Col"-LI9'W"ll1:......bia River Syste meration Re •ew Final Environmental ........npact Statement AppendixJ Recreation "••'!: .':.~.~. !. .~ .',.~ " us Army Corps [('Mill,I of Engineers \ .'•. North Pacific Division .. ~ DOEIE IS·0170 November 1995 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN THE SOR PROCESS The Bureau of Reclamation, Corps of Engineers. and Bonneville Power Administration wish to thank those who reviewed the Columbia River System Opel1llion Review (SOR) Draft EJSand appendices fortheir comments. Your comments have provided valuable public. agency. and tribal input tothe SOR NEPAprocess. Throughout the SOR. we have made acontinuing effort (0 keep thepublic informed and involved. Fourteen public seoping meetings were held in 1990. A series of public roundtables was conducted inNovember 1991 toprovide anupdate onthe status of SOR studies. The lead agencies went back to most of the 14 communities in 1992 with 10 initial system operating strategies developed from the screening process. From those meetings and other consultations, seven 50S alternatives (with options) were developed and subjected to full-scale analysis. The analysis results were presented in the Draft EIS released in July 1994. The lead agenciesalso developed alternatives for the other proposed SORactions. including aColumbia River Regional Forum for assisting in the detennination of future SOSs. Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement alternatives for power coordination. and Canadian Entitlement Allocation Agreements alternatives. A series ofnine public meetingswas held in Septemberand Oetober 199410 present the Draft EIS andappendices and solicit public input onthe SOR. The lead agencies received282 formal written comments . Your comments have been used to revise and shape the alternatives presented in the Final EIS. Regular newsletters on the progress of the SOR have heen issued. Since 1990, 20 issues of Streamline have been sent to individuals. agencies, organizations, and tribes in the region on a mailing liSl of over 5.000. Several special publications explaining various aspects of the study have also been prepared and mailed tothoseon the mailing list. ThoseincJude: The Columbia River: A System Under Stress The Columbia River System: The Inside SIOry Screening Analysis: A Summary Screening Analysis: Volumes I and 2 Power System Coordination: A Guide to the Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement Modeling the System: How Computers are Used in Columbia River Planning DailylHourly Hydrosystem Opel1llion: How the Columbia River System Responds to Shon-Term Needs Copies of these documents, the Final EIS, and other appendices canhe obtained from any of the lead agencies, orfrom libraries in your area. Your questions and comments OD thesedocuments should be addressed to: SOR Interagency Team P.O. Box 2988 Portland, OR 97208-2988 Recreation Appendix PREFACE: SETTING THE STAGE FOR THE SYSTEM OPERATION REVIEW WHAT IS THE SOR AND WHY IS IT BEING new Canadian Entitlement Allocation Agreements CONDUCTED? (contracts that divide Canada's share of Columbia River Treaty downstream power benefits and obliga­ The Columbia River System is a vast and complex tions among three participating public utility districts combination of Federal and non - Federal facilities and BPA). The review provides the environmental used for many purposes including power production, analysis required by the National Environmental irrigation, navigation, flood control, recreation, fish Policy Act (NEPA). and wildlife habitat and municipal and industrial water supply. Each river use competes for the This technical appendix addresses only the effects of limited water resources in the Columbia River Basin. alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The environmental To date, responsibility for managing these river uses impact statement (EIS) itself and some of the other has been shared by a number of Federal, state, and appendices present analyses of the alternative local agencies. Operation of the Federal Columbia approaches to the other three decisions considered River system is the responsibility of the Bureau of as part of the SOR. Reclamation (Reclamation), Corps of Engineers WHO IS CONDUCTING THE SOR? (Corps) and Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). The SOR is a joint project of Reclamation, the Corps, and BPA-the three agencies that share The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and responsibility and legal authority for managing the environmental compliance process being used by the Federal Columbia River System. The National three Federal agencies to analyze future operations Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and of the system and river use issues. The goal of the Wildlife Service (USFWS), and National Park Ser­ SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation vice (NPS), as agencies with both jurisdiction and strategy for the river that better meets the needs of expertise with regard to some aspects of the SOR, all river users. The SOR began in early 1990, prior are cooperating agencies. They contribute informa­ to the filing of petitions for endangered status for tion, analysis, and recommendations where appropri­ several salmon species under the Endangered ate. The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) was also a Species Act. cooperating agency, but asked to be removed from that role in 1994 after assessing its role and the press The comprehensive review of Columbia River of other activities. operations encompassed by the SOR was prompted by the need for Federal decisions to (1) develop a HOW IS THE SOR BEING CONDUCTED? coordinated system operating strategy (SOS) for The system operating strategies analyzed in the SOR managing the multiple uses of the system into the could have significant environmental impacts. The 21st century; (2) provide interested parties with a study team developed a three-stage process­ continuing and increased long-term role in system scoping, screening, and full-scale analysis of the planning (Columbia River Regional Forum); (3) strategies-to address the many issues relevant to the renegotiate and renew the Pacific Northwest Coor­ SOR. dination Agreement (PNCA), a contractual arrange­ ment among the region's major hydroelectric-gen­ At the core of the analysis are 10 work groups. The erating utilities and affected Federal agencies to work groups include members of the lead and coop­ provide for coordinated power generation on the erating agencies, state and local government agen­ Columbia River system; and (4) renew or develop cies, representatives of Indian tribes, and members 1995 FINALEIS Recreation Appendix of the public. Each of these work groups has a created for 10 resource areas and several single river use (resource) to consider. support functions. The work groups devel­ oped computer screening models and applied Early in the process during the screening phase, the them to the 90 alternatives identified during 10 work groups were asked to develop an alternative screening. They compared the impacts to a for project and system operations that would provide baseline operating year-1992-and ranked the greatest benefit to their river use, and one or each alternative according to its impact on more alternatives that, while not ideal, would pro­ their resource or river use. The lead agen­ vide an acceptable environment for their river use. cies reviewed the results with the public in a Some groups responded with alternatives that were series of regional meetings in September evaluated in this early phase and, to some extent, 1992. influenced the alternatives evaluated in the Draft and Final EIS. Additional alternatives came from • Full-Scale Analysis-Based on public com­ scoping for the SOR and from other institutional ment received on the screening results, the sources within the region. The screening analysis study team sorted, categorized, and blended studied 90 system operation alternatives. the alternatives into seven basic types of operating strategies. These alternative Other work groups were subsequently formed to strategies, which have multiple options, were provide projectwide analysis, such as economics, then subjected to detailed impact analysis. river operation simulation, and public involvement. 1\venty-one possible options were evaluated. Results and tradeoffs for each resource or The three-phase analysis process is described river use were discussed in separate technical briefly below. appendices and summarized in the Draft EIS. Public review and comment on the • Scoping/Pilot Study-After holding public meetings in 14 cities around the region, and Draft EIS was conducted during the summer coordinating with local, state, and Federal and fall of 1994. The lead agencies adjusted agencies and Indian tribes, the lead agencies the alternatives based on the comments, established the geographic and jurisdictional eliminating a few options and substituting scope of the study and defined the issues that new options, and reevaluated them during would drive the EIS. The geographic area the past 8 months. Results are summarized for the study is the Columbia River Basin in the Final EIS. (Figure P-l). The jurisdictional scope of Alternatives for the Pacific Northwest Coordination the SOR encompasses the 14 Federal proj­ Agreement (PNCA), the Columbia River Regional ects on the Columbia and lower Snake Rivers Forum (Forum), and the Canadian Entitlement that are operated by the Corps and Reclama­ Allocation Agreements (CEAA) did not use the tion and coordinated for hydropower under three-stage process described above.