September 14, 2012 File No. 11002A Electronically Filed Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20426 SUBJECT: Drum-Spaulding Project, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Project No. 2310- 193 Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project, Nevada Irrigation District, Project No. 2266-102 REPLY COMMENTS of Placer County Water Agency on the California Department of Fish and Game’s Federal Power Act § 10(j) Recommendations Dear Secretary Bose: Pursuant to the Commission’s January 19, 2012 Notice Soliciting Motions to Intervene, Protests, Comments, and Recommendations, and the Commission’s February 29, 2012 Notice extending time to file motions to intervene and comments, Placer County Water Agency (PCWA) submits comments on the California Department of Fish and Game’s (CDFG) § 10(j) Recommendations for Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E) Drum-Spaulding Project (FERC No. 2310)1 and Nevada Irrigation District’s (NID) Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2266)2 filed on July 30, 2012. PCWA’s interest in the aforementioned projects and background information are 1 Response to Notice of Ready for Environmental Analysis FEDERAL POWER ACT SECTION 10(j) and 10(a) RECOMMENDATIONS Drum-Spaulding Hydroelectric Project (Project No. 2310-193) (Jul 30, 2012). eLibrary No. 20120730-5181. 2 Response to Notice of Ready for Environmental Analysis FEDERAL POWER ACT SECTION 10(j) and 10(a) RECOMMENDATIONS Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project (Project No. 2266-102) (Jul 30, 2012). eLibrary No. 20120730-5174. September 14, 2012 Page 2 explained in detail in its letters of intervention, filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) on July 30, 20123. COMMENTS PCWA’s comments jointly address the CDFG’s § 10(j) Recommendations for the Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project and the Drum-Spaulding Project (as appropriate), as the two projects are hydrologically and operationally interrelated and FERC intends to prepare a multi-project environmental impact statement4. In the following, PCWA identifies the appropriate FERC project, measure, and reach associated with each comment. PCWA has specific comments on five elements of CDFG’s § 10(j) Recommendations: Issue No. 1. CDFG’s proposed Measure No. 2 - Flow Measures, Part 1. Water Year Types conflicts with United States Department of Agriculture – Forest Service5 (USDA-FS)/ Bureau of Land Management6 (BLM) Revised Preliminary § 4(e) conditions and fails to adequately protect PCWA’s water supply in Back-to-Back Critically Dry water years. This issue applies to: the Drum-Spaulding Project - all stream reaches7 and the Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project - Bear River below Rollins Reservoir Dam. Issue No. 2. CDFG’s proposed Measure No. 2 - Flow Measures, Part 2. Minimum Streamflows is duplicative to USDA-FS Revised Preliminary § 4(e) Condition No. 29 – Flow Measures, Minimum Streamflows but is less clear than the USDA-FS provision. This issue applies to: the Drum-Spaulding Project - South Yuba River Below Lake Spaulding Dam in Extreme Critically Dry water year types. 3 Motion to Intervene of the Placer County Water Agency under P-2310 (Jul 30, 2012), eLibrary No. 20120730-5131 and Motion to Intervene of the Placer County Water Agency under P-2266 (Jul 30, 2012), eLibrary No. 20120730-5134. 4 FERC Scoping of environmental issues for new licenses for the Yuba-Bear (FERC No. 2266-096) and Drum-Spaulding (FERC No. 2310-173) hydroelectric projects, and the Rollins Transmission Line Project (FERC No. 2784-003), California. (May 22, 2008). eLibrary No. 20080522-3011. 5 The US Forest Service's Revised Preliminary Conditions and Recommendations re Pacific Gas and Electric Company's Drum- Spaulding Hydroelectric Project under P-2310 (Aug. 24, 2012). eLibrary 2012824-5005. 6 Nevada Irrigation District Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 2266-102 The Department of the Interior Revised Preliminary Terms, Conditions, and Recommendations. (Aug. 28 2012). eLibrary 20120828-5023. 7 Stream reaches with an Extreme Critically Dry water year type. September 14, 2012 Page 3 Issue No. 3. CDFG’s proposed Measure No. 2 - Flow Measures, Part 3. Compliance with Streamflow Requirements conflicts with BLM Revised Preliminary § 4(e) Condition 3 - Coordination of the Drum-Spaulding Project and the Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project Operation Regarding the Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project’s Streamflow Requirements in the Bear River Below Rollins Reservoir at YB-196. This issue applies to the Drum-Spaulding Project - Bear River below the Bear River Canal Diversion Dam. Issue No. 4. CDFG’s proposed block flows for water temperature would reduce habitat for special-status species and increase power generation loss and water supply deficits. This issue applies to: the Drum-Spaulding Project - South Yuba River (Measure No. 2 – Flow Measures, Part 9) and the Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project - Middle Yuba River (Measure No. 2 – Flow Measures, Part 8). Issue No. 5. CDFG’s proposed Measure No. 7 Terrestrial Protection Measures – Part 6. Bear River Management Through Bear Valley fails to protect the water supply to PCWA and NID customers in certain conditions and fails to balance water supply, generation, and environmental resource protection. This issue applies to: the Drum-Spaulding Project - Bear River Management through Bear Valley. Comment on Issue No. 1 – CDFG’s Proposed Measure No. 2 - Flow Measures, Part 1. Water Year Types FERC should reject CDFG’s Measure No. 2 – Flow Measures, Part 1. Water Year Types, Table 1. The USDA-FS/BLM Revised Preliminary § 4(e) water year type measures provide a more appropriate balance of water supply, generation, and environmental resource interests. CDFG’s water year types measures should be replaced by USDA-FS Revised Preliminary § 4(e) Condition No. 29 – Flow Measures, Water Year Types for the Drum-Spaulding Project (all reaches) and BLM Revised Preliminary § 4(e) Condition 3 – Water Year Types for the Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project (Bear River below Rollins Reservoir Dam). The USDA-FS/BLM Revised Preliminary § 4(e) water year type measures include a water year type modification, whereby the second year of back-to-back Critically Dry water years become an Extreme Critically Dry September 14, 2012 Page 4 water year (B2B CD->ECD). As explained below, when there are back-to-back Critically Dry water years, there is a substantially increased threat to PCWA’s water supply. Recognizing the second Critically Dry water year as an Extreme Critically Dry water year is necessary to protect the only source of water for many PCWA customers. The USDA-FS/BLM Revised Preliminary § 4(e) water year type measures are shown below. The red text shows the revised text that is not in the CDFG’s Water Year Types Measures. Drum-Spaulding Project: USDA-FS Revised Preliminary Section 4(e) Condition No. 29 – Flow Measures Water Year Types Table 1. Water Year types for the Drum-Spaulding Project. DWR Forecast of Total Unimpaired Runoff in the Yuba River at Smartville in Thousand Acre- Water Year Type Feet or DWR Full Natural Flow Near Smartville for the Water Year in Thousand Acre-Feet1 Equal to or Less than 615 or Extreme Critically Dry second year of a back-to-back Critically Dry Water Years (<=900) Critically Dry 616 to 900 Dry 901 to 1,460 Below Normal 1,461 to 2,190 Above Normal 2,191 to 3,240 Wet Greater than 3,240 1 DWR rounds the Bulletin 120 forecast to the nearest 1,000 acre-feet. The Full Natural Flow is provided to the nearest acre-foot, and Licensee will round DWR’s Full Natural Flow to the nearest 1,000 acre-feet. Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project: BLM Revised Preliminary Section 4(e) Condition 3 – Water Year Types Table 1. Water Year types for the Yuba-Bear Hydroelectric Project. DWR Forecast of Total Unimpaired Runoff in the Yuba River at Smartville in Thousand Acre- Water Year Type Feet or DWR Full Natural Flow Near Smartville for the Water Year in Thousand Acre-Feet1 Equal to or Less than 615 or Extreme Critically Dry 2nd year of a back-to-back Critically Dry Water Years (<=900) 2 Critically Dry 616 to 900 Dry 901 to 1,460 Below Normal 1,461 to 2,190 Above Normal 2,191 to 3,240 Wet Greater than 3,240 1 DWR rounds the Bulletin 120 forecast to the nearest 1,000 acre-feet. The Full Natural Flow is provided to the nearest acre-foot, and Licensee will round DWR’s Full Natural Flow to the nearest 1,000 acre-feet. 2 Applies only to minimum instream flows in the Bear River below Rollins Reservoir. September 14, 2012 Page 5 Justification Operations Modeling results, using the correct PCWA water demands8 and NID peak-use demands, demonstrate the risk that reservoirs, required to serve PCWA customers, may run dry in the second year of back-to-back Critically Dry water years if flows are not adjusted during that second year. The results for Rollins Reservoir are shown (in Figure 1) to illustrate the effect of back-to-back Critically Dry Water Years on reservoir storage (including other reservoirs in the system such as Bowman and Spaulding reservoirs). Three scenarios, Base Case scenario (existing license conditions), CDFG Recommended model run without B2B CD->ECD, and the USDA-FS/BLM Revised Preliminary § 4(e) conditions model run, which includes B2B CD->ECD are shown in Figure 1. In 1988, under the Base Case scenario, Rollins Reservoir storage (and other reservoirs in the system such as Spaulding and Bowman reservoirs) remains at a level that can meet future minimum flow requirements, provide for water supply, and provide water supply reliability should the following year be drier than normal. However, with the new minimum flows specified in the CDFG § 10(j) Recommendations, Rollins Reservoir is drained and the other reservoirs (e.g., Spaulding and Bowman reservoirs) are at minimum reserve pool levels (water necessary to only meet future minimum instream flow requirements) and cannot be utilized for water supply or to provide water supply reliability.