). This area is managed to restrict human access effects on wildlife and their habitat.

Lands to the north and south of the Project have experienced rapid urbanization in recent years as part of the Harris Ranch and the Surprise Valley housing developments. Before these developments, much of this land was used for agriculture and grazing after the Barber Mill burned down and was removed.

A mix of older, established residential properties and agriculture occur along the border of the southern extent of the Project boundary upstream and downstream of Barber Dam and will remain during any new license period.

60 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Source: Ada County (2018) Note: Zone codes and definitions follow this figure. Figure 4-16. Land Use and Ownership in the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Vicinity

61 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Zone Code Zone Code Definition A-1 Open Space A-1/DA Open Space/Development Agreement District A-2 Open Space C-4D Planned Commercial C-2 General Commercial L-OD/DA Limited Office/Development Agreement District M2 General Industrial R-1B Single-Family Residential R-1BDA Single-Family Residential/Development Agreement District R-1C Single-Family Residential R-1C/DA Single-Family Residential/Development Agreement District R-2D/DA Combined Residential/Development Agreement District R1 Estate Residential R6 Medium Density Residential RP Rural Preservation RUT Rural-Urban Transition SP-01 Harris Ranch Specific Plan District SP-02 Barber Valley Specific Plan District

4.9 Aesthetics and Visual Resources The main scenic and aesthetic resources in the Project area are the Boise River and its adjacent riparian habitat and the BPCA, which will be protected from future development and the effects of surrounding urbanization. The Project’s continued run-of-river operation will not affect this unique setting.

62 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

The Boise foothills provide a scenic backdrop to the north of the Project. Visitors on the river access the portage and footpath and will continue to enjoy the scenic beauty of the river and historic nature of the Project facilities.

During the irrigation season (April through mid-October), river flows not used for power production cascade over the spillway section of Barber Dam and provide a scenic visual experience to visitors below the dam. During the non-irrigation season (November through March) the pool above the dam is held just below the elevation of the spillway to prevent icing and spalling of the concrete.

4.10 Cultural Resources Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act as amended and its implementing regulations found at 36 CFR 800 require that the effects of a federal undertaking on historic properties be assessed. In this case, the federal “undertaking” is the relicensing of the Project.

Historic properties are defined as any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register). The term “cultural resources” includes properties that have not been evaluated for eligibility for listing in the National Register. Traditional cultural properties are a type of historic property eligible for the National Register because of their association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living community that: (1) are rooted in that community’s history; or (2) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community (Parker and King, 1998).

4.10.1 Project History In 1902, the Barber Lumber Company of Wisconsin purchased 25,000 acres of land along Grime and More Creeks northeast of Boise. James T. Barber, Sumner G. Moon, and their colleagues sought a local means to process lumber acquired from these lands, and in 1904, they constructed a mill, dam, and power plant on the Boise River just southeast of town. By November 1905, the power plant was in operation and provided electricity to Boise under contract with Capital Electric Light, Motor, and Gas Company. However, the Barber Lumber Company had difficulty transporting logs down the two creeks to the Boise River where they would then be carried to the

63 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

mill. Heavy snow precluded transport during the winter, and during the warmer seasons, high water and silt from upstream mining operations clogged the log pond. The only option was to store the logs in the water during the winter, which resulted in a lower-grade lumber product. The mill closed in 1908 but was reopened in 1915 after the Intermountain Railroad Company constructed a railroad between Centerville and Barber Dam. At this same time, the Barber Lumber Company merged with the Payette Lumber and Manufacturing Company to become the Boise Payette Lumber Company. The mill operated until 1934 when it was closed and dismantled. Eventually, the original power plant also became non-operational.

In 1982, Ada County, the City of Boise and Arthur L. Bloom filed an application to construct a new powerhouse at Barber Dam; FERC’s December 29, 1983, Order Issuing License approved this proposal. New headgates were proposed for the powerhouse in 1987 to facilitate periodic access to the turbines, and this work required modifications inside and outside the powerhouse structure. In its documentation of the proposed work provided to the Idaho State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) (Blaser, 1987), Ada County provided Project details and proposed measures to avoid or minimize effects on the historic structural features. In a letter dated August 21, 1987, the Idaho SHPO commented that installing the new gates could result in an adverse visual effect on the powerhouse unless carefully designed. The Idaho SHPO also expressed concern about the proposed removal of the log screen and the original wood gates and requested that the Licensees initiate Section 106 consultation to seek a way to avoid or mitigate these effects. In a subsequent letter dated October 21, 1987, the Idaho SHPO provided additional comments on the proposed rehabilitation effort and determined that the overall Project would not adversely affect the historic character of the power plant and dam. However, the Idaho SHPO requested that that these be addressed and stated that the structures should be documented according to Historic American Engineering Record guidelines prior to commencement of modifications. On November 9, 1987, the Applicants filed a Cultural Resources Management Plan with FERC that included copies of the two letters from the Idaho SHPO. This plan did not include Historic American Engineering Record documentation but provided other measures designed to mitigate the impacts of the rehabilitation project on the historic dam and powerhouse. The Commission approved the Cultural Resources Management Plan in its Order issued on December 15, 1987.

Repairs to the Project spillway were proposed in 2007. By letter filed with FERC on February 19, 2008, the Idaho SHPO expressed concern regarding the potential effects of these repairs on the dam and historic timber crib and stated that the work would result in an adverse effect to the structure. It its letter, the Idaho SHPO stated that consultation had resulted in agreement on a number of measures that would be undertaken to resolve these effects. Documentation of completion of these measures was submitted to the Idaho SHPO on April 8, 2009, and a Final Construction Report was filed with FERC on May 20, 2009. The Project has not had any major modifications since that time.

4.10.2 Cultural Sites The Applicants conducted a record search of archives housed at the Idaho SHPO to determine if any “existing discovery measures” such as surveys, inventories, and limited subsurface testing work had been previously undertaken within or adjacent to the Project boundary. The results of the record search indicated that of 60 cultural resource investigations that have been conducted

64 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

within 1 mile of the Project area, only 2 of these studies had been conducted within the Project boundary itself. These studies include a study completed by the Idaho State Historical Society for the Boise River Drainage System (Idaho State Historical Society, 1976) and a study of the Barber Mill and Penitentiary Canal completed for Harris Family Ranch (Science Applications International Corporation [SAIC], 1999). Cultural resources surveys of two transmission line projects (SAIC, 1997a,b) and an area associated with the Surprise Valley Development (SAIC, 1994) were also conducted directly adjacent to the Project boundary. An additional study was also referenced on two of the archaeological site records provided with the record search results. These records indicated that a reconnaissance survey was conducted for Ada County (Ada County, 1989, as referenced by Davis and Bauer, 1989b,c). The Applicants are also aware of other studies undertaken within the Project boundary that are not part of the SHPO’s records. These include two supplemental cultural resources surveys (SAIC, 2006, 1996a) and an oral history summary of the Harris Ranch area conducted with Harris family members and ranch hands (Belt Collins Northwest, LLC, 2006).

Together, these studies resulted in the documentation of 46 cultural resource sites (21 archaeological sites, 16 historic-era resources, 8 linear resources, and 1 historic district) within 1 mile of the Project area. Within the Project boundary, five historic-period resources have been previously recorded and no prehistoric sites have been documented. Table 4-13 provides a summary of these five resources. No traditional cultural properties are known to be present within the Project boundary.

Table 4-13. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within the Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Boundary

Site National Register Number Description Source for Recordation Date Eligibility 01-2629 Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Idaho State Historical Society Listed Historical Archaeological Site (1978) 10AA137 Barber Dam and Powerhouse Ostrogorsky (1977); Davis and Undetermined Bauer (1989a) (January 1, 1977) 10AA439 Barber Lumber Mill Idaho State Historical Society Listed (1978); SAIC (1996b) 01-15201 Barber Dam Brick-lined Cistern Davis and Bauer (1989b) Unknown 01-15202 Barber Dam Wooden Structure Davis and Bauer (1989c) Unknown

4.10.2.1 Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site (01-2629) The Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site consists of a cottage and outbuilding, several concrete foundations, the remains of a railroad spur, the powerhouse, dam, and earth embankment. This site was documented in 1977 and listed on the National Register in 1978 as a significant example of early hydropower technology, for its contribution to the economy of Idaho, and for its potential to provide important historical and industrial data (Idaho State Historical Society, 1978). The boundaries of the site include two individual sites 10AA137 (Barber Dam and powerhouse, residence, and historic debris) and 10AA439 (Barber Dam Lumber Mill).

65 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.10.2.2 Barber Dam and Powerhouse (10AA137) Barber Dam and powerhouse were originally recorded in 1977 and described as including the Barber Dam and powerhouse, a caretaker’s residence and outbuildings, and brick and metal construction debris (Ostrogorsky, 1977). Additional information was provided in an updated site record prepared in 1989 (Davis and Bauer, 1989a). While a table provided by the Idaho SHPO with the record search results indicates that the National Register eligibility of this site is “undetermined,” it as part of the Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site (01-2629), which is listed on the National Register. The site itself is therefore eligible for listing. This eligibility is confirmed by information provided on the 1989 site record and subsequent correspondence with the Idaho SHPO.

4.10.2.3 Barber Dam Lumber Mill (10AA439) This site was originally recorded in 1977 as part of the documentation of the Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site (01-2629). A cultural resources survey for the Harris Ranch project (SAIC, 1996a) and updated site record describes it as the remains of the 1906 Barber Lumber Mill consisting of concrete foundations; two concrete standing structures; bricks, wire, iron, and concrete debris (SAIC, 1996b). The record notes that the entire site appeared to have been bulldozed. The Harris Ranch survey report concludes that while the site is in “poor condition,” because portions of it were previously recorded as part of the Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site (01-2629), which is listed on the National Register, all structures and materials associated with the mill are also eligible for listing.

4.10.2.4 Barber Dam Brick-lined Cistern (01-15201) This structure was recorded in 1989 (Ada County, 1989a, as cited on record). While the site record does not provide a detailed description of the cistern, attached photographs indicate that it consists of a circular brick structure containing metal piping. The record notes that the cistern may have originally been used for agricultural purposes.

The site record states that the condition of the cistern was poor but that it had not been evaluated for listing on the National Register. The record suggests that it “may be associated with the Barger Dam” and the Harris Ranch report (SAIC, 1996b) indicates that the cistern is contained within the Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site (01-2629). However, the National Register Nomination Form for the Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site does not discuss the cistern. Additionally, although not to scale and hand- drawn, the map of the dam and mill site included with the nomination form indicates that its boundary does not extend past the embankment that parallels the Project access road; the cistern is located outside of this boundary.

4.10.2.5 Barber Dam Wooden Structure (01-15202) This structure was recorded in 1989 (Ada County, 1989a, as cited on record). The site record only describes it as the “ruins” of a wooden structure but does not provide a detailed description. Attached photographs do not provide clarification of site components.

The site record states that the site not been evaluated for listing on the National Register but suggests that it “may be associated with the Barger Dam…this should be revisited at a later time when the river is down.” The Harris Ranch report (SAIC, 1996a) also indicates that the wooden

66 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document structure is contained within the Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site (01-2629). However, the National Register Nomination Form for the Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site does not discuss the structure. Additionally, although not to scale and hand-drawn, the map of the dam and mill site included with the nomination form indicates that its boundary does not extend upstream of Barber Dam; the wooden structure is located on a small island upstream of the dam.

4.10.3 Tribal Resources The term “tribal resources” is typically applied to Indian Trust Assets and agreements that may exist between tribes and other entities. Indian Trust Assets are legal interests in property held in trust by the United States for Indian tribes or individual Native Americans and include lands, including reservations and public domain allotments, mineral and water rights, hunting and fishing rights, other natural resources, and claims. No known Indian Trust Assets are located in the immediate vicinity of the Project. Federally recognized Indian tribes within the State of Idaho include (BIA, 2018): • Coeur D’Alene Tribe • Kootenai Tribe of Idaho • Nez Perce Tribe • Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation The Nez Perce Tribe is the only federally recognized Indian tribe located near Boise, Idaho. As part of the development of this PAD, the Applicants solicited input from the tribes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and inquired whether the tribes wished to be active participants in the Project relicensing; no response or input was provided as a result of that initial effort.

4.11 Socioeconomic Resources The Project is located in Ada County, Idaho, approximately 6 miles southeast of downtown Boise. Boise is the state capital and the county seat of Ada County. Boise is also the most populous city in the state. It is estimated that 226,570 people, more than half the population of Ada County, live in Boise as of 2017, an 8.7 percent increase from 2010. During the same time period, the population of Ada County increased by 16.4 percent. This reflects the rapid urbanization in recent years in the immediate Project area, including the Harris Ranch and Surprise Valley housing developments as well as the Riverstone International School (K-12, private) and other businesses. Much of this land was used for agriculture/grazing historically after the Barber Mill burned down and was removed.

The city of Boise is one of the most densely populated areas in the state. The city’s population density is 2,591.5 people per square mile, compared to 372.8 for Ada County and 19 for the state of Idaho. See Table 4-14 for a summary of the population, percent change, and density.

The median household income in Ada County is $58,099, which is higher than the overall state average of $49,174. However, the median household income for the city of Boise is only $52,249, which is closer to the state average than to the county. The poverty rate was higher in

67 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Boise at 14.1 percent than in the rest of the county at 10.8 percent and the state 12.8 percent. Table 4-15 presents a summary of income distributions. For the city of Boise, Ada County, and the state of Idaho, the highest number of people were employed in the healthcare and social assistance industry. The second highest was retail trade, then third was accommodation and food services. Table 4-16 shows a distribution of industry in the Project vicinity (U.S. Census, 2017).

Table 4-14. Population, Percent Change, and Density for the City of Boise, Ada County, and State of Idaho

City of Boise Ada County State of Idaho Population 2010 208,344 392,377 1,567,650 Population 2017 (estimate) 226,570 456,849 1,716,943 Percent Change 8.7% 16.4% 9.5% Population per square mile 2,591.5 372.8 19.0

Table 4-15. Income Distributions for the City of Boise, Ada County, and State of Idaho

City of Boise Ada County State of Idaho Median Household Income $52,249 $58,099 $49,174 Per Capita Income $30,798 $30,086 $24,280 Percent in Poverty 14.1% 10.8% 12.8%

Table 4-16. Distribution of Industries for the City of Boise, Ada County, and State of Idaho

Industry City of Boise Ada County State of Idaho Agriculture, forestry, fishing 738 16 3,359 and hunting Mining, quarrying, and oil 124 69 2,584 and gas extraction Utilities 1,954 1,792 3,586 Construction 18,515 12,755 38,254 Manufacturing 23,600 14,137 60,078 Wholesale trade 16,447 13,977 31,319 Retail trade 34,275 25,025 84,071 Transportation and 8,055 5,703 18,457 warehousing Information 8,393 7,502 13,103 Finance and insurance 10,646 9,494 22,432 Real estate, rental and 3,695 3,119 7,320 leasing

68 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Industry City of Boise Ada County State of Idaho Professional, scientific and 15,248 13,724 32,852 technical services Management of companies 6,273 5,975 7,713 and enterprises Administrative and support 17,566 15,095 39,761 and waste management and remediation services Educational services 4,123 2,325 14,934 Health care and social 40,370 32,282 91,190 assistance Arts, entertainment, and 4,117 3,149 9,010 recreation Accommodation and food 25,708 20,170 61,928 services Other services (except 10,177 7,848 20,209 public administration) Industries not classified 61 58 122

69 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

5.0 PRELIMINARY ISSUES AND STUDIES LIST (18 CFR § 5.6 (D)(4))

This section identifies preliminary issues pertaining to the Applicant’s continued operation of the Project based upon existing resource information summarized in Section 4 and consultation with federal and state agencies. For the purposes of this PAD, Project issues are any new changes to the natural and human environment attributable to licensing the continued operation of the Project.

Identification of issues is a key step in the relicensing process because any specific concerns or questions arising from the proposed continued Project operations may need to be addressed in the context of the relicensing proceeding. The Applicants has attempted to identify all the issues that have a nexus to licensing continued Project operations. It should be noted that the list of issues is not final, given that the agencies and other interested parties have not had the opportunity to review this PAD. During the public scoping process, which FERC staff will initiate upon issuing the Notice of Commencement, federal and state resource agencies, Indian tribes, nongovernmental organizations, and individuals will be invited to participate in refining the resource issues to be analyzed in the Applicant’s license application.

5.1 Issues Pertaining to the Identified Resources

5.1.1 Geology and Soils The Project will continue to operate in a run-of-river mode, and any water level fluctuations will only be attributable to flow releases from Lucky Peak Dam and natural flow conditions. Therefore, it is not anticipated that Project operations will adversely affect shoreline erosion, and no issues relating to geology and soils are currently known at the Project.

5.1.2 Water Resources Issues The Project will continue to operate in a run-of-river mode and continue to maintain the Barber Dam impoundment at seasonal levels based on flows as discussed in Section 3.4. It is not anticipated that the continued run-of-river Project operations will adversely affect water use or quality. The Applicants do not propose any changes to current operations for the next license term; therefore, continued operations are expected to provide and maintain existing water quality.

5.1.3 Fish and Aquatic Resources Issues Several measures are already in place to protect aquatic resources in the Project area. Those measures include maintaining run-of-river operations and maintaining the Barber Dam impoundment at seasonal levels based on flows (see Section 3.4). No additional protection, mitigation, and enhancement measures are proposed at this time.

5.1.4 Wildlife and Botanical Resources Issues Wildlife or botanical resources found in the Project area have become established since Barber Dam was originally constructed in 1904 and under the existing run-of-river operating regime in place since the powerhouse was reconstructed in 1989. The Applicants propose to continue this

70 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

run-of-river operation over the next license term. Consequently, no issues relating to wildlife or botanical resources are currently known at the Project.

5.1.5 Wetlands and Riparian and Littoral Habitat Issues As shown in Figure 4-12, wetlands within the Project area consist primarily of the Boise River and the Barber Dam impoundment. The Project will continue to operate in a run-of-river mode with any water level fluctuations being due solely to flow releases from Lucky Peak Dam and natural inflows. Any natural resources found along the shores within the Project boundary have become established since Barber Dam was originally constructed in 1904 and under the existing run-of-river operating regime in place since the powerhouse was reconstructed in 1989. The Applicants propose to continue this run-of-river operation over the next license term. Consequently, no issues relating to wetlands, riparian, or littoral resources are currently known at the Project.

5.1.6 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species Issues As discussed throughout this document, the Barber Pool, created by construction of the Barber Dam, is a locally important wildlife viewing and habitat area that is home to more than 200 species of birds and 60 species of reptiles, amphibians, and mammals. The federally listed species that have the potential to occur within the Project vicinity are the yellow-billed cuckoo and slickspot peppergrass. The state-listed bird species that have the potential to occur in the Project vicinity are Lewis’s woodpecker, olive-sided flycatcher, and sage thrasher. In addition, nine bird species, protected under either the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, may occur in the Project vicinity. Project operations are not anticipated to adversely affect these species. Consequently, no issues relating to rare, threatened, and endangered species are currently known at the Project.

5.1.7 Recreation and Land Use Issues Recreational opportunities are limited within the Project area. The only formal recreation facility in the Project vicinity is the canoe/kayak portage and graveled footpath trail outside the fenced area that runs from the north abutment to downstream of the tailrace area. Because of the limited recreation opportunities at the Project, FERC approved a request by the Applicants to be exempted from filing Form 80 monitoring reports. No issues relating to recreation and land use are currently known at the Project.

5.1.8 Aesthetics and Visual Resources Issues No issues relating to aesthetic resources are currently known at the Project.

5.1.9 Cultural Resources Issues It is not clear that a full cultural resources survey of all lands within the Project boundary has been conducted. Additionally, the site records for all five documented resources are more than 20 years old and the information on the record is either minimal or outdated. Ground disturbance associated with Project-related land clearing and/or construction activities could affect these known cultural resources or expose previously unidentified culturally resources, making them susceptible to alteration, damage, and theft/vandalism. Operation and maintenance of Project facilities may also affect significant historic properties.

71 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

No ground-disturbing activities or modifications to Project facilities are proposed as part of the relicensing. The Applicants anticipate that the Project would be operated without changes to its facilities or operations. However, relicensing efforts could find that changes to the Project or other activities may be necessary during or after a license has been issued. These activities could affect documented or previously unidentified historic properties. The Applicants will consult with the Idaho SHPO prior to conducting the activity to: (1) establish an area of potential effects in accordance with 36 CFR 800.4(1); (2) determine the need for any cultural resources surveys; and (3) develop appropriate management measures for any affected historic properties. With no planned ground disturbance or construction activities, no issues relating to cultural resources are currently known at the Project.

5.1.10 Tribal Resources No issues relating to tribal resources are currently known at the Project.

5.1.11 Socioeconomic Resources Issues No issues relating to socioeconomic resources are currently known at the Project.

5.2 Potential Studies or Information Gathering This section identifies potential studies or information gathering that may be needed to analyze the preliminary resource issues identified in Section 5.1. In accordance with 18 CFR § 4.38(b), within 60 days of the Joint Meeting, each stakeholder (i.e., interested resource agency, Indian tribe, and member of the public) must provide any and all study requests to the Applicants. In order for the Applicants to address stakeholders’ study requests and develop effective data that will best serve all parties throughout the relicensing process, stakeholders should generally follow the study request guidelines as set forth by the Commission and outlined below.

1. Describe the goals and objectives of each study proposal and the information to be obtained. 2. If applicable, explain the relevant resource management goals of the agencies or Indian tribes with jurisdiction over the resource to be studied. 3. If the requester is not a resource agency, explain any relevant public interest considerations in regard to the proposed study. 4. Describe existing information concerning the subject of the study proposal, and the need for additional information. 5. Explain any nexus between Project operations and effects (direct, indirect, and/or cumulative) on the resource to be studied, and how the study results would inform the development of license requirements. 6. Explain how any proposed study methodology (including any preferred data collection and analysis techniques, or objectively quantified information, and a schedule including appropriate field season(s) and the duration) is consistent with generally accepted practice in the scientific community or, as appropriate, considers relevant tribal values and knowledge.

72 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

7. Describe considerations of level of effort and cost, as applicable, and why any proposed alternative studies would not be sufficient to meet the stated information needs. The Applicants are not proposing any additional resource studies for the relicensing at this time. The Applicants recognize that there is further opportunity during the public scoping process for stakeholders including federal and state resource agencies, Indian tribes, and non-governmental organizations to participate in refining the resource issues to be analyzed in the Applicants’ license application. If Project-related impacts are identified during this process, the Applicants will work closely with the stakeholders to define study requests for this resource, if necessary.

5.3 Relevant Comprehensive Waterway Plans Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Power Act, 16 USC § 803(a)(2)(A), requires FERC to consider the extent to which a project is consistent with federal or state comprehensive plans for improving, developing, or conserving a waterway affected by the project.

FERC Order No. 481-A, issued on April 27, 1988, established that FERC will accord Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Power Act comprehensive plan status to any federal or state plan that: • Is a comprehensive study of one or more of the beneficial uses of a waterway or waterways;

• Specifies the standards, the data, and the methodology used; and

• Is filed with the Secretary of the Commission.

Based on FERC’s January 2018 revised list of comprehensive plans for Idaho, 13 plans may be relevant to the Project area: • Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2013. Fisheries management plan, 2013–2018. Boise, Idaho. 2013.

• Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Bonneville Power Administration. 1986. Pacific Northwest Rivers Study. Final report. Boise, Idaho.

• Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2005. Idaho comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy. Boise, Idaho. September 2005.

• Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2014. Idaho Elk management plan: 2014–2024. Boise, Idaho. June 2014.

• Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2008. Idaho mule deer management plan: 2008– 2017. Boise, Idaho. March 2008.

• Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. 1992. Idaho water quality standards and wastewater treatment requirements. Boise, Idaho. January 1992.

• Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation. 2013. Idaho Outside: Idaho’s Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Plan (SCORP): 2013––2017. Boise, Idaho.

73 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

• Idaho Water Resource Board. 2012. Idaho State water plan. Boise, Idaho. November 2012.

• Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2010. Mule deer initiative action plan. Boise, Idaho. 2010.

• Northwest Power and Conservation Council. 2016. The Seventh Northwest Conservation and Electric Power Plan. Portland, Oregon. Council Document 2016-02. February 2016.

• Northwest Power and Conservation Council. 1988. Protected areas amendments and response to comments. Portland, Oregon. Council Document 88-22. September 14, 1988.

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Whooping Crane Recovery Plan. Department of the Interior, Albuquerque, New Mexico. December 23, 1986.

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. n.d. Fisheries USA: the recreational fisheries policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C.

In conducting its research and outreach to identify relevant Comprehensive Plans, the Applicants have attempted to identify additional plans which may be relevant to the Project as Resource Plans, but which have not been certified by the Secretary of the Commission as Comprehensive Plans. The resource management plans listed below were identified as relevant to the Project.

• Ada County. 2016. Ada County 2025 Comprehensive Plan. Boise, Idaho. November 2016.

• Ada County Department of Parks and Waterways. 2007. Ada County Park and Open Space Master Plan. April 2007.

• Boise River Enhancement Network. 2015. Boise River Enhancement Plan. Boise Idaho.

• Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2017. State Wildlife Action Plan. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Portland, Oregon. January 2017.

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2002. Barber Pool Conservation Area Master Plan. Submitted to The Friends of Barber Pool Conservation Area. Boise, Idaho. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, Walla Walla, Washington. September 2002.

• City of Boise Department of Parks and Recreation. 2014. Boise River Resource Management and Master Plan. City of Boise Department of Parks and Recreation, Boise, Idaho. December 2014.

74 November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

6.0 REFERENCES

Section 3—Project Location, Facilities, and Operation Ada County. 2015. Ada County Environmental Advisory Board Meeting Minutes. August 18, 2015. Available at: https://adacounty.id.gov/Portals/Operations/Agendas%20and%20Minutes/Environmental %20Advisory%20Board%20Meeting%20Minutes%20081815.pdf?ver=2015-08-24- 142838-217.

Cripe, C. 2016. Engineered logjams, boulders to improve Boise River fish habitat near Barber Park. Idaho Statesman. November 30, 2016. Available at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/outdoors/playing-outdoors/article117892993.html.

ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute). 2018a. World Street Map.

ESRI. 2018b. World Imagery.

Kleinfelder (Kleinfelder Northeast, Inc.). 2016. Barber Hydroelectric Project, Supporting Technical Information Document. March 2016 (CEII).

MJA (McMillen Jacobs Associates). 2018. Technical Memorandum. Barber Dam Turbine Intake Debris. October 3, 2018.

4.1—General Description of the River Basin Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2002a. Barber Pool Conservation Area Inventory and Analysis. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District. September 2002. Available at: http://www.boiseriverenhancement.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/04/BarberPool_inventory_analysis_2002-1.pdf.

Corps. 2018. Lucky Peak Dam and Lake, Project Fact Sheet. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, Walla Walla, Washington. Available at: http://www.nww.usace.army.mil/Locations/District-Locks-and-Dams/Lucky-Peak-Dam- and-Lake/. Accessed 10/10/2018.

ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute). 2018b. World Imagery.

FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). 2018. Lucky Peak Environmental Inspection Report. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Portland Regional Office, Portland, Oregon. July 19, 2018.

IDEQ (Idaho Department of Environmental Quality). 1999. Lower Boise River Subbasin Assessment, Total Maximum Daily Loads. September 29, 1999. Available at: http://deq.idaho.gov/media/451243- _water_data_reports_surface_water_tmdls_boise_river_lower_boise_river_lower_entire. pdf.

November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

U.S. Climate Data. 2018. U.S. Climate Data for Boise, Idaho, Website. https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/boise/idaho/united-states/usid0025. Accessed on 10/8/2018. Accessed on 10/9/2018.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2018a. National Hydrography Dataset.

4.2—Geology and Soils ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute). 2018b. World Imagery.

IGS (Idaho Geological Survey). 2018. Interactive Map Website. Available at: https://www.idahogeology.org/webmap. Accessed October 9, 2018.

Kleinfelder (Kleinfelder Northeast, Inc.). 2016. Barber Hydroelectric Project, Supporting Technical Information Document. March 2016 (CEII).

Othberg, K.L. 1994. Geology and Geomorphology of the Boise Valley and Adjoining Areas, Western Snake River Plane, Idaho. Idaho Geological Survey, University of Idaho. January 1994. Available at: https://www.idahogeology.org/product/b-29.

Othberg, K.L. and W.L Burnham. 1990. Geologic Map of the Lucky Peak Quadrangle, Ada County, Idaho. Idaho Geological Survey, University of Idaho. May 1990. Available at: https://www.idahogeology.org/product/t-90-4.

NRCS (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2018a. Web Soil Survey Website. Available at: https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed October 9, 2018.

NRCS. 2018b. Soil Survey Geographic Database for Ada County, Idaho.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2018b. Earthquake Catalog Website. Available at: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/search/. Accessed October 23, 2018.

USGS. 2018d. Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States Website. Available at: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/. Accessed on October 23, 2018.

USGS. 2017. State Geologic Map Compilation Geodatabase of the Coterminous United States.

USGS and Idaho Geological Survey. 2006. Quarternary Fault and Fold Database Geospatial Data. Available at: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/. Accessed October 23, 2018.

4.3—Water Resources Ada County. 2011. Ada County Irrigation Districts. July 21, 2011. Available at: https://adacounty.id.gov/Portals/0/DVS/PLN/Map/Map_Irrigation_Districts.pdf

November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

BDPR (City of Boise Department of Parks and Recreation). 2014. Boise River Resource Management and Master Plan. December 29, 2014. Available at: https://parks.cityofboise.org/media/994797/boise-river-resource-management-and- master-plan_final-12-29-14.pdf.

BDPW (City of Boise Department of Public Works). 2017. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit Program, 2017 Annual Report. December 21, 2017. Available at: https://www.partnersforcleanwater.org/aboutpartners/annual-report/.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2002a. Barber Pool Conservation Area Inventory and Analysis. Submitted to The Friends of Barber Pool Conservation Area. Boise, Idaho. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Cripe, C. 2017. Boise’s Wildlife-friendly Barber Pool Shows What the Valley Used to Look Like. Idaho Statesman. April 10, 2017. Available at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/outdoors/playing-outdoors/article143889784.html.

ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute). 2018b. World Imagery.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2015. National Flood Hazard Layer. Available at: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/national-flood-hazard-layer-nfhl. Accessed November 13, 2018.

IDEQ (Idaho Department of Environmental Quality). 2017. Idaho’s 2014 Integrated Report. February 2017. Available at: http://www.deq.idaho.gov/media/60179654/idaho-2014- integrated-report.pdf.

IDEQ. 2015. Lower Boise River TDML, 2015 Total Phosphorus Addendum. August 2015. Available at: http://deq.idaho.gov/media/60177413/lower-boise-river-tmdl-total- phosphorus-addendum-0815.pdf.

IDEQ. 2013. IDAPA 58.01.02 State Water Quality Standards. Available at: https://adminrules.idaho.gov/rules/2013/58/0102.pdf. Accessed October 11, 2018.

IDEQ. 2009. Lower Boise River TDML Five-Year Review. February 2009. Available at: http://deq.idaho.gov/media/451665- _water_data_reports_surface_water_tmdls_boise_river_lower_boise_river_lower_five_y ear_review_final_0209.pdf.

IDEQ. 2002. Subbasin Assessment for Upper Boise River Watersheds. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Boise Regional Office.

IDEQ. 1999. Lower Boise River Subbasin Assessment, Total Maximum Daily Loads. September 29, 1999. Available at: http://deq.idaho.gov/media/451243- _water_data_reports_surface_water_tmdls_boise_river_lower_boise_river_lower_entire. pdf.

November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

IDWR (Idaho Department of Water Resources). 2018. Water Right and Adjudication Search Website. Available at: https://www.idwr.idaho.gov/apps/ExtSearch/WRAJSearch/SearchPage.aspx. Accessed October 11, 2018.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2018c. National Water Information System Website. Gage No. 13202000 Boise River near Boise, ID. Available at: https://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/inventory/?site_no=13202000&agency_cd=USGS. Accessed October 11, 2018.

USGS. 2018d. National Water Information System Website: Gage No. 13206000 Boise River at Glenwood Bridge near Boise, ID. https://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/inventory/?site_no=13206000&agency_cd=USGS. Accessed October 11, 2018.

4.4—Fish and Aquatic Resources Boise River Enhancement Network. 2016. Boise River Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat. Prepared by Ecosystem Sciences Foundation. June 2016. 36 pp.

Braun, C.D. and C.A. Walser. 2011. Distribution and Diet of Largemouth Bass (Micropterous salmoides) in the Lower Boise River, Idaho. Western North American Naturalist 71(3):316–326.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2002a. Barber Pool Conservation Area Inventory and Analysis. Submitted to The Friends of Barber Pool Conservation Area. Boise, Idaho. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Corps. 2002b. Barber Pool Conservation Area Master Plan. Submitted to The Friends of Barber Pool Conservation Area. Boise, Idaho. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, Walla Walla, Washington. September 2002.

ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute). 2018b. World Imagery.

IDFG (Idaho Department of Fish and Game). 2018. Idaho Species: Species Conservation Status Website. Available at: https://idfg.idaho.gov/species/taxa/list?usesa. Accessed October 15, 2018.

IDFG. 2017. Southwest Region Fisheries Management Report—Lower Boise River Fall Fry Monitoring. 18 pp.

IDFG. 2013. Fisheries Management Plan, 2013–2018: A Comprehensive Guide to Managing Idaho’s Fisheries Resources. 367 pp.

Lysne, S. 2009. A Guide to Southern Idaho’s Freshwater Mollusks. Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Research Station, Idaho Governor’s Office of Species Conservation, The College of Idaho, Orma J. Smith Museum of Natural History.

MacCoy, D.E. 2006. Fish Communities and Related Environmental Conditions of the Lower Boise River, Southwestern Idaho, 1974–2004. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5111. 36 p.

MacCoy, D.E. 2004. Water‐quality and Biological Conditions in the Lower Boise River, Ada and Canyon Counties, Idaho, 1994–2002. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004‐2158.

4.5—Wildlife and Botanical Resources Bloom and Ada County (Arthur S. Bloom and Ada County). 1981. Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Application for License Exemption. Prepared by J-U-B Engineers, Inc. June 1981.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2002a. Barber Pool Conservation Area Inventory and Analysis. Submitted to The Friends of Barber Pool Conservation Area. Boise, Idaho. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, Walla Walla, Washington. September 2002.

Corps. 2002b. Barber Pool Conservation Area Master Plan. Submitted to The Friends of Barber Pool Conservation Area. Boise, Idaho. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, Walla Walla, Washington. September 2002.

IDFG (Idaho Department of Fish and Game). 2017. State Wildlife Action Plan. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Office of Migratory Birds & State Programs, Wildlife & Sport Fish Restoration. January 2017.

4.6—Wetlands, Riparian and Littoral Habitat ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute). 2018b. World Imagery.

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2018. National Wetlands Inventory Wetland Mapper. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html. Accessed October 23, 2018.

USFWS. 1993. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Manual 660 FW 2: Wetlands Conservation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Division of Habitat Conservation. June 1993.

USFWS. 1981. National Wetlands Inventory Website. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/.

November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

4.7—Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species IDFG (Idaho Department of Fish and Game). 2017. State Wildlife Action Plan. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Office of Migratory Birds & State Programs, Wildlife & Sport Fish Restoration. January 2017.

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2018a. IPaC—Information for Planning and Consultation. Available at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed October 10, 2018.

USFWS. 2018b. Species profile for Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). Available at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/profile/speciesProfile?sId=3911. Accessed October 11, 2018.

USFWS. 2018c. Species profile for Slickspot Peppergrass (Lepidium papilliferum). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/idaho/promo.cfm?id=177175828. Accessed October 11, 2018.

4.8—Recreation and Land Use Ada County. 2018. Ada County Zoning Geographic Information System (GIS) Layer. Provided by Ada County GIS on November 26, 2018.

Ada County. 2007. Ada County Park and Open Space Master Plan. Ada County Department of Parks and Waterways. April 2007.

Ada County. 2016. Ada County 2025 Comprehensive Plan. November 2016. Boise, Idaho.

City of Boise Geographic Information System (GIS). 2018a. Greenbelt, Foothills, and River to River Trails. Available at: http://data.gis.idaho.gov/. Accessed October 28, 2018.

City of Boise GIS. 2018b. Parks and Recreation Managed Land. Available at: http://data.gis.idaho.gov/. Accessed October 25, 2018.

Corps. 2002b. Barber Pool Conservation Area Master Plan. Submitted to The Friends of Barber Pool Conservation Area. Boise, Idaho. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, Walla Walla, Washington. September 2002.

ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute). 2018b. World Imagery.

IDPR (Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation). 2018. IDPR Managed Land. Available at: http://data.gis.idaho.gov/. Accessed October 25, 2018.

4.10—Cultural Resources Ada County. 1989a (as referenced on Davis and Palmer, 1989b, 1989c). Ada County Historic Resources: A Reconnaissance Survey. Boise Idaho

November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

Belt Collins Northwest, LLC. 2006. Harris Ranch Oral Histories Summary (letter report). Belt Collins Northwest, LLC, Seattle, Washington.

Blaser, B. 1987. Historic Preservation Certification Application, Part 2: Description of rehabilitation, Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Archeological Site. Interwest Hydro Inc., Boise, Idaho.

BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs). 2018. Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. National Archives, Federal Register, 83 FR 4235.

Davis, B. and B. Bauer. 1989a. Barber Dam and Powerhouse Site Record (10AA137). Record housed at the Idaho State Historical Society, Boise, Idaho.

Davis, B. and B. Bauer. 1989b. Barber Dam Brick Lined Cistern Site Record (01-01501). Record housed at the Idaho State Historical Society, Boise, Idaho.

Davis, B. and B. Bauer. 1989c. Barber Dam Wood Structure Site Record (01-01502). Record housed at the Idaho State Historical Society, Boise, Idaho.

Idaho State Historical Society. 1978. National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form: Barber Dam and Lumber Mill Historical Archaeological Site. Form on file at Idaho State Historical Society.

Idaho State Historical Society. 1976. Boise River Drainage Archaeological Survey, Progress Reports 1-10. Idaho SHPO Report No. 5175. Idaho State Historical Society, Boise, Idaho.

Ostrogorsky, M. 1977. Barber Dam Site Record (10AA137). Record housed at the Idaho State Historical Society, Boise, Idaho.

Parker, P.L. and T.K. King. 1998. Guidelines for documenting and evaluating traditional cultural properties. National Register Bulletin 38. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Register, History and Education, National Register of Historic Places. Washington, DC.

SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation). 2006. Harris Ranch Supplemental Cultural Resources Survey, Archaeological and Historical Survey Report, Archaeological Survey of Idaho. Report prepared for LeNir, Ltd., Boise Idaho.

SAIC. 1999. Historical Investigations at Barber Mill and the Penitentiary Canal. Idaho SHPO Report No. 734. Report prepared for Harris Family Ranch, LLP, Boise, Idaho.

SAIC. 1996a. Harris Ranch Cultural Resources Survey, City of Boise, Ada County, Idaho. Report prepared for Harris Ranch, Boise Idaho.

November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

SAIC. 1996b. Barber Mill Site Record (10AA439). Record housed at the Idaho State Historical Society, Boise, Idaho.

SAIC. 1997a. Cultural Resources Survey of Idaho Power Company Transmission Line 904 between Brownlee Dam and Boise Bench Substation, FERC No. 1971, Ada, Gem, Payette, and Washington Counties, Idaho. Idaho SHPO Report No. 242. Report Prepared for Idaho Power Company, Boise, Idaho.

SAIC. 1997b. Cultural Resources Survey of Idaho Power Company Transmission Line 911 between Brownlee Dam and Boise Bench Substation, FERC No. 1971, Ada, Gem, Payette, and Washington Counties, Idaho. Idaho SHPO Report No. 243. Report Prepared for Idaho Power Company, Boise, Idaho.

SAIC. 1994. Cultural Resources Survey of Area Adjacent to Surprise Valley Development, Ada County, Idaho. Idaho SHPO Report No. 458. Report prepared for Surprise Valley Partnership, Boise, Idaho.

4.11—Socioeconomic Resources U.S. Census (U.S. Census Bureau). 2018. Quick Facts. Available at: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/id,adacountyidaho,boisecitycityidaho/PST0 45217. Accessed October 10, 2018.

November 30, 2018 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

APPENDIX A: Consultation/Correspondence Record

November 30, 2018 From: Wahto, Heidi To: Wahto, Heidi Cc: Lorna Jorgensen; Webb, Kevin (EGP North America); Wardle, Lewis Subject: Barber Dam FERC Relicensing - Stakeholder Questionnaire & Contact Request Date: Friday, September 7, 2018 3:45:36 PM Attachments: P-4881 Stakeholder questionnaire_Sept 2018.docx

Dear Stakeholders and Interested Parties:

Fulcrum, LLC, a subsidiary of Enel Green Power North America, Inc., along with Ada County, Idaho are co-licensees of the Barber Dam Project (No. P-4881), a 3.7-megawatt (MW) hydropower project located on the Boise River in Ada County just outside of Boise, Idaho.

McMillen Jacobs Associates is leading the consultant team and requests your review and response to this email. The co-licensees are interested in your feedback on and participation in the Barber Dam FERC Relicensing. The attached Stakeholder Questionnaire will allow you to provide us initial information about yourself and your organization.

Please return completed forms by September 28, 2018 to me, Heidi Wahto, by email to [email protected].

You may use the attached form or you may contact the consultant team at:

Heidi Wahto Project Manager 206-755-4867

Lewis Wardle Deputy PM 208-859-3409

Many thanks,

Heidi Wahto, MPA Practice Lead, Regulatory & Environmental Services

McMillen Jacobs Associates 1011 Western Ave., Suite 706 | Seattle, WA 98104 206.743.9210 p | 206.755.4867 c | [email protected]

Technical Memorandum Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Stakeholders & Interested To: Project: Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Parties Co-licensees: From: McMillen Jacobs Associates cc: Enel Green Power / Fulcrum, LLC Ada County, Idaho Date: September 7, 2018 FERC No: P-4881

Subject: Questionnaire and Request for Contact Information

1.0 Introduction

Fulcrum, LLC, a subsidiary of Enel Green Power North America, Inc., along with Ada County, Idaho are co-licensees of the Barber Dam Project (No. P-4881), a 3.7-megawatt (MW) hydropower project located on the Boise River in Ada County just outside of Boise, Idaho.

The Barber Dam Project operates under a license granted by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that will expire on November 30, 2023. Fulcrum and Ada County (the Licensees) must initiate the license renewal process by November 30, 2018 by filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) and a Pre- Application Document (PAD) containing existing information relevant to the Barber Dam Project.

Fulcrum and Ada County are interested in your feedback on and participation in the Barber Dam FERC Relicensing. Information that you and your organization have will be valuable to this project and the FERC relicensing process. Please take a moment to review this questionnaire and consider responding. You may provide your responses directly on this form or you may contact the consultant team at:

Heidi Wahto Lewis Wardle Project Manager Deputy PM 206-743-9210 208-859-3409

Please return completed forms by September 28, 2018 to Heidi Wahto at McMillen Jacobs Associates by email to [email protected], or hard copy to 1011 Western Ave, Suite 706, Seattle, WA 98104.

Fulcrum, Ada County, and our consultant team look forward to working with you and we thank you for your time.

September 2018 1 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes.

John Roldan, Strategic Water Resources Manager City of Boise P.O. Box 500 Boise, ID 83701 [email protected] (208) 608-7551

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: The City of Boise’s participation in the Barber Dam FERC Relicensing is relevant to ensure the City’s interests are protected as defined below.

National Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit to discharge pollutants pursuant to the provisions of the Clean Water Act.

IDAPA 58.01.02 Idaho Water Quality Standards contain many criteria necessary to protect beneficial uses in the Boise River. The City’s NPDES permit and Idaho’s certification (Section 401 of the Clean Water Act) require that the City’s discharge limits do not impair the Boise River. Specific permit limits are developed using mass balance equations and do not consider dewatered river conditions.

33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. - Clean Water Act – Ensure uninterrupted flow in the Boise River to prevent exceedances of water quality criteria that could result from City Water Renewal Facility discharges. Permitted discharge loads are based on historical river conditions and do not account for dewatering events. In addition, uninterrupted flow is necessary to protect the aquatic life (macroinvertebrates and fish) in the Boise River.

Idaho Code, Title 42 - Water Supply – Ensure available and uninterrupted water supply under the City’s water rights, the water rights of irrigation entities providing water to the City’s facilities, and the water rights of the City’s private potable water purveyor.

IDAPA 37.03.06 Safety of Dams Rules – Downstream Flooding – Protect public health and safety and prevention of property damage under normal and emergency operations of Barber Dam.

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: Yes.

Steve Burgos, Public Works Director [email protected]

Haley Falconer, Environmental Division Senior Manager [email protected]

Jim Pardy, City Engineer [email protected]

Kate Harris, Water Quality Programs Manager [email protected]

Abigail Germaine, Deputy City Attorney [email protected]

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: The City of Boise’s goal in participating in the relicensing of Barber Dam is to advocate for the health and safety of its residents and the protection of property along the Boise River, to preserve the recreational value of the City’s parks, and to protect the environmental qualities of the Boise River in accordance with the laws and regulations described in our response to Question 2.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: Review of operations for environmental, recreational and water supply impacts, including impacts to water quality, fisheries and Boise River stage and flow conditions.

Review of the adequacy of emergency response procedures, including but not limited to dam and equipment failure, power outages, flooding, criminal and terrorist acts, and operator error. These procedures should include, but not be limited to, emergency prevention measures and safeguards, facility and operational monitoring, advance warning and notification systems, security procedures, desktop and training exercises, mitigation measures, insurance requirements and risk analysis.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: Barber Dam has experienced power outages that have reduced the Boise River flow to a trickle. On February 3, 2015, a power outage occurred and was not discovered for many hours. Approximately 13 hours after the outage occurred, the USGS staff gage at Glenwood Bridge (approximately 11 miles downstream) registered 60 cfs which was one of the lowest flows recorded in 40 years. This was such a concern that Ada County called a public meeting and created an Environmental Advisory Board to help advise the county on next steps and future environmental projects. Conservation Voters for Idaho presented the county with a petition for Enel to make a significant financial contribution to a river restoration project or a study to assess the damage of the dewatering event.

Enel verbally committed to contributing between $37,500 and $50,000 but this number was reduced to only $15,000.

The disconcerting result of the dewatering event, is the realization that these continue to occur. Safeguards have not been implemented and the potential damage to the river continues. On September 15, 2015, the river at Glenwood Bridge was reduced to one half of the flow overnight. Enel did not self-report the incident. Idaho Conservation League reported this to FERC. A dewatering event occurred again on December 31, 2015 and apparently Enel’s FERC response states that this is how operations are managed at the Barber Dam Facility.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation holds Water Right No. 63-3618 for Lucky Peak Reservoir that includes Streamflow Maintenance as a beneficial use. The water right states: “The Bureau of Reclamation and Idaho Department of Fish and Game shall provide joint written instructions to the Department, for conveyance to the watermaster, regarding release of the Lucky Peak streamflow maintenance storage water.” This has typically resulted in a minimum winter release of 240 cubic feet per second.

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: None.

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes. Boise River Enhancement Network, INC PO Box 9402 Boise ID 83707 [email protected] (208) 570-3013

Contact person Liz Paul

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: NA

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: Too early to know.

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: Boise River Enhancement Network Mission Statement

We are a network of people that live, work and play in the Boise River watershed dedicated to promoting the ecological enhancement of the river.

Vision Statement

The Boise River is recognized as a valuable resource by all communities in the Treasure Valley. Boise River Enhancement Network participants envision a healthy Boise River that enriches the Valley’s quality of life.

Imagine a Boise River that:

• Helps meet our communities’ desire for outdoor recreation and economic vitality; • Provides irrigation and drinking water to communities;

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

• Flows through natural and restored fish and wildlife habitat; • Offers clean water for swimming and fishing; • Inspires people to better understand and appreciate the river and engage in stewardship efforts.

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: Geomorphology, aquatic habitat, riparian habitat, water quality, recreation.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Response: Please refer to the Boise River Enhancement Plan, https://www.boiseriverenhancement.org/boise-river/

We have hundreds of Boise River documents on our website, http://www.boiseriverenhancement.org/reports/

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email to [email protected]

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Response: Thanks for asking.

September 2018 6 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes. Organization contact information is:

Idaho Conservation League Marie Callaway Kellner P.O. Box 844 Boise, ID 83701

[email protected] 208.345.6933 ext 32

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: The Federal Power Act and the Clean Water Act are the primary federal laws relevant to ICL’s interest in this relicensing. A variety of state law and policy considerations are also relevant, including, though not limited to, water right administration and fishery priorities for this stretch of the Boise River.

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: The Idaho Conservation League’s Water Associate, Marie Callaway Kellner, will be ICL’s point person for this relicensing. Other ICL staff may assist or participate if it is deemed necessary once the process begins, but none are expected to at this time.

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: ICL's energy campaign focuses on protecting air quality and climate by reducing pollution from our electricity system in order to preserve and enhance Idaho's natural values. To achieve this goal we take a system-wide approach that does not prioritize individual electric generators or generation types. When considering individual electric generation projects we take a "totality of the circumstances" approach that balances the system wide pollution reductions the project drives against the local impacts to environmental values like fish populations and natural experiences for humans.

The Barber Dam has a nameplate capacity of 3.7 MW and is basically a run of river operation without meaningful storage or the ability for the utility to control the electric output to match system needs. Because of the very small size of this project, and its non- dispatchable nature, the potential to reduce electric-system pollution is minimal. Meanwhile the impacts to other natural values, specifically a naturally functioning Boise river, is acute. So, on balance, relicensing Barber Dam is not an energy priority for ICL. Our goal is to maximize the water quantity, quality, and habitat values of the Boise River. This goal is based on a combination of laws, policies adopted by the city of Boise to protect the natural values that make Boise a livable community, as well as the state laws and Public Utilities Commission policies that guide electric resource acquisition and operations in Idaho.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: As described above, because of Barber Dam’s very small electric generation capacity and its non-dispatchable nature, ICL’s most important consideration (at this point) is addressing how to restore as much natural river function as possible.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: Barber Dam is on the Boise River just upstream of downtown Boise, ID. The river boasts a year round cold-water fishery, year-round recreation, and primarily summer season irrigation supply. It is an integral part of Boise and the entire Treasure Valley. The river is the primary “potentially affected [natural] resource” and any potential impacts to it should be considered thusly.

As should be in the FERC file for this project, Barber Dam malfunctioned in winter 2015 and the Boise River went dry for a period of close to 8 hours. Since that time, the relevant USGS Gage (USGS 13206000 Boise River at Glenwood Bridge NR Boise ID) has shown abrupt short-term variation in flows on numerous occasions. Once ruling out release changes from Lucky Peak Dam (a 300,000 acre-foot reservoir and dam upstream of the Barber Dam), Barber Dam is the only upstream infrastructure capable of making these abrupt variations. Preliminary research should analyze that gage data in efforts to identify how often this occurs, which, in turn, would inform any operational improvements that would be necessary should Barber Dam hydrogenation be reauthorized.

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email.

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: None at this time.

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes Lance Holloway Water Quality Manager Boise Regional Office-Idaho Department of Environmental Quality 1445 North Orchard Boise, ID 83706 [email protected] 208-373-0550

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is responsible for issuing licenses for the construction of a new hydropower projects, relicensing existing projects, and overseeing ongoing project operations, including dam safety inspections and environmental monitoring.

Before FERC may license or relicense non-federal hydroelectric dams, state certification that the project will not violate state water quality standards is required. A company that has applied for a FERC license must request a §401 certification from DEQ. DEQ must grant or deny certification within one year of receipt of the request. If the state has not granted or denied the certification within one year of the request, certification is considered waived.

Ninety days before it must grant or deny the certification (nine months into the 12-month period), DEQ provides notice to the public that it has made its preliminary decision regarding §401 certification and provides the public the opportunity to comment on the decision. The applicant must provide a copy of the §401 certification to FERC before the final license is issued.

Antidegradation Policy: IDAPA 58.01.02.051

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: Yes Additionally, the Attorney Generals Office-DEQ Mark Chicchini-Beaver Deputy Attorney General 208-373-0543 [email protected]

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act requires state certification for any permit or license issued by a federal agency for an activity that may result in a discharge into waters of the U.S. This requirement allows each state to have input into federally approved projects that may affect its waters (rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands) and to ensure the projects will comply with state water quality standards and any other water quality requirements of state law. Any §401 certification in Idaho also ensures that the project will not adversely impact impaired waters (waters that do not meet water quality standards) and that the project complies with applicable water quality improvement plans (total maximum daily loads).

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: Aside from flow modification what pollutants will be discharged that will need evaluated in the 401 certification.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: No

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes.

Bill Bosworth Environmental Staff Biologist Idaho Department of Fish and Game Southwest Region 3101 S. Powerline Dr. Nampa ID 83686 [email protected] 208-465-8465

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: Statutory and regulatory authorities under the State of Idaho pertaining to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game are found in Idaho Title 36 and IDAPA 13. Please contact us for any specific citations that may be needed.

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: Yes.

Additional participants include Joe Kozfkay (Southwest Region Fisheries Manager; [email protected]) and John Cassinelli (Southwest Regional Fisheries Biologist; [email protected]). Both can be reached at the following address and phone number:

Idaho Department of Fish and Game Southwest Region 3101 S. Powerline Dr. Nampa ID 83686

208-465-8465

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: Advance the Department’s mission, which is to protect, preserve, perpetuate and manage Idaho's wildlife resources. Especially relevant to the proposed project is to implement the Fisheries Management Plan. The current plan is the Fisheries Management Plan 2013-2018, but this version will be replaced with a forthcoming revision.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: River flow rate. Boise River flow rate is directly related to fish population management. Winter flow rate, in particular, strongly affects trout and whitefish populations. IDFG works with the Bureau of Reclamation to allocate limited storage available for stream maintenance flows. IDFG recommendations for winter flow patterns are to benefit fisheries by reducing the risk of winter fish mortality. In the past, Barber Dam management has resulted in reduced winter flow.

Riverine habitat, including substrate conditions and water quality. Particular components include sediment transport dynamics, and ecological flows necessary for channel maintenance and riparian habitat maintenance.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: IDFG collects and maintains information related to fish and wildlife populations within the environment affected by the project. IDFG reports pertinent to this topic may be found on IDFG’s website in the technical report library, and IDFG staff can help identify and make available relevant reports and findings.

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: E-mail is preferred, but any methods are workable.

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes. Please include the following contacts: Adam Zaragoza Development Bureau Chief Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation 5657 Warm Springs Avenue Boise, ID 83716 208-514-2456 | [email protected]

Anna Canning Management Services Administrator Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation 5657 Warm Springs Avenue Boise, ID 83716 208-514-2252 | [email protected]

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: We are an interested neighbor and have a working relationship with the Idaho Shakespeare Festival and the Idaho Foundation for Parks and Lands

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: Both Adam Zaragoza and I will participate.

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: We will want to assure that future development near the Barber Dam can be properly designed to meet the needs of Idaho Foundation for Parks and Lands and the Idaho Shakespeare Festival and that the access to those properties through our property can be adequately addressed.

If additional recreation opportunities are provided in the area, we want to be in a position to partner or otherwise engage in those activities.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: Recreation development and access.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: Thank you for coming out to meet with me. I look forward to working with you all.

September 2018 5 From: Falk, John To: Wahto, Heidi Cc: Lorna Jorgensen; Webb, Kevin (EGP North America); Wardle, Lewis Subject: RE: Barber Dam FERC Relicensing - Stakeholder Questionnaire & Contact Request Date: Tuesday, September 11, 2018 8:04:26 PM Attachments: P-4881 Stakeholder questionnaire_Sept 2018.docx

Received.....thanks, Heidi. --jf

From: Wahto, Heidi [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2018 3:45 PM To: Wahto, Heidi Cc: Lorna Jorgensen; Webb, Kevin (EGP North America); Wardle, Lewis Subject: Barber Dam FERC Relicensing - Stakeholder Questionnaire & Contact Request

Dear Stakeholders and Interested Parties:

Fulcrum, LLC, a subsidiary of Enel Green Power North America, Inc., along with Ada County, Idaho are co-licensees of the Barber Dam Project (No. P-4881), a 3.7-megawatt (MW) hydropower project located on the Boise River in Ada County just outside of Boise, Idaho.

McMillen Jacobs Associates is leading the consultant team and requests your review and response to this email. The co-licensees are interested in your feedback on and participation in the Barber Dam FERC Relicensing. The attached Stakeholder Questionnaire will allow you to provide us initial information about yourself and your organization.

Please return completed forms by September 28, 2018 to me, Heidi Wahto, by email to [email protected].

You may use the attached form or you may contact the consultant team at:

Heidi Wahto Project Manager 206-755-4867

Lewis Wardle Deputy PM 208-859-3409

Many thanks,

Heidi Wahto, MPA Practice Lead, Regulatory & Environmental Services

McMillen Jacobs Associates 1011 Western Ave., Suite 706 | Seattle, WA 98104 206.743.9210 p | 206.755.4867 c | [email protected]

Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: YES

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: IDAHO CODE 42.1709 – 42.1721 GENERALLY

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: YES

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: PROBABLE FAILURE MODES RE-ANALYSIS, AND RESOLUTION OF EXISTING DISCREPANCY BETWEEN IDWR & FERC REGARDING HAZARD CLASSIFICATION.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: SEE #4 ABOVE

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: YES; PRIMARY IS TIMBER CONCTRUCTION

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: EMAIL IS APPROPRIATE FOR SIZE LESS THAN 10MB…ARRANGEMENTS WILL NEED TO BE MADE FOR LARGER SIZED ATTACHMENTS.

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Co-terminus with the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort is the acquisition of the upstream Barber Pool Conservation Area deeded by the Boise Cascade Corporation to Idaho Park Foundation (now Idaho Foundation for Parks and Lands) October 23, 1978 by Instrument # 7901709. Contact: Jan Johns, Executive Director Idaho Foundation for Parks & Lands (208) 860-0311 5657 Warm Springs Avenue Boise, ID 83716-8700 [email protected] Sharon Hubler, chair Barber Pool Conservation Area Committee (208) 859-9529 206 E Linden St Caldwell, ID 83605 [email protected]

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: Land ownership and Easement Agreement between Idaho Foundation for Parks and Lands and Fulcrum, Inc. Instrument # 8833012 dated June 23, 1988 with Survey No. 0105701585 attached to the Easement Agreement tied to Barber Dam Project No. 4881- 001. The Easement Agreement provided use of the Barber Pool water at 2,777 feet elevation with a permissible variation of 0.25 feet above that level for purposes of power generation at Barber Dam. (see attachment)

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: At various times the following may be important participants or respondents: 1. Larry Leasure - [email protected] 2. Don Weilmunster – [email protected] 3. Pat Barclay – [email protected] 4. Judy Peavey-Derr – [email protected] 5. Brian McDevitt – [email protected] 6. Stephani Hilding – [email protected] 7. Tom Williams – [email protected] 8. Chris Cook – [email protected] 9. Eric Traynor – [email protected] These above-named participants are assigned to the Barber Pool Management Committee, chaired by Sharon Hubler – [email protected] See Response to Question #1 for the primary contact information.

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: Management Plans relative to the Barber Pool Conservation Area:

Continued operation of the Barber Dam as it affects the Barber Pool Conservation Area.

Renewal of Easement Agreement.

Restoration and maintenance of Black Cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa L.) as a favored species along the Boise River considered the fourth most important habitat in the state of Idaho and also the fourth most inadequately protected habitat in the state of Idaho.

Eradication, suppression and/or containment of invasive species with herbicide and biological controls. Invasive species are directly linked with wildfire.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: (not necessarily in rank order of importance)

Elevation levels of the Barber Pool relative to Barber Dam relicensing contained in renewal of Easement Agreement.

Barber Dam Hydroelectric Project Boundaries.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: See Attachment on National Register Nomination Form November 21, 1978 A Brief History of Barber Dam The dams came in pretty succinct order; first, there was Barber Dam in 1904; then Diversion Dam was created in 1912 to supply power for the construction of Arrowrock Dam; and, finally, Arrowrock Dam was built in 1915. The earth-filled Lucky Peak Dam and Reservoir was built in 1956 following a flood of 21,000 c.f.s. Today’s water regime is to keep the flow under 7,500 cubic feet per second. Barber Dam was the site of one of the first major industrial efforts in the Boise area called the “Barber Lumber Company.” It was an ambitious undertaking and its stockholders read like a list of who’s who in Boise. Their fortunes were tied to the aspect of timber and mineral resource extraction. Barber Dam was used not only to support the operation of the Barber Lumber Company but also to

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

generate much needed power for the growing capitol city of Boise. The Barber Mill and the community of Barberton were built, flourished and vanished all within a span of approximately 30 years. The seeds of this endeavor have been much more lasting, however. Two major corporations, Boise Cascade (formerly Boise-Payette Lumber Company) and the Idaho Power Company can trace their beginnings back to the Barber Dam and lumber mill. In contrast, the Barber Pool Conservation Area is an entirely different kind of legacy. The dam itself was built for power but also created a holding pond for logs (hence Barber Pool). These logs were floated down the Boise River from as far up as More’s Creek Summit. The pond rapidly silted in forming the unique riparian environment of channels and islands that exists today. The area is a veritable bonanza of wildlife. Already the Barber Pool has garnered several awards. In 1979 it was chosen as one of the top 12 Unique Wildlife Ecosystems in Idaho. Few cities of Boise’s size can boast so much untouched habitat within six miles of its city center. In the spring nature’s colorama is beautiful – velvet green hills, roses and ribes (currant bushes which go from gray to green.) The marsh offers common yellow throat, sora rail and yellow-headed blackbird. The tributaries offer muskrat, beaver, river otter, mink and provide nesting for geese/mergansers/mallards and teal. The trees offer western tanager, yellow warblers, house wrens, hummers, cedar waxwings and yellow-breasted chat. The undulating flight pattern of a rough winged swallow in its pursuit of insects catches the eye. And, above all, the need to protect raptors: the wintering bald eagle, prairie falcon, red tail, ravens and many others. In 1987 Barber Pool was chosen as one of Idaho’s Lasting Legacy Projects and appears in the Idaho Centennial Wish Book. In all four categories of “habitat” “scenic” “linkage” and “history” the Barber Pool was rated as the top listing out of 42 sites by the Boise City Heritage Preservation Committee in 1993. The OREGON TRAIL is clearly visible coming off the Rim rock across the River. Here the western bound emigrants after 1840 came gratefully down into this

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

green valley. The first cart passed here with Spalding & Whitman, missionaries, in 1836. By the middle 1840s thousands of emigrant wagons had cut a broad track, later to become Overland Road. The tide of travel by wagon went down when the railroad was completed in 1884, but the tracks of the wagons and stages can still be followed for miles east in the desert.

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email is preferable.

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

The two attachments are for informational purposes.

September 2018 6 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 7 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes. Kevin Lewis, Executive Director Idaho Rivers United P.O. Box 633 Boise, ID 83701

(208) 343-7481 [email protected]

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: We are a public interest non-profit and have intervened and participated in numerous FERC relicensing processes throughout Idaho.

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: I will be the primary participant.

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: Our interest will focus on protecting the health of the Boise River.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: Enter notes

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 5 From: Bryce Farris To: Wahto, Heidi Cc: Lorna Jorgensen; Webb, Kevin (EGP North America); Wardle, Lewis; Rex Barrie; Greg Curtis; Andy Waldera; Mark Zirschky ([email protected]); Debby Long; "Daren Coon ([email protected])" Subject: RE: Barber Dam FERC Relicensing - Stakeholder Questionnaire & Contact Request Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 8:37:30 AM Attachments: image001.png 2018-09-26 NMID & PID Response to P-4881 Stakeholder questionnaire_Sept ....pdf

Ms. Wahto: Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to provide input/information concerning the Barber Dam FERC Relicensing. As you may already know, our clients, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and Pioneer Irrigation District, have expressed concerns with the operations of Barber Dam, have written letters to Ada County and Fulcrum expressing those concerns, and have met with Ada County and Enel as recently as August 22, 2018 to discuss these concerns. To date, these concerns have not been satisfactorily addressed and until such concerns are addressed our clients oppose any relicensing of Barber Dam.

I have attached hereto your Questionnaire & Contact Request Form as well as copies of various letters which have been provided to Ada County and Fulcrum regarding our clients’ concerns.

I’m not sure of all of the persons/organizations your e-mail went out to but I would suggest that you also include the Boise River Watermaster, Rex Barrie (e-mail: [email protected]) on all future correspondence regarding this matter. I have cc’d Mr. Barrie on this e-mail.

Thanks and please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.

S. Bryce Farris Attorney at Law SAWTOOTH LAW OFFICES, PLLC 1101 W. River St., Ste. 110 P.O. Box 7985 Boise, ID 83707 Tel: (208) 629-7447 Fax: (208) 629-7559 [email protected]

From: Wahto, Heidi [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2018 4:45 PM To: Wahto, Heidi Cc: Lorna Jorgensen; Webb, Kevin (EGP North America); Wardle, Lewis Subject: Barber Dam FERC Relicensing - Stakeholder Questionnaire & Contact Request

Dear Stakeholders and Interested Parties:

Fulcrum, LLC, a subsidiary of Enel Green Power North America, Inc., along with Ada County, Idaho are co-licensees of the Barber Dam Project (No. P-4881), a 3.7-megawatt (MW) hydropower project located on the Boise River in Ada County just outside of Boise, Idaho.

McMillen Jacobs Associates is leading the consultant team and requests your review and response to this email. The co-licensees are interested in your feedback on and participation in the Barber Dam FERC Relicensing. The attached Stakeholder Questionnaire will allow you to provide us initial information about yourself and your organization.

Please return completed forms by September 28, 2018 to me, Heidi Wahto, by email to [email protected].

You may use the attached form or you may contact the consultant team at:

Heidi Wahto Project Manager 206-755-4867

Lewis Wardle Deputy PM 208-859-3409

Many thanks,

Heidi Wahto, MPA Practice Lead, Regulatory & Environmental Services

McMillen Jacobs Associates 1011 Western Ave., Suite 706 | Seattle, WA 98104 206.743.9210 p | 206.755.4867 c | [email protected]

Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes. Please send all information to the following:

S. Bryce Farris Sawtooth Law Offices, PLLC 1101 W. River Street, Suite 110 P.O. Box 7985 Boise, ID 83707 Phone: 208-629-7447 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District

Andy J. Waldera Sawtooth Law Offices, PLLC 1101 W. River Street, Suite 110 P.O. Box 7985 Boise, ID 83707 Phone: 208-629-7447 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Pioneer Irrigation District

Daren Coon, Secretary/Treasurer Greg Curtis, Water Superintendent Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District 1503 First Street South Nampa, ID 83651 Phone: 208-466-7861

Mark Zirschky, District Superintendent Pioneer Irrigation District P.O. Box 426 Caldwell, ID 83606 Phone: 208-459-3617

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District (“NMID”) and Pioneer Irrigation District (“PID”) are irrigation districts with natural flow and storage water rights which divert water from the Boise River below Barber Dam and have raised numerous concerns regarding the operations of Barber Dam. These concerns have yet to be addressed. For your ease of reference, I am attaching three (3) recent letters from both NMID and PID expressing concerns.

NMID and PID representatives met with Ada County and Enel on August 22, 2018, to discuss these concerns. To date, there have been no actions by Ada County or Enel to address these concerns and thus NMID and PID oppose any Barber Dam FERC Relicensing.

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: Yes. See answer to Question No. 1.

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: Yes, the goals relate to the protection and non-interference with State water rights and the prevention of damages to NMID, PID, their landowners which rely upon their respective water rights and the prevention of damages to property and third persons as a result of the operations of Barber Dam. See the attached letters for more specifics.

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: See the attached letters. Until the concerns of NMID and PID are adequately addressed both NMID and PID oppose any FERC relicensing of Barber Dam.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: See the attached letters.

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email.

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 4

Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes Ted Trueblood Chapter of Trout Unlimited PO Box 1971 Boise, ID 83701 www.tedtruebloodtu.org Darryl Khurt, President Andy Brunelle, Treasurer Chris Jones, Board Member

Trout Unlimited Idaho Water Project 910 W. Main St., Suite 342 Boise, ID 83702 Kira Finkler, Director Peter Anderson, Counsel

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: Trout Unlimited is a non-government organization. Founded in Michigan in 1959, Trout Unlimited today is a national non-profit organization with about 300,000 members and supporters dedicated to conserving, protecting and restoring North America's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds. In the state of Idaho there are more than 2,000 members in nine local chapters, and more than one dozen staff in Boise, Idaho Falls, Hailey and Salmon among other communities. Our participation in the relicensing process would relate to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Administrative Procedures Act and the Federal Power Act.

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Response: Probably. See information in answer to question #1.

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: Trout Unlimited’s goals would relate to the organization’s mission in answer #2, but it’s premature to determine the major goals until more information is available. Nonetheless here are a couple of items to consider: • Project operations and effects on coldwater resources and the fishery in the project area and both upstream and downstream. • You might want to figure out how continuing the project’s existence and operations in to the future can occur with minimization of negative impacts on fisheries, such as turbine entrainment, hydrologic disruption and adverse modification of the riverine environment, habitat fragmentation through mitigation of migratory barriers.

There are numerous laws, regulations and policies as well as agency management plans affecting the project and area that will directly or indirectly impact the relicensing of Barber Dam. NEPA requires disclosure and discussion of mitigation of adverse effectgs of federal actions (issuing a new license). Clean Water Act and the 303(d) list has a role here too. That will get you started.

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Response: Refer to the response to question #4.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: Yes. Take some time and download all the studies you can find at www.boiseriverenhancement.net which is the most complete library out there.

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Response: Email and website should be sufficient.

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: Yes, the Corps has issued several permits for modification, and maintenance of the Project.

Christen Marve Griffith Senior Project Manager US Army Corps of Engineers Boise Regulatory Office 720 E. Park Blvd. Suite 245 Boise, Idaho 83712 (208) 433-4470 [email protected]

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: Yes,

I will be the point of contact for any involvement the Corps will have in the relicensing.

See Q1 for contact info

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: The Corps goal is to ensure that any management plans or additional modifications necessary for the continued operation/licensing are in compliance with the Section 404 of the CWA.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: Important issues would be related to future maintenance activities, or modification necessary for the continued operation in relation to expanding the physical footprint, temporary fills for maintenance (cofferdams), dredging of materials within the impoundment, or mitigation required to offset impacts.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: Review of the projects operating plan related to emergency shut downs should be reviewed to ensure that shut downs during times of dewatering do not result in the loss of flow either through or over the spillway which resulted in the de-watering of the river downstream of the facility a couple years ago.

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email if below 20mb, or sharepoint access.

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: The Corps issued a Standard Permit in 1988 for the project and multiple (7) Nationwide Permits for Maintenance since then.

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: No. BLM has only 0.3-miles of Boise River frontage at river-mile 33.4 (26-miles downstream from Barber Dam). Operation of the Barber facility has no effect on the proper functioning condition of this reach.

Contact; BLM Boise District Office Four Rivers Field Office attn. J. Allen Tarter 3948 South Development Avenue Boise, ID 83705

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: N/A

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: No

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: N/A

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: N/A

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: No

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: N/A

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response:

September 2018 5 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

2.0 Questionnaire

Question #1: Do you expect your organization to be an active participant in the Barber Dam Project FERC Relicensing effort? Please provide your contact details: name, address, email, phone. (If No, you may still provide your contact information to be kept on the Mailing List to receive project information).

Response: No, however, please keep us on the mailing list:

Bureau of Reclamation Attn: Florence Webster PN-1632 1150 N Curtis Road Boise, Idaho 83706 [email protected] (208) 378-5332

Question #2: If applicable, can you identify the authority [e.g., statutory, regulatory] that is relevant to your organization’s participation in the relicensing?

Response: At this time, we do not anticipate being active participants in the relicensing process.

September 2018 2 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #3: Do you personally plan to be a key/major participant in the relicensing? Are there others in your organization who will be important participants? (If so, please provide names and contact info for each participant.)

Response: Please send information to the above contact and we will include pertinent personnel as needed.

Question #4: What are your organization’s major goals regarding the relicensing the Barber Dam Project? Are the goals based on law or regulations, agency policy, or management plans relative to the affected area?

Response: Barber Dam is owned by Ada County and O&Med by IDWR. However, if at any point the project impacts Reclamation facilities, our goal is to preserve our interests consistent with Reclamation project purposes.

September 2018 3 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #5: What do you see as important issues or questions that should be addressed during the relicensing process from your organization’s perspective and why these are important issues?

Response: None at this time.

Question #6: Are you aware of any information, either current or historical, related to the project, its operations, potentially affected resources, etc., that we should include in our preliminary research?

Response: No.

September 2018 4 Barber Dam FERC Relicensing Stakeholder Questionnaire

Question #7: What is your preferred method of receiving project information/documents: email, US mail, website, other?

Response: Email

3.0 Additional Notes

Please use the space below to provide any other information you’d like to share.

Response: Enter notes

September 2018 5 BARBER DAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC NO. 4881) DISTRIBUTION LIST

Licensees

Kevin Webb, Hydro Licensing Manager Conrad St. Pierre, Hydro O&M Senior Director Enel Green Power North America, Inc. Enel Green Power North America, Inc. 100 Brickstone Square, Suite 300 100 Brickstone Square, Suite 300 Andover, MA 01810 Andover, MA 01810 978-935-6039 978-337-8939 [email protected] [email protected]

Chuck Salo, Regional Manager, Hydro O&M Lorna Jorgensen, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Enel Green Power North America, Inc. Ada County Prosecutor's Office 1755 E. Plumb Lane, Suite 155 Civil Division Reno, NV 89502 200 W. Front Street 978-447-3914 Boise, ID 83702 [email protected] 208-287-7700 [email protected]

Federal

Kimberly Bose, Secretary Douglas Johnson, Regional Engineer Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE Portland Regional Office Washington, DC 20426 805 SW Broadway, Fox Tower, Suite 550 Portland, OR 97205 503-552-2799 [email protected]

Michael Morse, Branch Chief FERC/Hydro/CPA Christian N. Dietz, District Commander U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Pacific Region U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office Northwest Division, Walla Walla District 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Suite 368 201 N. 3rd Ave. Boise, ID 83709 Walla Walla, WA 99362 208-378-5261 509-527-7020 [email protected] [email protected]

Christen Marve Griffith, Senior Project Manager Chris Hladick, Regional Administrator U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Northwest Division, Walla Walla District Region 10, Pacific Northwest Boise Regulatory Field Office 1200 6th Ave. 720 E. Park Blvd., Suite 245 Seattle, WA 98101 Boise, ID 83712 206-553-1234 208-433-4470 [email protected] [email protected]

1 Allison O'Brien, Regional Environmental Officer Jim Case, Realty Specialist U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Forest Service Office of Environmental Policy & Compliance Boise National Forest Pacific Northwest Region 1249 S. Vinnell Way, Suite 200 620 SW Main Street, Suite 201 Boise, ID 83709 Portland, OR 97205 208-373-4144 503-326-2489 [email protected]

Makary Hutson, Natural Resource Specialist Susan Carter, Chief Economist U.S. Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Interregional Hydropower Team 12th & Jefferson Drive SW, Room 112 1617 Cole Blvd, Bldg 17 Washington, DC 20250 Lakewood, CO 80401 202-720-5447 303-275-5220 [email protected] [email protected]

Peter Ditton, State Director (Acting) Lara Douglas, District Manager U.S. Bureau of Land Management U.S. Bureau of Land Management Idaho State Office Boise District Office 1387 S. Vinnell Way 3948 Development Ave Boise, ID 83709 Boise, ID 83705 208-373-4001 208-384-3300 [email protected] [email protected]

J. Allen Tarter, Natural Resources Specialist Florence Webster U.S. Bureau of Land Management U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Four Rivers Field Office Pacific Northwest Regional Office 3948 South Development Ave 1150 North Curtis Road, Suite 100 Boise, ID 83705 Boise, ID 83706 208-384-3300 208-378-5332 [email protected] [email protected]

Daniel Largo, Superintendent John M. Fowler, Executive Director U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Northern Idaho Agency 401 F Street NW, Suite 308 PO Drawer 277 Washington, DC 20001 Lapwai, ID 83540 202-517-0200 208-621-4831 [email protected] [email protected]

Kyle Blasch, Center Director David Evetts, Assistant Director for Hydrologic Data U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Idaho Water Science Center Idaho Water Science Center 230 Collins Road 230 Collins Road Boise, ID 38702 Boise, ID 38702 208-387-1321 208-387-1316 [email protected] [email protected]

2 Elliot Mainzer, Administrator Honorable James E. Risch Bonneville Power Administration U.S. Senate PO Box 3621 483 Russell Senate Office Building Portland, OR 97208 Washington, DC 20510 503-230-3000 202-224-2752 [email protected]

Honorable Mike Crapo Honorable Mike Simpson U.S. Senate U.S. House of Representatives 239 Dirksen Senate Building 2084 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20515 202-224-6142 202-225-5531

State

Bill Bosworth, Environmental Staff Biologist Joe Kozfkay, Southwest Regional Fisheries Manager Idaho Department of Fish & Game Idaho Department of Fish & Game Southwest Region Southwest Region 3101 South Powerline Road 3101 South Powerline Road Nampa, ID 83686 Nampa, ID 83686 208-465-8465 208-465-8465 [email protected] [email protected]

John Cassinelli, Southwest Regional Fisheries David Groeschl, Acting Director Biologist Idaho Department of Lands Idaho Department of Fish & Game 300 N. 6th Street, Suite 103 Southwest Region Boise, ID 83702 3101 South Powerline Road 208-769-1525 Nampa, ID 83686 [email protected] 208-465-8465 [email protected]

Cynthia Bridge Clarke, Water Projects Section John Falk, Dam Safety Program Manager Manager Idaho Department of Water Resources Idaho Department of Water Resources State Dam Safety Office 322 E. Front Street 322 E. Front Street Boise, ID 83720 Boise, ID 83720 208-287-4817 208-287-4927 [email protected] [email protected]

Rex R. Barrie, Boise River Watermaster Norman Wright, Chairman State of Idaho Idaho Soil and Water Conservation Commission Water District No. 63 322 E. Front Street, Suite 560 PO Box 767 Boise, ID 83702 Star, ID 83669 208-332-1790 208-908-5480 [email protected] [email protected]

3 Michael Ratchford, State Geologist Lance Holloway, Water Quality Manager Idaho Geological Survey Idaho Department of Environmental Quality University of Idaho Boise Regional Office 875 W. Perimeter Dr. MS3014 1445 N. Orchard Street Moscow, ID 83844 Boise, ID 83706 208-885-7993 208-373-0550 [email protected] [email protected]

Mark Chicchini-Beaver, Deputy Attorney General Tricia Canaday, Deputy SHPO/Interim SHPO Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Administrator Attorney Generals Office Idaho State Historical Society 1410 N. Hilton Street State Historic Preservation Office Boise, ID 83706 210 W. Main Street 208-373-0543 Boise, ID 83702 [email protected] 208-488-7462 [email protected]

Anna Borchers Canning, Management Services Adam Zaragoza, Development Bureau Chief Administrator Idaho Department of Parks & Recreation Idaho Department of Parks & Recreation 5657 Warm Springs Ave. 5657 Warm Springs Ave. Boise, ID 83716 Boise, ID 83716 208-514-2456 208-514-2252 [email protected] [email protected]

Idaho Office of the Governor Idaho Office of the Attorney General State Capitol 700 W. Jefferson Street, Suite 210 PO Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720 Boise, ID 83720 208-334-2400 208-334-2100 [email protected]

Diane Hanian, Commission Secretary Senator Janie Ward-Engelking Idaho Public Utilities Commission Idaho Senate 472 W. Washington Street District 18 Boise, ID 83702 3578 S. Crosspoint Ave. 208-334-0338 Boise, ID 83706 [email protected] 208-385-9564 [email protected]

Senator Chuck Winder, Majority Leader Senator Fred S. Martin Idaho Senate Idaho Senate District 20 District 15 5528 N. Ebbetts Ave. 3672 Tubleweed Place Boise, ID 83713 Boise, ID 83713 208-853-9090 208-447-9000 [email protected] [email protected]

4 Representative Phylis K. King Representative Ilana Rubel, Assistant Minority Leader Idaho House of Representatives Idaho House of Representatives District 18 District 18 2107 Palouse Street 2750 Migratory Drive Boise, ID 83705 Boise, ID 83706 208-344-0202 208-866-4776 [email protected] [email protected]

Representative Mike Moyle, Majority Leader Representative Thomas Dayley Idaho House of Representatives Idaho House of Representatives District 14 District 21 480 N. Plummer Road 4892 S. Willandra Way Star, ID 83669 Boise, ID 83709 [email protected] 208-562-0276 [email protected]

Local

John Roldan, Strategic Water Resources Manager Haley Falconer, Environmental Division Senior City of Boise, Public Works Department Manager 150 N. Capitol Blvd, 4th Floor City of Boise, Public Works Department Boise, ID 83702 150 N. Capitol Blvd, 4th Floor 208-608-7551 Boise, ID 83702 [email protected] 208-608-3338 [email protected]

Jim Pardy, City Engineer Kate Harris, Water Quality Programs Manager City of Boise, Public Works Department City of Boise, Public Works Department 150 N. Capitol Blvd, 2nd Floor 150 N. Capitol Blvd, 4th Floor Boise, ID 83702 Boise, ID 83702 208-608-7150 208-608-3338 [email protected] [email protected]

Abigail Germaine, Deputy City Attorney Steve Burgos, Director City of Boise, Attorney's Office City of Boise, Public Works Department 150 N. Capitol Blvd, 4th Floor 150 N. Capitol Blvd, 4th Floor Boise, ID 83702 Boise, ID 83702 208-608-7956 208-608-3338 [email protected] [email protected]

Doug Holloway, Director City of Nampa City of Boise, Parks and Recreation Office 411 3rd Street S 1104 Royal Blvd Nampa, ID 83651 Boise, ID 83706 208-468-4413 208-608-7600 [email protected] [email protected]

City of Eagle City of Meridian 660 E. Civic Lane 33 E. Broadway Ave., Suite 104 Eagle, ID 83616 Meridian, ID 83642 208-939-6813 208-888-4433 [email protected] [email protected]

5 City of Kuna City of Garden City PO Box 13 6015 N. Glenwood Street Kuna, ID 83634 Garden City, ID 83714 208-387-7726 208-472-2900 [email protected] [email protected]

New York Irrigation District Boise-Kuna Irrigation District 6616 W. Overland Road 129 North School St. Boise, ID 83709 Kuna, ID 83634

Boise Project Board of Control Ada County Highway District 2465 Overland Road 3775 Adams Street Boise, ID 83705 Garden City, ID 83714

Tribal

Rachel Edwards, Assistant to Executive Committee Nez Perce Water Resource Development Nez Perce Tribe PO Box 365 PO Box 305 Lapwai, ID 83540 Lapwai, ID 83540 208-621-3685 [email protected]

Nathan Small, Chairman Fort Hall Business Council PO Box 306 Fort Hall, ID 83203 208-478-3700 [email protected]

Other

Northwest Power and Conservation Council Kevin Lewis, Executive Director 851 SW Sixth Ave., Suite 1100 Idaho Rivers United Portland, OR 97204 PO Box 633 503-222-5161 Boise, ID 83701 [email protected] 208-343-7481 [email protected]

Marie Callaway Kellner, Water Associate Mark Hofflund, Managing Director Idaho Conservation League Idaho Shakespeare Festival PO Box 844 PO Box 9365 Boise, ID 83701 Boise, ID 83707 208-345-6933 ext. 32 208-429-9908 ext. 202 [email protected] [email protected]

Jan Johns, Executive Director Sharon Hubler, Chair Idaho Foundation for Parks and Lands Barber Pool Conservation Area Committee 5657 Warm Springs Ave. 206 E. Linden Street Boise, ID 83716 Caldwell, ID 83605 208-860-0311 208-859-9529 [email protected] [email protected]

6 Ryan Jones Boise Valley Irrigation Ditch Co. Sentry Management 8750 N. Bogart Ln 6149 N. Meeker Place, Suite 150 Boise, ID 83714 Boise, ID 83713 208-323-1080 ext. 59504 [email protected]

Andrew J. Waldera S. Bryce Farris Sawtooth Law Sawtooth Law 1101 W. River Street, Suite 110 1101 W. River Street, Suite 110 Boise, ID 83702 Boise, ID 83702 208-629-7447 208-629-7447 [email protected] [email protected]

Andy Brunelle, Treasurer Darryl Khurt, President Ted Trueblood Chapter of Trout Unlimited Ted Trueblood Chapter of Trout Unlimited PO Box 1971 PO Box 1971 Boise, ID 83701 Boise, ID 83701 208-334-1770 208-870-6628 [email protected] [email protected]

Chris Jones, Board Member Kira Finkler, Director Ted Trueblood Chapter of Trout Unlimited Trout Unlimited Idaho Water Project PO Box 1971 910 W. Main Street, Suite 342 Boise, ID 83701 Boise, ID 83702 208-344-0284 208-345-9800 [email protected] [email protected]

Peter Anderson, Counsel Doug Fowler, President and CEO Trout Unlimited Idaho Water Project LeNir Ltd. 910 W. Main Street, Suite 342 4940 E. Mill Station Drive Boise, ID 83702 Boise, ID 83716 208-345-9800 208-344-1131 [email protected] [email protected]

Riverstone International School The Terraces of Boise

5521 Warm Springs Ave. 5301 E. Warm Springs Ave.

Boise, ID 83716 Boise, ID 83716 208-424-5000 208-336-5550 [email protected]

Christy Meyer, Idaho Conservation Manager Tim Breuer, Executive Director The Freshwater Trust Land Trust of Treasure Valley 910 Main Street, Suite 258 708 W. Franklin Street Boise, ID 83702 Boise, ID 83702 208-321-8116 208-345-1452 [email protected] [email protected]

Liz Paul William Gigray, President Boise River Enhancement Network, INC Foundation for Ada/Canyon Trail Systems PO Box 9402 5700 E. Franklin Road, Suite 200 Boise, ID 83707 Nampa, ID 83687 208-570-3013 [email protected] [email protected]

7 Jane Kreller, Communications Manager Clint Dolsby, Chair SUEZ Idaho Operations Lower Boise Watershed Council 8248 W. Victory Road [email protected] Boise, ID 83709 208-362-7336 [email protected]

8 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

APPENDIX B: FERC Order Issuing License

November 30, 2018 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

POOR QUALITY PARRR f ORPILOYRR,OUU UNITED urATss or- amsmaua FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY CONNISBION

Ada County, the City of Boise, ) Project No. 4881-002 and Art):"r LE Bloom Cook Electric Company ) Project No 3598 000

ORDER ZSBUING LICENSE (NAJOR) AND DENYING APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PERNZT

( XsaYRed DYRcYRYUDRRr 23, 1983 ) Ada County, the City of Boise, Idaho and Arthur L. Bloom (Applicant) filed on September 7, 1982, an application for license under Part I of the Federal Power Act (Act) to construct, operate, and maintain the Barber Dam Project No. 4881.+1 The project would be located on the Boise River, in Ada County, Idaho„ and would affect the interests of interstate or foreign commerce. Notice of the application has been published and comments have been received from interested Pederal, State, and local agencies. No protests or petitions to intervene have been received trcm the agencies, and none of the agencies objected to the issuance of the license. Cook Electric Company (Cook) f i.led on April 4, 1983, a motion to intervene. Cook states that the application for license for Project No. 4881 should be dismissed and that a preliminary permit be issued to Cook. The concerns of the intervenor and commenting agencies are discussed below. Project Descrintion and Oneration

The Barber Dam project No. 4881 would consist of: (1) the existing 1,500-foot-long, 25-foot-high embankment and timber-crib Barber Dam owned by Ada Countyo (2) a 180-acre reservoir; (3) an intake structure; (4) a powerhouse containing three generating units with a total installed'apacity of 4,140 kwU and (5) a transmission line. +2

Ql Authority to act on this matter is delegated to the Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation, under 8375.308 of the Commiesion's regulations, 18 C.F.R. 5375.308 (1983). This order may be appealed to the Commission by any party within 30 days of its issuance pursuant to Rule 1902, 18 C.P.R. 385.1902, (1983). Piling an appeal and final Commission action on that appeal are prerequisites for iiling an application for rehearing as provided in Section 313(a) of the Act. Piling an appeal does not operate as a stay of the effective date of this order or of any ', other date specified in this order, except as specifically directed by the Commission. DEC O) 399 A more Q2 "'"-'"detailed project description is contained in ordering "'3/22.7&Z3& Dc-a-11 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

The proposed project would be desig;.ed for auto atic..operation on a run-of-the«river mode. Bafetv and Adecuacv The existing Barber Dam consists of an embankment section, a timber- crib section, and a non-operational integral powerhouse section. The timber crib dam was analyxed for stability and sliding and was found to have a factor of safety less than two. Ordinarily, a factor of safety of two is generally considered the minimum acceptable for design. However, the dam has safely withstood actual loads in excess of the loads used for the analysis; therefore, giving due consideration to the lack of water storage behind the dam, it is considered safe for normal operation. Failure of the dam during extreme flood flows would be gradual and would not impose a hasard to downstream life. Failure of the dam could result in a significant movement of the sediment collected behind the dam. Article 30 requires the Licensee to file for approval, a report to show that dam failure would not present a haxard to human life or cause significant property damage. No project construction may commence until this report is approved.

The earth embankment section of Barber Dam would be overtopped by extreme floods and would probably fail . Failure of the earth embankment by overtopping flood water would not create a hasazd to downstream life or property. The existing non-operational powerhouse is aAso a water retaining structure, but the details of the powerhouse provided on the Exhibit F drawings are inadequate for safety analyses. Article 31 requires:the Licensee to file a revised Exhibit F drawing of the powerhouse plus a stability analysis of the powerhouse under normal and flood loadings. The design of. the proposed powerhouse presented in the application for license is preliminary in nature. Therefore, Article 31 requires the Licensee to submit for approval, revised Exhibit F drawings showing the final design, and a final design report. Zt is concluded that, under the conditions of this license, the project will be safe and adequate. Bconaaic Feasibilitv

The project will generate an average 16.5 million kWh annually which will be. sold to Idaho Power Company.+3 An economic comparison of the Barber Dam Project to a coal-fired alternative shaws that over its 50-year economic life, the proposed hydro project would have a levelixed annual benefit of 6234,000. Therefore, the project is economically feasible.

/3 This is equivalent to the energy that would be generated by the consumption of 23,300 barrels of oil or 7,600 tons of coal at a thermal generation plant. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

Wildlife Resources The Boise River in the vicinity of the project provides habitat for winte-.ing and nesting waterfowl. Tne Federally listed endangered bald eagle wznters in the area and uses large trees in the riparian zone for roosting . The U.S. Department of the Interior (Interior) and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) recommended that the Applicant create new riparian habitat and compensate for the loss of large roosting trees to replace the habitat that would be destroyed by the project. Interior also recommended that the Applicant limit heavy construction and/or blasting to the period fram late summer to early fall to minimize- potential impacts to nesting waterfowl and wintering bald eagles. 1DFG also recommended that the Applicant should design and construct transmission line facilities to protect raptors.4/ The applicant has agreed to implement the recommendations. Article 24 requires the Licensee to prepare a wildlife mitigation plan that would address the agencims'oncerns. staff also concludes that implementation of the measures required by Article 24 would adequately protect the endangered bald eagle. Water Qualitv The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rivers'he(EPA) and the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) expressed concern about the possible adverse effects on water quality that would result from the removal of a sand bar. The EPA also expressed concern about the dredging of sediments fram the Applicant received on September 21, 1983, water quality certification for .the project from IDHW. Article 36 requires the Licensee to file an erosion and sedimentation control plan that would include measures to protect water quality. NPPC Fish and Wildlife Procram pursuant to section 4(h) of the pacific. Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act Of 1980, Pub. L. No. 96-501, the Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC) developed in 1982 a fish and wildlife program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife resources in the Pacific Northwest. The

Q4 The IDFG for its comments on the application, submitted Se've'ral conditions appropriate for an exempted project. The IDFG's concerns are provided for in the standard articles of the license. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

'roject does not appear to conflict with NppC's fish and wildlife progrsmi Nevertheless, Article 34 reserves in the 'Commission the authority to order, where practicable, alterations in project structures and operations in order to take into account Nppc's fish and wildlife program. Recreational Resources

An uncompleted section of the regional Boise River Greenbelt Bikepath is tentatively planned to be constructed within and adjacent to the project boundary. The Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation ( IDPR) recommended that the Applicant acquire two parcels of land in order to complete this section of the bikepath. Ads County, is committed to the completion of the bikepath and has secured matching funding from Interior for this purpose. Thus, IDPR'-s request is unnecessary. The Applicant is expected to cooperate in allowing use of project lands for completion of the bikepath where possible, thereby contributing to the comprehensive development of the Boise River. Cultural Resources Barber Dam is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Idaho Stats Historic Preservation Officer &SHPO) stated that construction of a new powerhouse would have a visual effect on Barber Dam, but the effect would not be adverse if the powerhouse is designed in consultation with the SHPO and according to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic preservation Projects. The Applicant stated that it would comply with -'these standards to ensure that the powerhouse would be constructed in a manner visually compatible with existing structures, and would continue to consult with the SHpO. It is concluded that the project would not have an adverse effect on historical resources as long as the Applicant complies with Interior's standards. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has been consulted. Article 25 recuires the Licensee to implement these mitigative measures. Other Hnvironmental Imnacts .The project would result in short-term, minor increases in noise levels, exhaust emissions, and dust from construction activities, and erosion and sedimentation from disturbance of land surfaces. Dredging of the tailrace would temporarily increase turbidity of the river. Less than 1 acre of riparian habitat would be affected. Special license articles are included herein to .protect .wildlife habitat and cultural resources. On the basis of the record, and Staff's independent analysis, it is concluded that issuance of a license for the project would not constitute a major pederal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

5

Other Asaects of Comnrehensive Develonment The project does not conflict with any existing or proposed developments, makes good use of the flow and fall of the Boise River, and will be best adapted to a plan for the comprehensive development of the Boise River for beneficial uses upon compliance with the terms and conditions of the license. License Term The proposed scale of development is less than that which would warrant a full 50-year term since the project's dam and reservoir currently exist. Therefore, pursuant to the Commission's policy for licensing projects involving moderate development, ~5 this license will be issued for a term of 40 years. Comoetinc Annlication Cook Electric Company (Cook) filed on October 23, 1980, an application for preliminary permit for the Barber Dam Project Bo. 3598.. Cook subsequently filed motions to reject the Applicant's license application (and grant Cook's permit application) and intervene in the licensing proceeding. Cook argues thats (a) the Commission should not have accepted for filing the Applicant's license application for project No. 4881-002 as the time for filing competihg applications to Project No. 3598 had expired; and (b) granting Applicant a licens'e and denying Cook a preliminary permit would violate Cook's rights to the due process of law.guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and would violate Cook's right to a decision on its preliminary permit application within .a reasonable time. Cook's arguments are essentially the same as those set forth in its request for rehearing of the Order Dismissing Appeal As Boot issued Narch 4, 1983, by the Commission.'+6 zn the Order Denying Rehearing, issued Nay 20, 1983, the Commission rejected Cook's arguments and affirmed that the license application was..properly accepted and that the Commission had acted within a reasonable time in resolving Cook's competitors'ppeal. Thus, Cook's arguments are rejected here.+7 Cook'.s preliminary permit application for Project No. 3598 proposes to study the feasibility of a similar hydroelectric

+5 Lvndonville Electric Denartment, 7 FERC 961,324 (June 29, 1979).

+6 See Arthur Bloom and Ada Countv. et al.. 22 FERC %61,273 (Narch 4, 1983).

+7 See 23 FERC'661,264 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

6-

project at Barber Dam with a capacity between 3,200 kw and 4,$00 kw and sn average annual generation of 15.4 million kwh. Th ~ proposal by the license applicant for project Mo. 4881 would develop 4,140 kW with an annual energy generation of 16.6 mil~(on kWh. Section 4.33(f) of the Commission's regulations states that, if an applicant for license has demonstrated its ability to carry out its plans, the Commission will favor the applicant for license over a preliminary permit applicant proposing to develop the same water resource. This presumption is rebuttable, where the permit applicant can substantiate that its proposal is superior to that of the license applicant.~8 Here, the permit applicant has not demonstrated that ts proposal is superior./9 Since the license applicant meets the statutory and regulatory license requirements, including demonstrating its ability to carry out its plans, the application for license will be granted and the competing application for preliminary permit will be denied. Petition for Waiver Concurrent with the application for license filed September 7, 1982, the Applicant also filed a petition for waiver of ownership requirements. The Applicant states that part of the reservoir created by Barber Dam is owned by the Idaho park Foundation, Inc. (IPFI) in trust for Ada County under covenants designed to preserve, protect, and maintain a wildlife sanctuary in the reservoir area. The Applicant argues that it would not be in the public interest to require it to obtain the said property interests since the land is already devoted for public recreational use. The ZPFZ did not object to the project provided that it was operated run-of-the-river. The Commission has determined that where a dam and reservoir are an integral part of a hydroelectric project, those facilities must be licensed. The Licensee must have sufficient control over project works to enable the Commission, through the Licensee, to carry out its responsibilities with respect to the project. ~10 Therefore, the Applicant's petition for waiver will be denied.~ll

/8 see Frontier Technolocv. Inc. 22 FERc %61,267 (Narch 4, 1983).

/9 See, ~e. ..W.P.B. Power. Inc.. 17 FERC %61,008 (Oct. Si 1981); and Continental Hvdro Corn., 20 FERC %61,347 (SePt. 23, 1982) ~

~10 See New York State Electric and Gas Corcoration, 16 FERC ~ 61,176 (September. 10, 1981).

~11 Normal project operation is not expected to interfere with the wildlife sanctuary. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

It is ordered thats (A) This license is issued to Ada County, City of Boise, and Arthur ( ~ Bloom (Licensee), of idaho under Part I of the pederal power Act (Act), for a period of 40 years, effective the first day of the month in which this order is issued, for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Barber Dam Project No. 4881, located in Ada County on the Boise River and affecting the interests of interstate or foreign commerce. This license is subject to the terms and conditions of the Act, which is incorporated by reference as part of this license, and subject to the regulations the Commission issues under the provisions of the Act. (B) The Barber Dam Project No. 4881 consists ofs (1) All lands, to the extent of the I,icensee's interests in those lands, constituting the project area and enclosed by the project boundary. The project area and boundary are shown and described by certain exhibits that form part of the application for license and that are designated and described as:

EXHIBIT PERC DRAWING NO ~ 4881 SHOWING

G-1 21 Vicinity Map G 2-1 22 Topographic Map G-P-2 23 Topographic Map Gx3 24 I.and Survey (2) Project works consisting of& (a) the 1,500-foot-long, 22.4-foot-high Barber Dam comprising a timber crib section, an embankment section, and a non-functional integrated powerhouse sectiong (b) a 180-acre reservoir with negligible storage capacityt (c) an .intake structure with three gatess (d) two flumesg (e) a 56-foot-long, 48-inch-diameter steel penstock& (f) a powerhouse containing three generating units, 'ne rated at 1,990 kW, one rated at 1,930 kW, and one rated at 220 kwhr (g) a 100-foot-long concrete tailraceg (h) a 5,000 KVA 4.16/34.5-kV transformer) (i) a 175-foot-long, 34.5-kV transmission liney and appurtenant facilities. The location, nature, and character of these project works are generally shown and described by the exhibits cited above and more specifically shown and described by certain other 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

-8-

~xhibits that also form a part of the application for. license and that are designated and described ass

EXHIBIT PERC DRAWING NO ~ TITIE P 1 4881 1 Proposed Refurbishment Existing Powerhouse P 2 4881- 2 Powerhouse Plan P 3 4881- 3 Powerhouse Profile P 4 4881- 4 Powerhouse Profile P 7-D 4881- 10 Upstream Elevation of Powerhouse 4881- 11 Downstream Elevation P-7-P 4881- 12 Section of Boise River Dam and South Elevation of Powerhouse P-7-H 4881- 14 Section of -Crib Overflow Dam

P-7-I 48&1- 15 Barber Dam Rehabilitation Pxoject

P 8- 4881- 16 Toyographic Nap P-9 A 4881- 17 Cross Section Embankment P-9-8 4881- 18 Cross Section P-9-C 4881- 19 Cross Section Exhibit A - Page A-10, paragraphs 2 and 3, filed September 7, 1982. (3) All of the structures, fixtures, equipment, or facilities used or useful in the operation or maintenance of the project and located within the yroject boundary, all portable property that may be emyloped in connection with the project, located within or outside the project boundary, as approved bp the Commission, and all riparian or other rights that are necessary or appropriate in the operation or maintenance of the project. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

-5

(C) Sxhibits A (Page A-10& paragraPhs 2 and 3), F, and G, designated in ordering paragraph (B) above, are approved and made a part of the license only to the extent that they show the general lo".ation, description, and nature of the project. (D) This license is also subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Form L-ll (revised October, 1975), entitled "Terms and Conditions of License for Unconstructed Major Project Affecting the Interests of Interstate or Foreign Commerce," designated as Articles 1 through 23, attached to and made a part of this license. The license is also subject to the following additional articles: Article 24. Licensee shall consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, in developing a wildlife mitigation plan. The plan shall be filed with the Commission, for approval, and shall considers (1) the timing of construction activities to avoid impacts to wintering bald eagles and nesting waterfowl; and (2) measures necessary to mitigate the loss of riparian habitat as a result of project construction. Agency comments on the plan Sfiall be included in the filing. The Licensee shall not commence construction of any project structures until the plan is approved.

Article 25. Licensee shall, p ior to the commencement of any construction or rehabilitation at the project, consult with the Idaho State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to develop a:mitigation plan in a manner sapisfactory to the SHPO ensuring that: (1) the construction of the .project ccmplies with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation Projects and Rehabilitation; and, (2) based on final review of redevelopment plans, any historic and engineering components that will be substantially altered shall be documented according to the standards of the Historic American Hngineering Record (HAHR) and accepted in writing by HAHR and the SHPO prior to construction activity. The mitigation plan shall be filed for Commission approval, and the Licensee shall not commence construction of any project works until the plan is approved. The Licensee shall make available funds in a reasonable amount to complete any additional survey and/or archival work required and any other work found necessary. If any previously unrecorded archeological or historical sites are discovered during the course of construction or development of any project works or other facilities at the project, construction activity in the vicinity shall be halted, a qualified archeologist shall be consulted to determine the significance of .the sites and the Licensee shall consult with the SHpo to develop a mitigation plan for the protection of significant archeological or historical regources. If the Licensee and the SHPO cannot agree on the amount of money to be expended on archeological or historical work related to the project, the Commission reserves the right to require the Licensee to conduct, at 'its own expense, any such work found ()ecessary. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

10

Article 26 ~ The Licensee shall within 90 days after completion of construction file ih accordance,with:the.Ccmmishion's Rules and Regulations revised Exhibit A and Exhibits y and G drawings for Commission approval showing the project as-buil't.

Arti~-,le 27 ~ The Licensee shall file with the Commission's Regionna hn~L neer and tne Director, office of Electric'ower Regulation one copy each of the contract drawings:and 6'pecif ications for pertinent features of the project such as water retention structures, powerhouse and water conveyance structures,'t least.60 days prior to the start of construction. The; Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation may require changes in the plans and specifications to assure a safe and adequate project. Article 28. Licensee shall commence construction of the prgposed project within one year of the date of issuance of the license and shall complete construction within two years from the start of construction. Article 29. The Licensee shall review and approve the design of contractor-designed cofferdams and deep excavations prior to the start of construction and shall ensure that construction of cofferdams and deep excavations are consistent with the approved design. At least 30 days prior to start of construction of the cofferdam, the Licensee shall file with the Commission's Regional Engineer and Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation one copy of the approved cofferdam construction drawings and specifications and a copy of the letter(s) of approval. Article 30 'icensee shall, within six months fraa the date of issuance of. this license, file for approval by the Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation, a report to demonstrate that failure of the dam would not present a hasard to human life or cause significant property damage, and shall not commence construction of any project structures until the report is approved. The report filed should fully document all reconnaissance and studies performed to determine that failure of the dam will not present a hasard to human life or cause significant property damage under all flow conditions up to the Probable Maximum Plood (PMP). If the results of reconnaissance the area downstream dam of of the are inconclusive 'n determining the hasard potential of the dam, a dam break analysis should be performed and results of the analysis ,should consider failure under normal operating conditions and 'flood flows up to the rate where no significant increase in hasard to downstream life and property occurs. An inundation map and water surface profiles should be developed and furnished for the .flow condition which=mmaults in the greatest potential for loss of life and significant property damage. The method and assumptions utilised in the dam break analysis should be fully documented ~ The inundation map and water surface profiles delineate the affected areas and water surface elevations'hould prior to and after the assumed failure. The map and profiles should also show the travel time of the flood wave at critical points downstream of the dam. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

Article 31. The Licensee shall at learnt 50 days prior to start of construction file for approval of the pirector, office of Slectric power Regulation revised Sxhibit p drawirigs showing the final design and a final supporting design report for the propose powerhouse, including stability analyses for the retired powerhouse, and shall not commence construction of any project structures until the filing is approved.

Article 32 ~ The Licensee shall pay the United States an .annual charge, effective the first day of the month in which this license is issued for the purpose of reimbursing the United States for the cost of administration of Part I of the Act. The charge shall be a reasonable amount as determined in accordance with the provisions of the Commission's regulations in effect from time to time. The authorised installed capacity for that purpose is 5,520 horsepower. Article 33. Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Act, after the first 20 years of operation of the project under license, a specified reasonable rate of return upon the net investment in the project shall be used for determining surplus earnings of the project for the establishment and maintenance of amortisation reserves. One half of the project surplus earnings, if any, accumulated after the first 20 years of operation under the license, in excess of the specified rate of return per annum on the net investment, shall be set aside in a project amortisation reserve account at the end of each fiscal year. To the=- extent that there is a deficiency of project earnings below the specified rate of return per annum for any fiscal year after the first 20 years of operation under the license, the amount of that deficiency'hall be deducted from the amount of any surplus earnings subsequently accumulated, until absorbed. One-half of the remaining surplus earnings, if any, cumulatively computed, shall be set aside in the project amortisation reserve account. The amounts established in the project amortisation reserve account shall be maintained until further order of the Commission. The annual specified reasonable rate of return shall be the sum of the annual weighted costs of long-term debt, preferred stock, and common equity, as defined below. The annual weighted cost for each component of the reasonable rate of retuin is the product of'ts capital ratio and cost rate. The annual capital ratio for each compocent of the rate of return shall be calculated based:on an average of 13 monthly balances of amounts properly includable in the Licensee's long-tean debt and proprietary capital accounts as listed in the Commission's Uniform System of Accounts. The cost rates for long-term debt and preferred stock shall be their respective weighted average costs for the year~ and the cost of common equity shall be the interest rate on'10-year government bonds {reported as the Treasury Department's 10 year constant maturity series) computed on the monthly average for the year in question plus four percentage points (400 basis. points) ~ 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

-12-

Article 34. The Commission reserves the authority to order, upon its own motion or upon the recommendation of Pederal or State fish and wildlife agencies or affected Indian Tribes, alterations of pro}act structures and opera- tions to take into account to the fullest extent practicable ~t each relevant stage of the decision-making process the regional 'fish and wildlife program developed and amended pursuant to the Pacific Northwest Electric power planning and Conservation Act.

Article 35 ~ (a) Zn accordance with the provisions of this article, the Licensee shall have the authority to grant permission for certain types of use and occupancy of project lands and waters and to convey certain interests in project lands and waters for certain other types of use and occupancy, without prior Commission approval. The Licensee may exercise the authority only if the proposed use and occupancy is consistent with the purposes of protecting and enhancing the scenic, recreational, and other environmental values of the project. Por those purposes, the Licensee shall also have continuing responsibility to supervise and control the uses and occupancies for which it grants permission, and to monitor the use of, and ensure compliance with the covenants of the instrument of conveyance for, any interests that it has conveyed, under this article. Xf a,permitted use and occupancy violates any condition of this article or any other condition imposed by the Licensee for protection and enhancement of the project's scenic, recreational, or other environmental values, or if a covenant of a conveyance made under the authority of this article is violated, the Licensee shall take any lawful action necessary to correct the violation. Por a permitted use,or occupancy, that action includes, if necessary, cancelling the permission to use and occupy the project lands and waters and requiring the removal of any non-complying structures and facilities. (b) The types of use and occupancy of project lands and waters for which the Licensee may grant permission without prior Commission approval are: (1) landscape plantingss (2) non- commercial piers, landings, boat docks, or similar structures and facilities that can accommodate no more than 10 water craft at a time and where said facility is intended to sprv@-eingle- family type'wellings) and (3) embankments, bulkh'@ada, retaining walls, or similar .struqtures for erosion control-~to protect the existing shoreline. To the extent feasible and desirable to protect and enhance the project's scenic, recreational, and other environmental values, the Licensee shall require multiple use and occupancy of facilities for access to. project lands or waters. The Licensee shall also ensure, to the satisfaction of the Commission's authorised representative, that the uses and occupancies ior which it grantk permission are maintained in good repair and comply with applicable State and local health ind safety requirements. Before granting permission for construction of bulkheads or retaining walls& the Licensee shallI. (1) inspect the site of the proposed construction, (2) consider whether the planting of 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

'egetation or.the use of riprap would be adequate to c:ontrol erosion at the site, and (3) determine that the proposed construction is needed and would not change the basic contour of the rear:rvoir shoreline. To implement this paragraph (b), the Licensee may, among other things, establish a program for issuing permits for the specified types of use and occupancy of project lands and waters, whish may be subject to the payment of a reasonable fee to cover the Licensee's costs of administering the permit program. The Commission reserves the right to require the Licensee to file a description of its standards, guidelines, and procedures for implementing this paragraph (b) and to require modification of those standards, guidelines, or procedures. (c) The Licensee may convey easements or rights-of-way acr'osa, or leases of, project lands for: (1) replacement, expansion, realignment, or maintenance of bridges and roads for which all necessary State and Pederal approvals have been obtained) (3) storm drains and water mainsg (3) sewers that do not discharge into project waters) (4) minor access roads& (5) telephone, gas, and electric utility distribution lines) (6) non-project overhead electric transmission lines that do not require erection of support structures within the project boundary; (7) submarine, overhead, or underground major telephone distribution cables or major electric distribution lines (69-kV or less)) and (8) water intake or pumping facilities that do not extract more than one million gallons per day from a project reservoir. Ho later than January 31 of each year, the Licensee shall file three copies of a report briefly describing for each conveyance made under this paragraph (c) during the prior calendar year, the type of interest conveyed, the location of the lands subject to the conveyance, and the nature of the use for which the interest was conveyed. (d) The Licensee may convey fee title to, easements or rights-of-way across, or leases of project lands fore (1) con- struction of new bridges or roads for which all necessary State and Pederal approvals have been obtained) (2) sewer or effluent lines that discharge into project waters, for which all necessary Pederal and State water quality certificates or permits have been obtained) (3) other pipelines that . cross project lands Or waters but do not. discharge into project waters; (4 ) non-project overhead electric transmission lines that require erection of support structures within the project boundary, for which all necessary Pederal and State approvals have been obtained) .(5) private or public marines that can accommodate no more than 10 watercraft at a time and are located at. 1east one-half mile from any other private or public marina) (6) recreational development consistent with an approved .Exhibit R or approved report on recreational resources of an Exhibit Et and ('".1 other uses, ifa (i) the amount of land conveyed for a pa'vdicular use is five acres &: cr less) (ii) all of the land conveyed is. located at least 75 feet, measured horixontally, from the edge of the project reservoir at normal maximum surface elevation) and (iii) no more than 50 total acres of project lands for each project 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

l4

development ara conveyed under this clause (d.)(7) in any calendar yehr. At least 45 dSys before conveying any interest in project lande under this paragraph (d) & the Licensee must file a letter to the Director, office of Electric power Regulation, stating its intent to convey the interest and briefly describing the type of interest and location of the lands to be conveyed (a marked Exhibit G or E map may be used), the nature of the proposed'se, the identity of any Federal or State agency official consulted, and any Federal or State approvals required for the proposed use. Unless the Director, within 45 days ffom the filing date, requires the Licensee to file an application for prior approval, the Licensee may convey the intended interest at the end of that period. (e) The following additional ccindit'iona apply to any intended conveyance under paragraphs (c) or (d) of this articles (1) Before conveying the interest, the Licensee shall consult with Federal and State fish and wildlife or recreation agencies, as appropriate, and the State Historic Preservation Off icer. (2) Before conveying the interest, the Licensee shall determine that the proposed use of the lands to be conveyed is not inconsistent with any approved Exhibit R or approved report„on recreational resources of an Exhibit E: or, if the project does not have an approved Exhibit R or approved report on recreational resources, that the lands to be conveyed do not have recreational value. (3) The instrument of conveyance must include covenants running with the land adequate to ensure thats (i) the use of the lands conveyed shall not endanger health, create a nuisance, or otherwise be incompatible with overall project recreational uses and (ii) the grantee shall take all reasonable precautions to ensure that the construction, operation, and maintenance of structures or facilities on the conveyed lands will occur in a .manner that will protect the scenic, recreational, and environ mental values of the project. (4) The Commission reserves the right to require the Licensee to take reasonable remedial action to correct any violation of the terms and conditions of this article, for the protection and enhancement-ef the project's scenic, recreational, and other environment+a~values.

gl (f) The conveyance..of an interest in project lands under this article does not in itself change the project boundaries. The project boundaries may be changed to exclude land conveyed under this article only upon approval of revised Exhibit G or E 'drawings (project boundary mays) reflecting exclusion of that land. Lands conveyed under this article will be excluded from the project only upon a determination that the lands are not necessary for project purposes, such as operation and maintenance, flowage, recreation, 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

-15-

public aces'ss, protection of environmental resources,';.and shoreline control, including shoreline aesthetic values. Absent extraordinary circumstances, proposals to exclude lands conveyed under this article fram the project shall be consolidated for consideration when revised Exhibit G or K drawings would be filed for approval for other purposes. Article 36. The licensee, in consultation with the V.S. Environmental protection Agency and the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, shall prepare and file with the CoNaaission's Regional Engineer in San Francisco, California, and the Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation, at least 60 days prior to any ground disturbing activity or spoil disposal at the Barber Dam Project:, a detailed"plan to control erosion and dust, and to minimise the quantity of inorganic sediment or other potential water pollutants resulting fram construction and operation of project facilities, including dredging and spoil disposal. This plan shall include an implementation schedule, monitoring and maintenance programs for project construction and operation, and a sugary and evidence of agency consultation ~ The Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation, may require changes in the plan to minimise erosion, dust, sedimentation, and. water pollution problems. (E) The'application for preliminary permit filed by cook Electric company on octcber 23, 1980, for project Eo. 3598 is denied. (F) The Petition for Waiver of Ownership Requirements filed by Ada County, City of Boise, and Arthur Bloom is denied. (G) Failure of the Licensee to file a petition appealing this order to.- the Commission shall constitute acceptance of this license. In acknowledgment of acceptance of this license, the license shall be signed for the Licensee and returned to the Commission within 60 days r43a the date'of.fauuhdbs"of" '- '" this order. ace,5,. Lawrence R. Anderson Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

Pro)ect No. F801-002

IN TBS'fiNC&Y of its acknowledgment of acceptance of all of the terms and conditions o! this order, Ada County, City of Boise, and Arthur Bloom, this day of 19 has caused its corporate name to ba signed hereto by its President, and its corporate seal to be affixed hereto and attested by its Secretary, pursuant to a resolution of its Board of Directors duly adopted on the day cif 19, a certified copy of the record of which is attached hereto.

Pres ident

Attests

Secretary

(Bxecuted in quadruplicate) !I 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

I I tora t 2 ~ . (RavL se4 October, 1979) r'isaac amer 22colatohv cceusszcr

astfsfa l. %ho .satire yecdeet& aa CesesfheC fo this orCer eg tse ~~4~sfcay 1 ha ~set to all et tho ysosfsfsaer teias, aa4 ees4ftfeai ot the lfeeaae,

kseisfa 2 ~ Ne aohataatial ehaoga shaQ.'ha aaCo fa. th ~ says& Wacs, syee5$ featfoas, as4 ataaeoaata Cesorihe4 aa4 Ceofysat's4 as arbfhfts aaC ayyrove4 br the "~ aioa ia fts es4as as a yart oc tbs lieaasa total sash ebaago shall bass bees a~ bp the CswsLssfeaa rresfaaC, hssaNr ~ .that 52 tbo Lfeaasoe or tbe v~tessoa eases aa m es Cesirahle that saf4 assrevsC ~'"~ts er asy oC s he ehaaIeC, there be asbaLttaC ~fas for ayyrosal a resfsaC or a445~~ ~ ~shfhft or eshfhfts eesarfsy the ysoyoee4 ehaoyos shish, uyoa aIa ~Td hg tbs ~~ sioor shall ~ a yart oC lfeeasa aa4 shall soyesseCar fa shale ar 5$ sooh ~'"'t os a~a+its tbesetocere oaCo a yart et g ac osg be eyesf4feC hg the " ~ afoa. ~f~s 2. aha yroSeet sorbs shou. ho eaa;-—— sosetaa~ seagosÃf ty sfth tba ayysgp%4 ~~4%&to~ retssreC to fa lrtfola 2 harefo or as ebaayeC fa assozC- Oaea fifth tho ysovfsfeaa oc safC artfale. ~osetsaoF shall reysfre for tha yrotsosiaa ot aavfyatfoa, 152am healthy or yroyestgi there shall aot be Sa4a wftholRt ysfor agjsnval of tbe ~a+isa aag aohstaatfal altasatiea or a445afso aot,fo eoa4orsfay'fth sbe a-;~;=- yiaas to aay Caa er othea'rogeot sorbs oaCar the lfsaase os asqr sab see o! yregeet lasCs aa4 satess'Sot aatbosfseC 'tastfal bsrefal ea4 aap essrooaof altaratfoar a44fofoar or 1$sa ~e oaCe shall these as ha ssh5est to sech oa454featiaa ~s4 ebaaoe as tba &~4cafes oag Cfrsot +Laos sbaasoe— fa yro)eot verba& os fa ossa eC eet laa4a aa4 eaters, or 45 »~ I~sss~to sar bo ssCa 54 each cAlsaese sill aet raealt ia ~aaCaoioaeo fa eefsfeheg, ia a mteI. fosroass fa ':ssae fa aa aCvossa Oosf ~~ fsysot, or fa '~'~t ot yeaaral ~~ o4 Cesoleyaeatt bat asy o! saoh wLsos ehaaoea aaue «ftboot the ysios ass ~4 ot tha ~~ ', shish ia fts bssa yso e4 or vill ysehuw aiy o4 sash reaaltsr %bail ha eah5eat to each alteratfoa aa tho +~ aioa oay 4 sate 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

. -Oyoa the ecscyletioa oC tba yrojut, or at sech other ticce u tba +~c~siea-. CSrut( the X4eauee shall sthait te the Osscissioa fer a val ravise4 ashihits Sasofar as outsoar'o show aaW 4Sverfeue CrNl os variatiou ia tbe ysojeet mea aa4 ysojaet heoafarg u CSaalap looats4 or Sa the ysojeat works as ac+wally ooastraota4 whoa ~~ with tha asu aa4 heeafasf showa aa4 tha works CudR5hoh Sa tba er. Sa tbe ~~&its syysove4 hy the Caaecissioa, tchrethss witiL ~ atateaaat Sa writiay uttiay forth tbe reuoas whish Sa the o 4~i~ of the LSoeuea aaoessitate4 or jostifie4 variatiea ia ar 4Sverieaoa fsocc sbe ayysovs4 erhihits. Cook ~sbihita shall, Sf aa4 wbea a ——M hr the Coaccissioa, he safe a ysrt ef the lieease'a4er the~yrovisiou of Artiola 1 bereofo ... la S.. She oaaatstetioa& oyeratioa& as4 rais os tae yrojeot aa4 aay work Suifaatal to or altesatices shall he sohjeoa to ahe Sssyeetioaoff'iou aa4 soyarvisioa ef tbe yerioaal Regiaaar, taferal yowas sioa& ia the sarioa wkesaia tbs srojeaa Se looata4. or of stab'ther offiser or areas u saioa esp 4uisaate, who shall he the atthorise4 reyraseatative of tha ~~~~siss for sash yoryosas. Cha t-c~iee shall oooyarata ~ai4 rayreseatative as4 shall ~cah e4 yrofrai oC iasyaotioa hr the ~-~ ea that will yravifem for sa te aa4 CSe4 Suyeotich fores Cor eoutucotioa of sha ysojaot aa4 for aag sshse%aeat alterabiou te aba yrojeet. Coa-~ ~ of the yrojeot works or aay futora or altaratioa tbeseaf shall aot he Ssitiate4 oatil, tha ysogrscc of Sosyeotioa for tba ysojaot verbs or say sooh featsse thereof has heea ass kr aaS4 reyreaeatativa. %he X4oeasae shall else f to saS4 ~aatative sash Setback Ssfoseaaioa as ha aay oouessiaf tba ooutraotioa& ayesatioai aa4 of tba yrojaotg as4 of as( altasasioa thereof r aa4 she@i aetio hia oC the Cata vyoa whish wash will hayia, u fat ia a4vaaoe thereof u sai4 reyreseatativa— ray s " "'g ayeeifp& aa4 shall aatifg hics r ~Ag Sa wsitiay of aay sasyeaaioa of wosk for ~ yerio4 of mre than eae seek& aa4 of Sta suosytioa aa4 oosylatioa. 'ha LL ahaU. aLLow saS4 rayreseatative sa4 othea'ffioera or 08yleifooe of tka Qaite4 States ~ sbowiay yroyes erafeatials, Csee aa4 oasueriota4 assess toc thro ~ aa4 "assess tba yrojeot Serfs aa4 yrojeot works Sa the yerfosuaoe of thais offio~ 4atiea. Cha ee shall o sash sales aa4 eagtlatioas of geaeral ar a isl ayylioahilisy as tba " 'ioa ae yrasorLhe froa the te tire for tba ysoteetioa of tLCe& health, or yroyestp. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

age arsfafa s..yhe Lfeenaee, within cfve years cRes tbo cate eC fayCanas OS the LSOeaaec shall OOIyCSRO title Sn Cae OR tbe rfsbt-bh uae fn yaryetafty all lan401 ether than lan40 OC tba ChCfte4 Stataec nseaaaaay Or ayyawyriate COR'he Oenatrtstfen, ~ saint~ ~ 1 an4 Oyeratfsa OC tbe yrejeste %he Lfeenaee Or ita assaoaasra 004 aaaf+N ehaLLe 4nric+ tho yorio4 OC tbe I-cs~aog retain the yeeeeaaion ac all yrajeet yroyeRIe oovsrs4 hg ihe 14~~ as Saano4 oR aa later ansn4O4y'nolI tho yrojoot arm, the srojeot «orbs, an4 all Cranohiasa, eaaemata, wateR Rflhta, an4 riehta aC eesayaney an4 aaeg an4 aone OC sash yasyertfea shall he volnntnrflg 0014, Leaae4, taonsCerra4r , ar oshoawfae 4fayoae4 OC «ftbout tho yafor written ayyiivaL OC the Occaclaafon, 'eaoeyt that, the-.t40enaee nag lasso er otherwise 4fayose OC fntoraata in yaojoot Lan40 or 'yropeatv wftboat ayoefCSO Written .apgrovrL='OC'ho ~RS'On yeraSQlt ~0 the then eorroat Reaalatfana OC the ~afon. Chs yasvfafona' OC thfh article aro not fnten4o4 to yrevont tho er the Ratfsenent CRoa eervfse OC etFIcotnrea, ape t, or other yrojeea «orbs in eclneotfon with Reylaoe- main theraoC when haeam obsolete, ™~A~to,aa fnoCCfsfent Cor Cnrther service 4no to woer ail tears an4 nertyacs or arnot 4se40 Ar jt4fofaL sales na4O therewn4sr, or tan ealoet shall not he 4sewa4 volantarg tranaCORR wfthfn the -~ —OC shia artisle. krtfsle C. hs ths event ths RRojeot fa tabes evoF hy the Onsaes Ctaste ayon the teRRLLnaikoa oC ths liaaaae as yravf404 Sn.cooties Ls oc the ye4eral rower Ass ~ or ia tranaCORRON to 0 new 1 I~~so or to 0 Rsn yower Lfoenaeo 004sr ths. yreviafone oc cooties Ly oc eaf4 Rat, the xfsontee. Sts aseoeeeora an4 assi@us shall he Reayoiafhle toR, aa4 shall soho OO04 any 4OCeet oC: title to, or OC Rfyht OC oo aa4 aas in; any eC sash yrojeot yroyertr that ia nesassary or arc c fate or valnahla an4 aeavieeshle fn tbs saint an4 oyeratfos oC the yrojeet, an4 ahaLL yay an4 4faehaFOO, or shall aamw Raiyonafhflftjr Cor yarnent an4 "' oCc all Liens or eneenbranaea ayon tha yrajaa OR yrsjeat yroyerty~ aaeate4 hg ths Q,aeneas or eReate4 or fnanrra4 aCter the faeaanee OC the lfoenaoc yrovf404, ybat the yes«4 I~I OC this artfsle aro not fat== to Roaafre the Lkaenaee. Cor tha yaaysoo OC tranacaerfny the yeofeef, to tbo Qnfta4 states or ts a aew 1 ee, to OIFycfre any 4SCcerant title to, or rflht OC osssyanoy an4 aao inc any OC aseh yrojast Icoyeaty ~ban wae nosoaaarr to alspcfRO Cor fta olol ynayoeos aa ths 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

i&isle 1. Se. Setaal lsyitkaate orifiaal oost of the ycageoai aa4 of aag a44itkoa thereto or bottescoat thsheef r shall he 40teslalae4 hy tha Coacissioa is asesr4aaoe cith.tba Tefercl yewar bat aa4 tba CoeaLssioa' Sales as4 109LLatiaae .Chofsos40F. hrtisio 9. yhe LLoeasoe shall iastall aa4 thereafCSF Rsiataas cases as4 strosR-QSQQlg statioao for tho yoryose eg 4o l ~ y tho stage:aa4 floe of tbo streah or streaca es shish tbo yrejeat is losate4I the afoot of catoc h014 is aa4 irith4rssa fosa saercyo,,'s4 tbo.offeotivo hoa4 oa the tsshiaoel shell yrsvifo:for tho FNIaice4 F "' of each cacao $04 fea'ho SAN/Sate ratite of sash statuses) ~S4 shT isstall as4 caiaaais a~ ~ W cooers afeysato fcr ~ho 4ot ~'ioa ef. the asset ef alsstsfo eaorsy coascats4 - le the ychjoct oorhsi Cha nosher, ehasaeteri aa4 looatioa of IROooi 'Seteroi or Other Seasarisy 40ICoesi as4 tho w4 of eyesore thereof, shall at all tihes he aetio . footers to tho " ~ sioa OF ito actboria04 Feyreseatative.

%ho rt~ sioa Fesoew Cho Fioht, after eotioa ao4:~sr--='osiW for heariag, to FIsylire soah aloeratioos ia tho .aacber, obaraster, aa4 looatioa of Ceoao, cetera, Or ether aoasoriog 4seiooei aa4 «ho asths4 of oyecatioa tboceofi as sre seoassasy co ssoore a4ogte ce4 ~4~tiaas. She QlstallpILLOS of cases, the m~ ef sai4 qtreaa or 'a$4 tbe 40i ~ ties ef tho floe thereof, shall ho osfor tha soyorvisios ofi or ia 4ooyoFSCQRl vithi Cho. OistrLot IofilIoar of tbo ohita4 States csoloeioal focecg havisc eharce of sar~cise. Oyeratioaa is the FoyLos of tbe yrojeot ~ aa4 tha ~=~ shall afraaoo Cs the Qsite4 states csolociosl careay the~afoot sf fss4$ eetisat04 to bo aosossosy fsr sash soysF~Csioai OF Cooyeratios for sech yerio4$ as csg be catoLUg aeaee4 Csea. Ibe~ho™3,eaasseshall Rosy aecnuate aa4 soffieLeat ~~.of the for090iaf 40COFsisatioss to the satisfaotioa . ~ of tho Casa4sioalilaa4 shall sebo Fetasa af sooh Faoorfs. acsoallg at 'sash Chas aa4 ia sooh fossl a~ the osaaLS!isa cay yroaorihe. + lrtisla 9 ~ %ho l~ -0 shall i aftsc Sstiea as4 salty sar boacisyi isstsll a44ie+m I- oayaoity or Saba ohasgoo is tho yrojoct as 4iresto4 bll ths "~~ ~sioai. to tho Ostoat that it is. Oo'oa~+~a~l1 aa4 yehlis istorest to 4O ao. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

aSs

-..Aatisls 10. Qbe LLesssee ah'L'alp aftoR aotieo aa4 eyps~av Ros houisi, aaor4isats the oysratios of tbo yes)est, oloaorieallp as4 hyfraolieallp& with swh other yre)oats er pessr apstaos as4 is swh sheer aa tbs 'isa sap 4ireit ia tbe istarest of yssoR as4 oober ~ 'esefieial io weo: of ester rueoroes& aa4 es swb eoa4itisss ~~ abe table shasiss 04.hoaofita hp ths +~~ 00 as the OssFLssios Fag OR40RI krtks10 'll. Iheaeeer tba Ltaeaaee ia 4$restlp hosafawa sp caa aosateastiss wsh of saether liasssoe, a yeRIRLatoot 0F ths Chit04 Itatu.os a stars/a FsssrvsLR or etbea'oa4sster tbo Zd,eessss shall Reishorae the asser af the beefeater~ ~;—.~tfor swh yart of tbe asses'haoies for isteseati~Salas ~& as4 4eyrsoiatios ~bereef u tha. P~fasisa Shag 40~~+ee ts he gygtahlee ~a4 shkU. yap te tba Oaits4 States the east of sahiss scab 40~& os u fia04 bp the " yrovi4e4 hy a storage RosersoiR oR other hsa4satsr ~ mst ef the Iait04 States, the Liesasoe Shan, ysy to tha ~~raise tho SWSSta fsr lIbish it ia btl1~ fROS tiae So tia ~ for swh hss4sater heaafits as4 f'or the oooo of "% sbe W~~" tioas sorssast to tbe thea a~a t of tba ~ss safer tbe ysferal poser hot lrtiolo Qr %hs oyerstioss of oba r=', so faR as tbsp arcsec tso ass& stoaaps as4 4isoharpe faoa storage of vatsrs-.affsos04 hr tba liossso, shall at all tisss hs eoatrel104 hg awh r "la Solos aa4 Fafslathes as ~he Cossissioa say ysosoribo for the yrotaooioa of 1140, heaLth, ss4 yroyortp. Sa4 ia.tbe istsreat of the aalleat eoasermtios sa4 0 '1'io4 of swh eaters yolloF yssyoseo 004 for other hosofioial yOLLio llseo iaolsiLSg Feoreasc~rl yarpoaeat Q4 the L~aaaaee shall Release ester fros tbs 'ysojsot Fuarvoir at ssab Rats is ashia feet ysa'eooa4, or swb velwo is aero fast yeR sysoifi04" ysrio4 of ttas, as the & 4 sioa sag Q» fsr tbs yssyesss heaa'4tsaaaeee gaat4asaA ela 13. Oa.tbe ayplieatios of asr ysrsosr uSOOXNIXea&s OaryORatiaa, psleral afsaep& State Or ess4aiyali@ tbo f.(aaaaaa Shall Sorgit SWh Faa'aaarL~l we of ita reseRRoiR or otbsa yR03eeC properties, isolo4isp wrbs, las4s sa4 ester Risbts, or parte thsreof & u Fsp he ORSOR04 bp tbe H~t saisay after 'Sotiae SS4 eypsrtWisp 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

ega

fss b'OOFQ+t fa tho. fatareata Of aasyrahoaafVO COVoloyseat of tho watosweg or watesweys favolv04 004 tho aaasorllatfoa ~a4 atfifsatfaa ef tbo water rosoasees of the Fogioa for water aayyly OF fer the yssmoaes of s~ootsfe, isle ~'-'pal er afaLlar sacs. 'srffatfsa&NIO Lfaaaseo aha@. Raoofl% Feasoaahle acscpoasatfoa for ase ef fts Fosescafs'ar other project yssyertfes or parts thereof fsr aaab PSSPOSeoc te faelafe at leaat OSJl safshsssessat.fsr asg 4$0$0400 or - ea whish the joist aee Oaaaea tbe aa~~seo to fsaari hay Nceh tioa shall ho ffcca4 hy the..O$00fssfea ofthes=-..—.- ayyreeal ef aa 0$—~t hetwaei the ~-4 ~oe 004 50 yartsParty:or parties heaefftfss or after aotfae a04 ty fes 'hearfsy. aatfoas shall eaatafa 'sc fs siafffeieat Cetafl to affcNC 0 ~ 'aswatfoa OOCORS+ of the presoso4 aso, faelaCfsr satfsfaotosy that, Sho 0~V~:t yosseasea aeoeasasy water Rfshts yassasat to sy &c" » ~ state lsw, or ~ shcnefsr of ealcae'by saob owLCoase Oallaet Oeaearroatlg he Nchsfttaar aa4 a atatesest as te the Rolstfossbiy or the proyose4 aso to asg Staae er Ssafafyal, ylaaa or ORCORS whish Say hase hoes 04oyte4 with Rosyeet.to the ase of sash waaers. lrtfele li. Xa the eoastroatfoa OR Safa~ of She ~sea woes i abe TA~~ Shall yNOO 004 mfatafa Ncf Oshlo otsllstaroo 004 Cowfooo to R04aso to 0 L ~~0 Ceproe the lfabflftr ef asataet ===—fts 0 - ~ -sioa lfaea 004 , teleyboao'a4 other aftaal wires OR power tsaas gfsjggg lfaes aeastraeteC yrfor to fts tr c ofoa Jfaoe as4 aot owaaC hr tbe hfsaasoo, anC shall also ylaoo 004 $$sfatafa 0'aftahlo strlcotsroa 004 CO%fees to R040eo to 0 s " Ceprae the $$»cccty of aay stssetsres or wfsas 00 Ohstssatfay tref ffa OR &~~S life. Noae of the yrdcsfoaa of this'rtiola ORO &i~&~ So rolfen the ~f w frcsa asy Rosyoasfhflfty or reysirecleat which Ssv ho fsyoaaC hg aag.othea'swfal aathosftg for aoaLCf$ $g or ~~~tfay f04%otfvo faaarfereaoo. Artfele 1$ Nle hfseasee Shall, foR the eoasorvatfea . 'a4 40$0Lopaoat of fish 004 wcI&~~&a Resoaroes, ooasistot, ~safataiai aa4 operate, or asraccge fOR tbe eoaatslcetfea, c as4 oyeratfoa of soob Roasoaahlo faoflftfes, a04 eaaylg «fth ssab s "'e saCiffaatfoas of

. tho'rofest straotssos 004 oyeratfsar as aag ho osCeisec hy ths ~'fea ayoa fas owa Sstfoa or oyoa tho .~i:==Catfea sf,.the,,,f aarstssy,.of .tbe- zatarfor-or--tho .fish-«kL- wc-~~4.&o .= ~coaoF or sgaaafeo of asv State fa whish tho protest 0L. 0 ysrt thesoof fs loaaee4, after Soafeo a04 ayyostaaf "or bearish. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

e 7,e hrt$ 01O 14. Nboaevor ths Vail dtatos oba$ $ 400$00 ia shaaeet$ oa with tho yrofeet, te oeaotroot fish sad wc ~ ~~ifo faoilitfoo or'o tbe oaio CSob aa4 faoilitioo".ot ita owa oayoaaei tho Liooasso shall t tbe Ihited fthtos or Sta dseifaatod afoaoy to assi C~ af oestc Oeob Of the LLOOaaee'O laa4O sad iatsroota ia Saa4ei roaeavoira, «ataawayo aad yeo5oot woabo 'oo ms@ he r ~~~+~+ rQglcirsd to eoayloto ooob fa0$$$tioo or oooh Say—~to thereof. Xa oddities, adter aoties sad oyyeotoaMgr for hsariae, the LSeeaose shall modify Ohs yro)oot oyeratioa ao aaf ho roaooaahlp yrooerihed hg tho +~csoioa ia 'ordse to yoaait tho aaiat~~~~ ~ aad oysratioa ....of'tbe fish.oa4 0$141$fe faoilitios ~iiiotod cr i——-M tho Iaited ftatos Oadoo 'tho yrovioioaa of this olo. ertiolo shall aot'o Satoryrotod to ylaoo oaf ob tioa ea the. Rd,tsd States to ooastrooa or isys0m fish sad w$ 14- lids fasilltios or to relieve ths Q,eeaoee of aay ohlicfatioa oa4er th'is liesaoo. krtiols 17. ebs +-1 " ee shaLl. Ooascecot maiataia ~ad oysratoi. Or shall oaraaeo for ths ooastwsotioa, mala- "==-=, aa4 oysaatioa ef sooh rsasoaahls rooroaic==& fa0$1$tiese $00104$CaS modifioatieae therotec OOOh a~ aeoooo goads g whasvos ~ ]aeseh cIIa gomys ~ ~aLos ~ ~a4 ~™~:;aesaa& oaaitarr fooLlitiee, oad ic~~c yiviacs ooasidoratsoa to ths aosdo of tbo ybyosoallg L~~«~yyod, aad shall 'ooaylp with each rosa»~ msdS- fsoisssao of ths yreioet„as mag bo yreeoesho4 heas- ofaor hg tbe Comaissioa the teea of tbSO lieease oyoa Sto oea aooioa or myoa Qs rs 0 tioa of tho foorstarg of the xatorsor or ethos Satseostod yedsral .Or ftate.ageaoSO ~, after aotios sad ~~ ~ty fer heariciy. Article IO. So far as So ooaoioseat «Ssh yroyor tsoa 0! tho yco)sots tbo +c~~—es shall allow yohlio faoo aooooo, to a eoaaonablo emtoat, to yrogset waters aa4 ad]aooat yrogoot leads owasd hy the ~.4 ~~.for the yosyooe of full ot$1$aatioa of oaob laid'- aad waters for aavifa aad for omtdcor reeroatioaal.yaoyoossi SaolmdSOCS fiohiae aa4 hoatiaf c yrovidods %st tho t'4+~~eo aap Oosorvs faoa yob1$0 aeob yortsoa'o of the yrofsot motors a45aosat loa4oc 'oad yeofoet fa0$1$tioo ao as/ ho assessor+ for the yeoteetPea af %$fe, health, aa4 '6 yroyorty. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

Ie 4

Srtisls lf ~ Xa the dosatroeCietc waiataaaaoor or eyeia%~ 00 cao profeet& the W,esaaee ahall he reayoaaihls for. 4h4 aha@1, tobe r «"~"10 soaetrea to preheat& soil ~aoaios es 14440 44feoeac to acroase er otbsa wstara, ~crees a~c~~cacsese oa4 asy fera of water oi asr yollwLLaa. yhe Cemtaeieai Cyea regent er Syea Sta OOS artisan 0OV arfsr tho LSeesaoo, ts Colo aeoh ssaellree 44 Cbs ~44SOO fiafa Cs he aeesaaekp for those ysrpoeoe ~ 4ftoL aocioa ~44 ayyortlcaitg ror hoaiiar. 1 2a. ~ aieesaee aball ooaaslt with Cb eyyreyraace aeata 404 teferal ag ~"'= as4, withis oao ysaa af the 44ta Of Saauaaas ef labia ~4 ShaLL aeb- SSC far ~aaSOS naval 4 P144 for Oloaeiaf=, Chs racer weir areas Ptrthor ~ tbe ++~~~ ehLL1 olaar 454 Rssy olaar te 40 te «S4th 1404a aloag eyes oesfsita 404 shall 4iayeee of, 411 aerlsctersai sssas4 +~~, hatch, refaes, or''Otbeot~~saterLal essseeaaaer for the yeryoase of tho yrefeot whish eseulca fros the 01 Lse of 14044 00 fros the lIRSac~~""0 er 41Coracioa of Cho eec wsrhae Xs 444SCSost all crees sleep the peeiybsrg of yrofeot roaoshire whish sar 4SO 4orisg eyeratiosa ef tbs yeofset ah411 he a~ Uyos of the oloarisg plea olaariao of tbs lasfe as4 4il4iayoaal of; the " W satarial ab41J. ho fess with 44O ses as4 ta the aatiaraaties of tbe asthoriasf rsyrsass ~otic ef Chs &~f ies as4 Sa aeesafases with aew ---Sate Feferalg Stater 444 10041 atatttsa F44 rsgolatiosae %resole 21. %2ccher os 14044 of tha ysstc4 States catt sae4& sr eoeteoIN4 Ss the eoaacroocies 444 saiat of tbs pisfsac werIca, or Sa the oleariay of asi4 laaRa, shall he yaS4 fare aa4 the raasltiag ~ ea4 4ohria 4iayoesf oft Sa aoesrfaseo with Cho ~sirssesta of Che 49ssop of tha I4SC04 states havior fsriafiotios over 4414 14444. payasac for ssrclcastahla-~~~ abLQ bo at oeerest atasy- afe rataee 444 pep%est for yotaf yroetb ic~ halos serohaatable:.OSae shall h'0 at osreaat 444afo ayyraiaal. valtsa. Wcncevar, Cba arose'f Cho Qaito4 States.haviay- feri'afietioa sap $011 op 4Sayoae of tbo ~aehaatehlo t'~ co others thea ths Lioeaassc praws444, Chat csshsr ae eall or 4iayoae4 of aha@. be ott 444 —--.— feoa Cbs area prior co, or wicbost ua4ss Saterfarsses «Scb, olearisy CSosa of the c~ ee as4 Sa ooorfiaatios with the ~aaoe 4 peofooCf eoaaoegotios ewh~ ~ l yseh sale or 4Sayoaal to 0 shall aoc esliewa che LSoesase of raapeaaihilitg far Cbs elias 444 4iayoeal of 411 alaab 444 4ehria fata yro feet

7y 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

a ~ e'

braf ala 22.e 5he Teiceasee shall 40 hfag sea~ coachy sama sta y'csNr& an4 shall r«maire fta eayloyees, aaatraetorc, aa4 eayloyeea o4 ccatraetora"to 4o evarF-. this re ~ &ly wftbfa their poverty both fa4ayea4eatly aa4 ayea tba r«maeet:e4 e44feers e5 tbe aceaey eeaeerae4, te provost, to sebo a4veace preyaritfoas 5or bogoresafea o5, aa4 te aoyyraea tires oa ebs laa4s to hs asecpfa4 or ase4 ea4er tbs lfeeasa. 5hs r-f " eo shall ha liable 2sr aa4 shalL tho costa facarre4 hg tbo Qafte4 8&tea ia. avyprasefay !free caaae4 5rea tbe ceaatrtctfoi& oy'eratfoa& oc safa- e4 the prefect aorbs er o5 sbe verba apyaraeaaat ..: or aseasecay theceto

sa4ea'the-lfasasc'rticle 23. She Licsaaao shall faaoayoae ao oh jeetfoa voi aaa shall fa ao var prevent,'ao hy the agoaef o5 tbe Onita4 States havfaC 'focfa4fctfoa over abe laa4s h4 tbo Qafte4 states a55ecte4, oc br yocaoaa er eoayoratfeas occemg las4s of tho Qafte4 Ctaaoe aa4ec yemft. o5 «ster 5or 5fce aayyressfoa 4coa asy aaae«a, coa4aft, sr ho4g o!vates, aataral or actf5, aae4 hg tbo hfceaeoe ia tb~ oyeratioa. o! the yea)set verbs aovere4 hg the 14 e, or the aao hy yartfsa o! «ster 5or eaaftarg aa4 4amatfc yaryoaoa Crea asy stree«t coa4%fty or ho4y eC llaaert aatoral or artf5fcfalt ase4 hy the',!4caasee— ia the oyecatfoa o5 the yaogect sachs ~—M hy ths liam. hrtfafo 2i, ybs.hfeeaaee shall he liable for faiorg tsr or 4esecaceaoa of, sag hafl4faye, hcf45ea, coa4s, trailers laa4e; oc ethos yaoyeatr ot tba Oafte4 States, oc hp tbo mastaactiea, t =, or oyeratfoa o! the yroSocs oocba or o5 the verbs ayycrteaaat or accessory thaceao aa4er the lfceass. bcraacaasats to scot sash lfahflfty& either hg coayeaaatfoa 5or saob fakery or 4oetaactfoa, or hp recaasacacafoa or r ot 4ahoge4 ~ portgi: or othecvfae+ shall he aa4e fifth the ayycoyrfate gac«asst oc ageacp ot the Qafte4 Staaea. Article 25 ~ She Ltceaaee ebL1l aller cap aceacg 0! tbe QLLasa State ~, NftholLt charger to ccaatacct or t "=:=-4a.ho ceaetcacts4 oa,„ tbcoach, an4 access those pcoject laa4s'IAfcb are las4r'of ebs Iaits4 ctataa sash ~& its& chatea, 4ftahoe, raflrca4a, roa4s, .trafla, telayboae aa4 paver lfsssr aa4 atherjcoutae or maaa o5 teassportatfca. aa4 =—.—ic~sfea ac ar'e aot:i~~~faaeat vfCh tbo eafog«sat 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

e 10

of ssS4 lsa4s by the diseases-for tbe yasyoses sf tbe lioesse. %As lisease shall sot-..he eoastsoe4 ss esaferriaf syoa ~he t.c~~«ee say rifht of asec usoysaey, or sagogcceat ef th'e lsa4a of the lbcite4 Ctatu sober thea Cor the eeastrtetiea, oyeratioac sa4 asiateasaoe of the yro5eet u stats4 ia tbs 1Sssasee article 55. ca tb~ eoastsssosoa sa4 asia" oC . ths ace~sos& sae'lo¹tisL sQ sc" ~ W oC roofs ss4 tr oa loafs ef the Cbitsf Ctatu sa4 other ssu oc loafs'c.the Oasts4 States.i —.iaelafsay th'e''loca%sea sa4 esafitioa ef ~sriu, horro«yits, —sa4 syoil 4Ss -..yossl-:oresor shall he sohhus to tbs scc -mal OC tbe ~ 4eysstaeat or sseasr of the Inite4 Ctatos'e«Sag soyeerlsioa seer the loafs Sasolve4. artisle 17. The Lioeasee shall asbe yro«isieai or shall assr tae ressoashle oost, ss 4W c ~ hg the sgoao,F of tbs Ihite4 States sffootef p of iacbiag yso«isioa fos'1loSCSaf Sa4aooivo Saterfersaoe M~~ say yes est ts»~'~siss liao or other ysogeat r~""cd soastsoots4I oysrats4r or'asiat c ~ safer the Xisenie. ss4 sip rafio fastallatioa, teleylisas lite& or other ==:--™tioa 'seiiioy iastalle4 or ooastrsote4 before oo after eoa- ~tricetioa eC seoh ysofeot sich liae or other yso$ us Sane tity sa4 e«ae4&~syegate4& or oee4 by stsaey of the yaits4 Statu ia ~~c~c~iag the loafs . saaes its Sarimotioa. asaiais f0 %he hioeasee shall oshs ose of the ~~sSS4 s Caifgaau aaa ethos rsestaiss4 p " " for tseatasat of ta ~~4Isioa liae rithts~~, sa4 shaLL clear sash yostioas ef ti c Sea iia riobtomf~ Seseu loafe ef tbe Cbiite4 ~tstu ss are Cesiyas bg ths offiosr of .the Iaite4 states Sa obarye of'.the lsafsi shall heey the asses so duiqaate4 slear ef apped«th& ag refose& sa4 Saf ~s'v ~ oaterial to the saaisfsotiah.of sooh effioeoi shall aria all hr of treu ia ooatsot «ith or liable to ooataet the tsoas- oissioa liaos shall oat sa4 sll 4es4 or «hiob a4ht CN, ia soonest «Stb the tr "~'reu sioa Lisesi sa4 shall tabs soob other yrsoaatioas ast fire ss asy bs solpLLre4 hy stab offioere I'0 CSses for tbo horaiao of «esto oatssisl shall be sst eaoeyt «Sth tbe ysior «sittsa eoaseat of tbs. offioes of the M.os4 Ctates ia obssye of the loafs as,to ties.sa4:ylsoe. 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

e 11 brassie $$'yhs hsesaase shall aooysrats wsch chs Alit@a states Lo th ~ 4$ayeaal bf cbs Oasts4 Itatoa ~ cafes the bit of falg 31;- 1NVc 01 ftat 00lc aa aawa4s4 {30 O.f C. ase..f4lr ah o), ef aiaeral aa4 vs0etativa oatoriala froa, loafs ef fiatea eaecyis4 by Che yrejeet ar aay yert ChereefC yrCuCS4S4c ybat each 4$ aal baa bssa aatheaiae4 hy tae wmasaiea aa4 chat St 4ssa aot aar ily Saterfeao «Stb tbo osoayaney of atoh laa4a hy tbs "" foa tbs ytaysasa of cha saasc rus&as4 8crchsr, chat ia.ths «seat af 4$mg ———c,, qwtaoa of aareaeeaahle. Satsrfsasacio shall be 4stsaaLas4 hg cbe c~bsoa after aetsoe ap4 oyyortaascy for hsarsmy, brtials 30. i?f the Lfasaaeo ahaX1 eases.or aaffsr..:--- -: oaaoatsas yrogeot"yroysrCg to hs rsuen4 or 4satregs4 or te'~ aafit for aas, vithitt to rsylasemat, er ahaLl, Y ":er 4$aooatiats CD@ th oasaatioa of the yrolsot or refuse or asflest to ooaylp sich Chs 'bf the liosase aa4 Chs laccfal cgfera of the a~™SSoasail s4 CO tho rsoor4 a44rssa of'bs LSssasos o~rQ t, cho Coaaisaioa vill 4ssa St to bs ths. Sataat of tbs Jkssaass to Iatrrsa4su tbs lissaase Ths 'ioa& after aotios aa4 syyortaaitp for hsaaiay. Rag 'rolycirs Cbs SSosaaso Co rwwE aag oa all atraoalcrss ~ ~Caiymat aa4 ycucer SSaos titbit tbs yrofset bsaafarF ~a4 co CAco aag sash other.astioa asoesaaap co rsscor ~ tho.aro]sot vatora, laa4s, aa4 faoiliCies a c c ~ yro5sot houafarF to a asa4$tioa satiafastsay Co Cho yaits4 ytaass afoaay hacicuF ]uria4$ etioa over. SCa 1aa4a or cho CMa'LLaaioa' aachorias4 asyasssatativar aa ayyrayriacs, or Co pro~ for tbs soatiaos4 oysratioa aa4 oaiatsaaase oy aoayouer faoSSSCSss aa4 falfill aaeb ocher ob tioas aa4sr the liosass as chs ~'ioa oat yaoaor ~ Za a44$tioai ths ~™aioaia ita 4$aeaeehsa& akCer aotieo an4 oyyortuaieg for hsaricei say alee ayass to chs atarsafsr of the lissaas uhsa chs Oaaaiaaioa&,foe the asaaoaa rsoits4 bsasia, 4soaa St Co bs Chs Satsat of ths LSoeaaeo Co atrrsufar Chs liosaas. krtiols 31. Cha right of the t4osaaoe aa4 of ita ~assessors ana aaaifaa to oao or oosapg waters ocoa uhish tba Qaits4 ytatsa hae fariafioeioa& or laa4a of the Oaits4 ftaaor,'Wr cho " ",for the yasyoss ef asia~4~4 ~ chs yregsot woaba or othearias, shall obsoletely esses at tho oa4 of cho }Sssaas ysrLC4, aalsaa the Liooaaeo haa oh ' a ass liosaae yuraaaat ts the thea scciaticcI laces aa4 as a~,,or.maaaaal-.-----.—.-*—.— =ca4ea-the*=tacccr aa4 oea4LChtia "of this lioeaea. ''Sessss 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983

4

hot5ei:e Sa. the toelte . OII4 00045t5000 ~gooo1& Oet too%a QL tae 1500000 ohe11 ILot he ooaotcte4 -500 OAI:terna ~00045t5oas"et'ho'I040caJ.'9owiP~ao "h0% lh50A 000 Aot ospoooo1p sot footh hooo5ae

~ ~ 19831229-0236 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/23/1983 Document Content(s) 13595924.tif...... 1-28 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

APPENDIX C: Flow Duration Curves

November 30, 2018 I I PERIOD OF RECORD 1971-1980 I 8000

------Projected Minimum Flow Release with Lucky Peak Project 150 CFS I 7000 ----Boise River Flow at Barber Dam I (Computer Modeled) 600 Maximum Flow of Record- 21,000 CFS ;·1 Minimum Flow of Record - 3.5 CFS en LL u 5000 ll z

31: 400 '.·:1 0 ...J LL

tr ti lLJ 3000 > 11 tr 2000

L_I 100

150 CFS o-L---.----.---~-.---.------=:::=:~::::=~· 90CFS 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 'I EXCEEDANCE PERCENT :.I '--·· I BARB.ER DAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FLOW DURATION CURVE .J-U-B ENGINEERS, INC. L..I Engineers Surveyors Planners I Boise, Idaho OE. SHEET OF I DATE OWG.NO 8820724

BARBER DAM SPILLWAY RATING CURVE 2786

2785

2784

2783 (FEET)

2782

2781 ELEVATION 2780

2779

2778 0 2500 5000 7500 10000 12500 15000 17500 20000 22500 25000 FLOW (CFS)

Figure 6.1 Spillway Discharge Rating Curve Barber Hydro STID 6-5 11-Mar-16

Figure 6.2 Tailwater Rating Curve

Barber Hydro STID 6-6 11-Mar-16 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

APPENDIX D: Project Photos

November 30, 2018

Photo 1: Powerhouse, Tailrace, and Spillway

Photo 2: Barber Dam impoundment looking upstream

D-1

Photo 3: Trash Racks and Sluiceway

Photo 4: Spillway, Trash Sluiceway, and Boise River downstream of Barber Dam

D-2

Photo 5: Spillway and Trash Sluiceway

Photo 6: Earthen Embankment Dam and Canoe Portage

D-3

Photo 7: Canoe Portage signage

D-4

Photo 8: River Access Trail

Photo 9: Canoe put-in below Barber Dam

D-5

Photo 10: Historic site designation on powerhouse

D-6

Photo 11: Historic elements including radial gate

Photo 12: Barber Mill historic site and adjacent housing development

D-7

Photo 13: Engineered Log Jams installed on north side of Boise River, across from Boise Park

D-8 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

APPENDIX E: Exhibit G Maps

November 30, 2018 P~0 I

i MVIO C. m / )osal Well IDAHOPARK I I rOUNDATIOM "a.--,.

'•%.

~ °%

"I m.o ~x "..~ \

'.o

EXHISIT 0-2 % "',, BARBER DAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT "qL 1 "°°'~ THIS DRAWING 19 PART OF THE APPLICATION LOCATION MAP FOR UCENSE SUBMITTED BY THE UNDERSIGNED J-U-B ENGINEE.JRS, INC THIS/R DAY OF~:~J~d~ 1982. ~~,. ~_~-~--- y~'.~-. Boise, Idaho

OATIEJULY. 1982 Im~NO.B82071 Barber Dam Project FERC No. 4881 Pre-Application Document

APPENDIX F: One Line Diagram (Filed Separately as CEII)

November 30, 2018