PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT AND HISTORIC PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT PLAN 2014 ANNUAL REPORT

Transcription

1 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ARTICLE 201 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT AND HISTORIC PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT PLAN 2014 ANNUAL REPORT REPORTING PERIOD JANUARY 1 DECEMBER 31, 2014 BAKER RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC No June 2015 BAK SA 201 Annual Report 2014.Docx Baker River Hydroelectric Project PUGET SOUND ENERGY 10 June 2015

2 CONTENTS CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary Introduction Activity Report Principal Management Activities Monitoring Results and Maintenance Plan Accounting Funding and Expenditures Prescribed by SA Additional PSE Expenditures for SA Adjustments Supporting Documents References Review and Comments... 9 List of Tables Table 1. Summary of site activities by year for all monitored sites PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page ii

3 1.0 Executive Summary This annual report reviews PSE activity undertaken in 2014 to implement settlement agreement article 201 (SA 201), Programmatic Agreement, and license article 404 (LA 404), Programmatic Agreement and Historic Properties Management Plan, of the Baker River Hydroelectric Project license. SA 201 implementation measures completed during the reporting period included: Consultation with the Consulting Parties (members of the Cultural Resources Advisory Group and parties to the Programmatic Agreement) regarding implementation of the Historic Properties Management Plan (HPMP) for the Baker River Hydroelectric Project. Providing the Consulting Parties with background information on the proposal to develop the Lower Baker compound project. This included discussions of the area of potential effects (APE), identification of historic properties, the adequacy of cultural surveys, and finding of effect on historic properties within the APE. Providing the Consulting Parties with background information on the changes to the Lower Baker Dam crest and floodwall project. This included discussions of the area of potential effects (APE), identification of historic properties, the adequacy of cultural surveys, and finding of effect on historic properties within the APE. Providing the Consulting Parties with the revised cultural resources assessment for the Swift Creek erosion control project. Providing the Consulting Parties with background information on the proposal to modify the Baker Lake maximum daily pool level change constraint through an amendment to the license, as well as final draft versions of the proposed modification. Providing the Consulting Parties with the cultural resources monitoring report for geotechnical investigations within the Lower Baker Compound area. Providing the Consulting Parties with the cultural resources assessment and treatment report for archaeological site 45SK252 in accordance with the HPMP Treatment Plan (Appendix G). Providing the Consulting Parties with the 2013 annual monitoring report for archaeological resources in accordance with the HPMP Treatment Plan (Appendix G). Providing the Consulting Parties with the draft Programmatic Agreement and HPMP 2013 Annual Report. Providing the Consulting Parties with the final Programmatic Agreement and HPMP 2012 Annual report. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 1

4 Introduction 2.0 Introduction On October 17, 2008, PSE received a 50-year license for the Baker River Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2150) ordering implementation of the Programmatic Agreement (PA) and Historic Properties Management Plan for the project under license article 404 (LA 404) and incorporating a comprehensive settlement agreement s proposed measures. Under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and related regulations, federal agencies must take into account the effect of any proposed undertaking on properties listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (defined as historic properties) and afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking. This generally requires the FERC to consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to determine whether and how a proposed action may affect historic properties, and to seek ways to avoid or minimize any adverse effects. To satisfy these responsibilities, the FERC executed a Programmatic Agreement (PA) with the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) on September 21, 2006, and invited PSE, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the National Park Service, the Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, and the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community to concur with the stipulations of the PA. The PA is consistent with article 201 of the settlement agreement (SA 201) because it requires PSE to prepare and implement a final Historic Properties Management Plan (HPMP) for the term of any new license issued for this project. Execution and implementation of the PA demonstrates the FERC s compliance with section 106 of the NHPA. License article 404 requires PSE to implement the PA, and to file a final HPMP for FERC approval within one year of license issuance (October 17, 2009). Settlement agreement article 601 (SA 601) established the Baker River Coordinating Committee (BRCC) to implement the terms of the settlement agreement. The BRCC established technical resource groups, including the Cultural Resources Advisory Group (Consulting Parties) to address ongoing historic property issues as PSE carries out the terms and conditions of the license. The Reporting and Auditing paragraph within SA 601 directs PSE to provide an annual report to the BRCC and the FERC, generally summarizing the activities of the Consulting Parties during the preceding year as required by SA 201. For purposes of implementing SA 201 and LA 404, the Consulting Parties consist of members of the Consulting Parties and parties to the Programmatic Agreement for the project (hereinafter called the Consulting Parties). During 2010, PSE and the Consulting Parties refined the draft HPMP. PSE submitted the final HPMP for FERC approval on September 25, The final HPMP was approved by the FERC on March 1, PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 2

5 Activity Report 3.0 Activity Report 3.1 Principal Management Activities Monthly Consultation with the Consulting Parties Consultation topics included: Reviewing major PSE projects and schedules. Developing strategies for treatment of historic properties. Conducting cultural surveys and inventories. Reviewing and commenting on cultural resource findings and recommendations. Reviewing and finalizing meeting notes. Meetings with Consulting Parties A summary of these consultations is as follows. February 19, 2014, Skagit Service Center, Burlington, WA. Reviewed BRCC activities, reviewed major project activities, reviewed list of annual projects for May 14, 2014, Skagit Service Center, Burlington, WA. Reviewed BRCC activities, reviewed major project activities, and provided progress updates on the Washington Portland Cement Company Historic DAHP Level II report and archaeological reconnaissance in the Lower Baker area. August 20, 2014, Skagit Service Center, Burlington, WA. Reviewed BRCC activities, reviewed major project activities, and provided progress updates on the Washington Portland Cement Company Historic DAHP Level II report and archaeological reconnaissance in the Lower Baker area. Additionally, the CRAG previewed rough-cut versions of the Baker shorts produced as part of the mitigation for impacts to the Lower Baker Dam. December 16, 2014, Update provided via . The summarized cultural resources activities at the Project (see attachment 1). Programmatic Agreement Activities As plans for implementing the license continue to develop, PSE consulted with the Consulting Parties concerning the effect of potential project activities on the project s historic properties. Consultation, review, and implementation for 2014 projects included the following. Baker River MOA (LA 404, SA 201) Lower Baker compound proposal (LA 404, SA 201) Lower Baker Dam crest and floodwall (LA 404, SA 201) Swift Creek erosion control project (SA 110) Baker River Project cultural resources reporting schedule modification (SA 201) Cultural resources assessment and treatment of 45SK252 (LA 404, SA 201; appendix G of HPMP) PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 3

6 Activity Report Archaeological monitoring results for geotechnical investigations at the Lower Baker compound area Annual draft review of cultural report (LA 404, SA 201) Maintenance plan (LA 404, SA 201; appendix F of HPMP; see section 3.2) Routine actions (LA 404, SA 201; appendix C of HPMP; see section 3.2)) Historical Videos In accordance with the FERC-approved MOA (April 10, 2013), PSE worked with the Consulting Parties and the production company Sadis Filmworks to develop three short videos outlining the history of fish conservation and dam construction at the Lower Baker Project. Rough cuts of the videos were sent to the Consulting Parties for review, and the rough-cut versions of the videos were screened at the August 20, 2014 CRAG meeting. Comments received were incorporated, and fine-cut versions of the videos were made available to the consulting parties for review in December No further activities with this project occurred in Lower Baker Compound Project Following discussions about impacts, APE description, and options for the proposed changes to the Lower Baker compound, the CRAG decided that a memorandum of agreement (MOA) would be drafted for review. A draft MOA was provided to the CRAG in February 2014, prior to the February CRAG meeting. Comments were incorporated, and a revised version was provided to the CRAG for review in May Comments were received and incorporated into the MOA, and a final draft version was created on May 13, In the August 20, 2014 meeting, PSE updated the CRAG regarding the schedule and budget for the Lower Baker Compound project. The project consisted of improvements to the Lower Baker compound area to address space requirements for staffing, tools, materials, vehicles, and storage; and to address life safety hazard conditions found in two historic structures at the site. PSE proposed construction of new buildings for staffing and materials, demolition of the sacking house and skybridge, both contributing resources of the Washington Portland Cement Company Historic District, and removal of a debris pile that is partially composed of debris from the 1965 landslide that destroyed the 1925 powerhouse. Initial analysis of the project proposals revealed growing costs for the debris pile removal, and the overall project was not approved for The proposal to remove the two historic structures and construct a new building for staffing and materials remained under consideration, and PSE presented the idea that the Lower Baker compound and Lower Baker Dam crest improvement projects be combined for purposes of drafting a new MOA to capture all the impacts and repackage the proposed mitigation. The CRAG was in agreement that this seemed like a reasonable option. No further activities with this project occurred in Lower Baker Dam Crest Improvement and Floodwall The CRAG was given an update on the proposal to redevelop the Lower Baker Dam crest and floodwall. Project managers explained that three projects were necessary to meet the requirements under the FERC s Part 12 dam safety standards for the Lower Baker Dam crest improvement project. The three smaller components of the Project PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 4

7 Activity Report were all interrelated: grouting, flood wall construction (the MOA covers the related abutment project), and dam crest improvements. The CRAG received a presentation at the May 14, 2014 meeting, and was given a chance to ask questions and comment on the proposed project. A general schedule was also discussed. In the August 20, 2014 meeting, the CRAG was given an update on the progress of the LB Dam Crest Improvement Project. For the remainder of 2014 and most of 2015, the dam crest team would conduct preliminary design and analysis of each phase of the work needed. The general schedule to complete work on the three phases was related to the CRAG: 2016 Grouting 2017 Flood wall project (raising walls on the abutment) Dam crest work In addition, PSE proposed to have an architectural historian review and provide input on the design of the projects. The CRAG again discussed adding the dam crest impacts to the already-drafted Lower Baker compound MOA. No further activities with this project occurred in Swift Creek Erosion Control The PSE cultural resources coordinator updated the CRAG on the latest developments for the Swift Creek erosion control project. A cultural resource assessment of this project was conducted in early A letter summarizing the findings was completed and sent to the CRAG for review in March No significant cultural materials were identified during the survey, so no additional investigations were recommended. In late 2013, the PSE cultural resources coordinator received revised design drawings that modified the project and expanded the disturbance areas outside of the original area of potential effects (APE), with proposed construction elements that would cause deeper ground disturbance than initially planned. PSE determined that a review of the new proposal and APE was necessary. PSE consulted with the CRAG at the February 2014 meeting. It was agreed that the APE would be expanded to encompass the new disturbance area, and that a review of previous field work would be conducted. Since this project is located on National Forest System lands, PSE also forwarded the draft revised report to the Jan Hollenbeck of the Mount Baker -Snoqualmie National Forest to review and make sure the report met USFS requirements. PSE received concurrence from the USFS via on May 15, Under section of the HPMP ( Identification of Historic Properties ), PSE recommends a finding of A. No historic properties listed or eligible for listing are present within the APE. PSE also recommended that archaeological monitoring of construction activities within the Swift Creek valley bottom be conducted to determine whether all project activities will be in lahar sediments. No further activities with this project occurred in 2014 (see attachment 2). Annual Report Schedule The PSE cultural resources coordinator forwarded a memo to the CRAG requesting a vote to approve the revised SA 201 Reporting Schedule for Cultural Article 201, as presented at previous CRAG meetings in 2014 and distributed to the CRAG for 30-day PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 5

8 Activity Report review and comment on May 9, No objections to the schedule change were received and no further activities with this project occurred in 2014 (See attachment 3). Archaeological Site The PSE cultural resources coordinator forwarded the Archaeological Conditions Assessment and Treatment at Archaeological Site 45-SK-252 on July 14, This report was prepared in accordance with appendix G ( Treatment Plan ) of the Project s Historic Properties Management Plan (HPMP), which was approved by the FERC on March 1, This report summarizes all activities for No further activities with this project occurred in 2014 (See attachment 4). Lower Baker Geotechnical Investigations The PSE cultural resources coordinator forwarded to the CRAG the results of archaeological monitoring for geotechnical investigations at our Lower Baker Compound on August 11, In total, nine test pits were excavated in the landslide spoils to determine the soil characterization of the project. The surface of the landslide spoils had historic debris associated with the Lower Baker powerhouse destroyed in the 1965 landslide. Two test pits identified Washington Portland Cement Plant features that were noted. The results of the monitoring were summarized in the attached report. No further activities on this project occurred in 2014 (see attachment 5). Annual Report Review The PSE cultural resources coordinator forwarded the review draft of the 2013 annual report for settlement agreement article 201, Programmatic Agreement and Implementation of the Historic Properties Management Plan, to members of the CRAG for a 30-day review period on July 31, No comments were received, and no further activities for this project occurred in 2014 (see attachment 6). No other project modifications required implementation of preservation measures. 3.2 Monitoring Results and Maintenance Plan Monitoring Results In accordance with the annual monitoring protocol established in the HPMP, resource conditions at several archaeological sites within the Baker River Hydroelectric Project were monitored in As outlined in the Archaeological Resources Treatment Plan (HPMP appendix G), site visits were attempted to all pre-contact sites that are contributing elements to the Baker River Archaeological District (DT189), as well as the National-Register-eligible Weston and Edgar Homesteads on Lake Shannon. In accordance with the annual monitoring protocol established in the HPMP, resource conditions at several archaeological sites within the Baker River Hydroelectric Project were monitored in As outlined in the Archaeological Resources Treatment Plan (HPMP appendix G), site visits were attempted to all pre-contact sites that are contributing elements to the Baker River Archaeological District (DT189), as well as the National-Register-eligible Weston and Edgar Homesteads on Lake Shannon. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 6

9 Activity Report Proposed treatment for pre-contact sites included the systematic collection of all surface artifacts as well as completion of a Baker River Hydroelectric Project Archaeological District archaeological resources condition report (ARCR) for each site. Systematic surface collection included closely-spaced pedestrian surveys within and around the site to locate all visible artifacts. Each artifact was flagged and assigned a field inventory number, its location was recorded with a hand-held Trimble GPS unit, and the object was placed in an artifact bag with its corresponding field number. Photos were taken at each site, and conditions were documented on standard daily work records. An ARCR was completed for each site including a collected artifact catalog or field artifact inventory where appropriate. A Washington State archaeological site update form was prepared for sites with notable change in conditions or contents. A summary table of site activities and artifacts collected by year is shown below in table A-1. The report Summary of 2014 Archaeological Monitoring and Conditions Assessment for Selected Pre-Contact Sites on Baker Lake, Whatcom County, Washington and all associated Archaeological Resources Condition Reports (ARCR) were sent to the Consulting Parties for review on March 20, The comment period has not ended at the time of this report, but no comments have been received to date (see attachment 7). Table 1. Summary of site activities by year for all monitored sites. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 7

10 Accounting Maintenance Plan In accordance with section ( Actions Excluded from Case by Case Review, appendix F of the HPMP), the PSE cultural resources coordinator reviewed tenant agreements for historic houses currently occupied at the Baker River Project. No further related activities for this project occurred in Routine Actions The PSE cultural resource coordinator reviewed routine actions as outlined in appendix C of the HPMP, and determined that one proposed action fell under these conditions. A cultural resource review of the proposed improvement to an existing boat ramp at Komo Kulshan campground on Baker Lake determined that the area was highly disturbed, that natural deposits had little possibility of containing evidence of human activity, and that boat ramp construction was limited to the same area as the existing facility. A recommendation of no further review was determined under the routine actions section of the HPMP. No further activities relating to this action occurred in 2014 (see attachment 8). 4.0 Accounting Puget Sound Energy, pursuant to settlement agreement articles 102, 201, 301, 501, and 602, is required to provide an annual summary of expenditures made during the preceding year, as well as an accounting of funding expenditures, any interest earned, disbursements made as required by any article, and adjustments for inflation. This section provides an accounting of all expenditures made during the reporting period. All disbursement adjustments and relevant calculations were determined using the guidelines provided in settlement agreement article Funding and Expenditures Prescribed by SA 201 No funding was prescribed for SA 201 implementation during the reporting period. 4.2 Additional PSE Expenditures for SA 201 During the reporting period, PSE spent approximately $89,511 for operations and maintenance (O&M) and $ 53,645 in capital expenditures for SA 201 implementation, for a total of $143, Adjustments There were no adjustments to the funding for SA 201 during the reporting period. 5.0 Supporting Documents The following documents are attached to this report as separate files. to CRAG Re Summary of CRAG Activities to CRAG Re Swift Creek cover letter to CRAG, report included (privileged) reply from USFS Re Swift Creek cover letter and report to CRAG reply from USACOE Re Swift Creek cover letter and report to CRAG PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 8

11 References to CRAG Re Notice of Decision Approval of Revised SA 20, Reporting Schedule included to CRAG Re Archaeological Conditions Assessment and Treatment at Archaeological Site 45-SK-252, report included (privileged) to CRAG Re Geotechnical Investigation and Archaeological Monitoring for Washington Portland Cement Company Historic District, report included to CRAG Re 2013 Annual report for Settlement Article 201, Programmatic Agreement and Implementation of the Historic Properties Management Plan to CRAG Re 2014 Annual Archaeological Monitoring report, report included (privileged) Memo to File Re Boat Ramp Assessment 6.0 References Parvey, Michele Summary of 2014 Archaeological Monitoring and Conditions Assessment for Selected Sites on Lake Shannon and Baker Lake, Skagit and Whatcom Counties, WA. Prepared for Puget Sound Energy by Southwest Environmental Consultants Inc., Council, Idaho. Puget Sound Energy Historic Properties Management Plan (FERC No. 2150). Puget Sound Energy, Bellevue, WA. 7.0 Review and Comments PSE delivered a review draft of this report to the Cultural Resources Advisory Group by on March 31, 2015, for a 30-day review and comment period. No reviewers replied with comments. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 9