20030180 Ver 7_More Info Received_20100720

Water Quality Certifications for Stor-a2eJ?roieels,
n a?
Nantahala (FERC P-2692; WQC #3829)
East Fork (FERC P-2698; WQC #3831)
West Fork (FERC P-2686; WQC #3830)
The legal name for the project licensee is Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC. All references to
the project licensee and the holder of the applicable WQC should be Duke Energy
Carolinas, LLC rather than Duke Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Duke requests that you make these changes where appropriate in the reissued
WQCs.
Condition 3 for the Nantahala Proiect (#3829):
Condition 3 contains a reference to the West Fork Project that should be stated as the
Nantahala Project. 4411
Duke requests that you make this change for Condition 3 of the reissued WQC for
the Nantahala Project.
Conditions 8 and 9 for the Nantahala (#3829), East Fork (#3831) and West Fork (6830)
Projects:
• These Conditions should be appropriately numbered Condition 6 and Condition 7,
respectively for all three Projects.
Duke requests that you make these changes in the reissued WQCs for these
Projects.
Condition 8 for the Nantahala Proiect (#3829):
We understand that you are incorporating some of the Sections and Attachments from the
Nantahala Cooperative Stakeholder Team (NCST) Settlement Agreement as conditions in the
WQC for the Nantahala Project.
Condition 8 should refer to the Nantahala Cooperative Stakeholder Team (NCST) rather
than the Tuckasegee Cooperative Stakeholder Team (TCST).
Duke requests that you make this change in Condition 8 of the reissued WQC for
the Nantahala Project.
Some of the Section numbers and titles in the WQC did not match Section numbers and titles in
the NCST Settlement Agreement. Also, a couple of the Sections listed (i.e., shoreline
management and recreation flows) have not been topics covered in other WQCs (e.g., Catawba-
Wateree) and in Duke's opinion are not topics that are pertinent to this WQC. Finally, per
Section 14.7 of the NCST Settlement Agreement, Duke is contractually prohibited from
supporting the inclusion of Section 5.0 (Recreation Flow Agreements) and Section 7.0 (Shoreline
Management Agreements) in the Nantahala Project WQC. Considering these points, Duke only
supports inclusion of the following Sections and Attachments of the NCST Settlement
Agreement in Condition 8 of the Nantahala Project WQC:
• Section 1.0 Reservoir Level Agreements
• Section 4.0 Minimum Flow Agreements for Bypassed Reaches
• Section 9.0 Sediment Management Agreements
• Section 13.0 Agreements on Compliance Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
• Attachment B - Low Inflow Protocol (LIP) for the Nantahala Project
• Attachment C - Hydro Project Maintenance & Emergency Protocol (HPMEP) for the
Nantahala Project
Duke cannot support the inclusion of Section 5 (Recreation Flow Agreements) and Section 7
(Shoreline Management Agreements) into Condition 8 of the Nantahala Project WQC.
Duke requests that you make the changes in the reissued WQC for the Nantahala Project
as detailed above.
i
Condition 8 for the East Fork Project 03831) and West Fork Project (#3830):
Duke understands that you are incorporating some of the Sections and Attachments from the
Tuckasegee Cooperative Stakeholder Team (TCST) Settlement Agreement as conditions in the
WQCs for these Projects. Some of the Section numbers and titles in the WQCs did not match
Section numbers and titles in the TCST Settlement Agreement. Also, the Low Inflow Protocol
and Hydro Project Maintenance & Emergency Protocol appear to have been inadvertently left
out of the WQCs for these two Projects. Finally, since the TCST Settlement Agreement Sections
and Attachments have portions that apply to the East Fork Project and portions that apply to the
West Fork Project but not necessarily to both, it is important to note that distinction. Considering
these points, Duke's understanding of Condition 8 in the East Fork Project WQC and the West
Fork Project WQC is that you are only incorporating the following Sections and Attachments of
the TCST Settlement Agreement into the Project's WQC and only to the extent that the words in
the referenced Sections and Attachments apply to the particular Project:
• Section 1.0 Reservoir Level Agreements
• Section 4.0 Minimum Flow Agreements in the Tuckasegee River Main Stem and
Bypassed Stream Reaches
• Section 9.0 Sediment Management Agreements
• Section 14.0 Agreements on Compliance Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
• Attachment B - Low Inflow Protocol (LIP) for the West Fork and East Fork Projects
• Attachment C - Hydro Project Maintenance & Emergency Protocol (HPMEP) for the
West Fork and East Fork Projects
Duke requests that you make the changes in the reissued WQC for the East Fork and West
Fork Projects as described above.
Condition 9 of WQCs for the Nantahala Project (#3829), East Fork Project (#3831) and the
West Fork Project #3830
ti
V
• Attached is documentation that Duke has paid the cost of public notice advertisements in
local newspapers. Since it is complete, this requirement should be eliminated from the
WQCs.
Duke's understanding is that based on your letter of June 24, 2010 to Steve Jester, Vice
President Hydro Strategy, Licensing, and Lake Services, Condition 9 has been satisfied.
Please do not include this condition in the reissued WQCs.
Certificates of Completion for the Nantahala (43829), East Fork (#3831) and West Fork gk,
(#3830) Projects:
• Since the WQCs for these Projects involve implementation of plans for managing various
aspects of ongoing Project operation, a certificate of completion would not seem to be
applicable to these Projects.
Duke requests that no requirement for a Certificate of Completion be included in the
reissued WQC for these Projects.
LP ?
C ? c 4vv