20150579 Ver 1_FERC Scoping Document 1_20160318

2 ! C
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20426
March 18, 2015
OFFICE OF ENERGY PROJECTS
Project No. 9842-006 — North Carolina
Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project
Mr. Ray F. Ward
Subject: Scoping Document 1 for Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project, P-9842.
To the Party Addressed:
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is currently reviewing
the license application filed on August 28, 2014, by Mr. Ray F. Ward for relicensing the
Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 9842). The project is located on the
Watauga River in Watauga County, near Boone, North Carolina. No federal lands or
Indian reservations are located within the proposed project boundary.
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended,
Commission staff intends to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA), which will be
used by the Commission to determine whether, and under what conditions, to issue a new
license for the project. To support and assist our environmental review, we are beginning
the public scoping process to ensure that all pertinent issues are identified and analyzed,
and that the EA is thorough and balanced.
We invite your participation in the scoping process, and are circulating the
attached Scoping Document 1 (SDI) to provide you with information on the Ward Mill
Project. We are also soliciting your comments and suggestions on our preliminary list of
issues and alternatives to be addressed in the EA.
We will hold two scoping meetings for the Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project to
receive input on the scope of the EA. A daytime meeting will be held Tuesday, April 21,
2015, starting at 1:00 p.m. at the Watauga County Center, 971 W. King Street, Boone,
North Carolina. An evening meeting will also be held Tuesday, April, 2015, starting at
7:00 p.m. at the Watauga County Center, 971 W. King Street, Boone, North Carolina.
We will also conduct an Environmental Site Review on Tuesday, April 21, 2015. For the
site review, attendees should meet by 3:30 p.m. at the Watauga County Center parking
area. Attendees must provide their own transportation to the project site.

We invite all interested agencies, Indian tribes, non-governmental organizations,
and individuals to attend one or all of these meetings. Further information on our
Environmental Site Review and scoping meetings is available in the enclosed SDI.
SDI is being distributed to both Ray F. Ward's distribution list and the
Commission's official mailing list (see section 9.0 of the attached SDI). If you wish to
be added to or removed from the Commission's official mailing list, please send your
request by email to ik, or by mail to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Room IA, Washington, DC
20426. All written or emailed requests must specify your wish to be removed or added to
the mailing list and must clearly identify the following on the first page: Ward Mill
Hydroelectric Project No. 9842-006.
Please review SDI and, if you wish to provide comments, follow the instructions
in section 5.0, Requests for Information. If you have any questions about SD 1, the
scoping process, or how Commission staff will develop the EA for this project, please
contact Adam Peer at [phone] or L1.,1 1p e c� ov . Additional information
about the Commission's licensing process and the Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project may
be obtained from our website, htp 'ww tcrcf.
Enclosure: Scoping Document 1
cc: Mailing List
Public Files

SCOPING DOCUMENT 1
WARD MILL HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
PROJECT NO. 9842-006
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Office of Energy Projects
Division of Hydropower Licensing
Washington, DC
March 2015

1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 4
2.0 SCOPING................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 PURPOSES OF SCOPING..................................................................................... 6
2.2 COMMENTS, SCOPING MEETINGS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SITE
REVIEW........................................................................................................................... 6
3.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES...................................................... 8
3.1 NO -ACTION ALTERNATIVE..............................................................................9
3.1.1 Existing Project Facilities.................................................................................
9
3.1.2 Existing Project Operation................................................................................9
RESOURCE ISSUES.........................................................................................
3.2 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL..................................................................................
11
3.2.1 Proposed Project Facilities and Operations.....................................................
11
3.2.2 Proposed Environmental Measures.................................................................
11
3.3 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION ...............................................
13
3.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED
15
.........................
STUDY...................................................................................... ............
13
3.4.1 Federal Government Takeover........................................................................
13
3.4.2 Non -power License.........................................................................................
13
3.4.3 Project Decommissioning...............................................................................
14
4.0 SCOPE OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND SITE-SPECIFIC RESOURCE ISSUES
........................................................................................................................................... 14
4.1
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS................................................................................
14
4.2
RESOURCE ISSUES.........................................................................................
14
4.2.1
Geologic and Soil Resources..........................................................................
15
4.2.2
Aquatic Resources...........................................................................................
15
4.2.4
Recreation and Land Use................................................................................
15
4.2.5
Cultural Resources..........................................................................................
16
4.2.6
Developmental Resources...............................................................................
16
5.0 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION............................................................................. 16
6.0 EA PREPARATION SCHEDULE............................................................................. 18
8.0 COMPREHENSIVE PLANS..................................................................................... 21
ii

9.0 MAILING LIST .......................................................................................................... 22
Figure 1. Location of the Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project (Source: License application
andStaff) . ...................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 2. Facilities of the Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project (Source: License application
andStaff) . .................................................................................................................... 10
ill

Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project, No. 9842
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC), under the
authority of the Federal Power Act (FPA),' may issue licenses for terms ranging from 30
to 50 years for the construction, operation, and maintenance of non-federal hydroelectric
projects. On August 28, 2014, Mr. Ray F. Ward filed an application for a new license for
the Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 9842-006).
The project is located on the Watauga River in Watauga County, near Boone,
North Carolina (Figure 1). No federal lands or Indian reservations are located within the
proposed project boundary.
The Ward Mill Project is operated as a run -of -river facility at all times. The
average annual energy production during the period from 2006 to 2013 was 374,403
megawatt -hours (MWh). A detailed description of the project is provided in section 3.0.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969,3 the Commission's
regulations, and other applicable laws require that we independently evaluate the
environmental effects of relicensing the Ward Mill Project as proposed, and also consider
reasonable alternatives to the licensees' proposed action. At this time, we intend to
prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that describes and evaluates the probable
effects, including an assessment of the site-specific and cumulative effects, if any, of the
proposed action and alternatives. The EA preparation will be supported by a scoping
process to ensure identification and analysis of all pertinent issues. Although our current
intent is to prepare an environmental assessment (EA), there is a possibility that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be required. Nevertheless, this meeting will
satisfy the NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is issued by
the Commission.
'16 U.S.C. § 791(a) -825(r).
2 The current license for the Ward Mill Project was issued with an effective date of
September 9, 1986, for a term of 30 years and expires on September 8, 2016.
3 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4370(f) (2006).
4

Figure 1. Location of the Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project (Source: License
application and Staff).
2.0 SCOPING
This Scoping Document 1 (SDI) is intended to advise all participants as to the
proposed scope of the EA and to seek additional information pertinent to this analysis.
This document contains: (1) a description of the scoping process and schedule for the
development of the EA; (2) a description of the proposed action and alternatives; (3) a
preliminary identification of environmental issues; (4) a request for comments and
information; (5) a proposed EA outline; and (6) a preliminary list of comprehensive plans
which are applicable to the project.
5

Scoping is the process used to identify issues, concerns, and opportunities for
enhancement or mitigation associated with a proposed action. According to NEPA, the
process should be conducted early in the planning stage of the project. The purposes of
the scoping process are as follows:
• invite participation of federal, state and local resource agencies, Indian tribes,
non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the public to identify significant
environmental and socioeconomic issues related to the proposed project;
® detennine the resource issues, depth of analysis, and significance of issues to
be addressed in the EA;
® identify how the project would or would not contribute to cumulative effects in
the project area;
• identify reasonable alternatives to the proposed action that should be evaluated
in the EA;
O solicit, from participants, available information on the resources at issue; and
determine the resource areas and potential issues that do not require detailed
analysis during review of the project.
2.2 COMMENTS, O' 1 ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW
During the preparation of the EA, there will be several opportunities for the
resource agencies, Indian tribes, NGOs, and the public to provide input. These
opportunities occur:
2

during the public scoping process when we solicit oral and written comments
regarding scope of the issues and analysis for the EA;
® in response to the Commission's ready for environmental analysis notice; and
e after issuance of the EA when we solicit written comments on the EA.
In addition to written comments solicited by this SDI, we will hold two public
scoping meetings and an Environmental Site Review in the vicinity of the project. A
daytime meeting will focus on concerns of the resource agencies, NGO's, and Indian
tribes, and an evening meeting will focus on receiving input from the public. We invite
all interested agencies, Indian tribes, NGOs, and individuals to attend one or both of the
meetings to assist us in identifying the scope of environmental issues that should be
analyzed in the EA. The times and locations of the meetings are as follows:
Daytime Scoping Meeting
Date and Time: Tuesday, April 21, 2015, 1:00 p.m. (EDT)
Location: Watauga County Center, 971 W. King Street, Boone, North
Carolina, 28607.
Evening Scoping Meeting
Date and Time: Tuesday, April 21, 2015,
Location: Watauga County Center,
Carolina, 28607.
7:00 p.m. (EDT)
PI W. King Street, Boone, North
Environmental Site Review
Date and Time: Tuesday, April 21, 2015, 3:30 p.m. (EDT)
Location: Watauga County Center, 971 W. King Street, Boone, North
Carolina, 28607.
Participants must provide their own transportation to the project site. Anyone with
questions about the Environmental Site Review or needing directions should contact
Andrew Givens at [phone].
The scoping meetings will be recorded by a court reporter, and all statements
(verbal and written) will become part of the Commission's public record for the project.
7

Before each meeting, all individuals who attend, especially those who intend to make
statements, will be asked to sign in and clearly identify themselves for the record.
Interested parties who choose not to speak or who are unable to attend the scoping
meetings may provide written comments and information to the Commission as described
in section 5.0. These meetings are posted on the Commission's calendar located on the
internet at lAtp `/WW .fere. )z'luvczitCalenclai-'Everltsf:]st.as )x, along with other related
information.
Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues and/or concerns
as they pertain to the relicensing of the Ward Mill Project. It is advised that participants
review the license application in preparation for the scoping meetings. Copies of the
license application are available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference
Room or maybe viewed on the Commission's website(i t p �`w�� w iter ov), using the
"eLibrary" link. Enter the docket number, P-9842 for the Ward Mill Project, to access the
documents. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
F EPC0111i eSLI ort ,(� icrc.,-,ov or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, (202) 502-
8659.
Following the scoping meetings and comment period, all issues raised will be
reviewed and decisions made on the level of analysis needed. If our preliminary analysis
indicates that any issues presented in this scoping document have little potential for
causing significant effects, the issue(s) will be identified and the reasons for not providing
a more detailed analysis will be given in the EA.
If we receive no substantive comments on SDI, then we will not prepare a Scoping
Document 2 (SD2). Otherwise, a SD2 addressing any substantive comments received
will be issued for informational use only by all participants or interested persons; no
response will be required. The EA will address recommendations and input received
during the scoping process.
In accordance with NEPA, the environmental analysis will consider the following
alternatives, at a minimum: (1) the no -action alternative, (2) the applicant's proposed
action, and (3) alternatives to the proposed action.
R

Under the no -action alternative, the Ward Mill Project would continue to operate
as required by the current project license (i.e., there would be no change to the existing
environment). No new environmental protection, mitigation, or enhancement measures
would be implemented. We use this alternative to establish baseline environmental
conditions for comparison with other alternatives.
3.1.1 Existing Project Facilities
The Ward Mill Project consists of the following facilities: (1) a 130 -foot -long, 20 -
foot -high rock and concrete dam; (2) an impoundment with a surface area of 4.6 acres and
an estimated gross storage capacity of 16.3 acre-feet; (3) a 14 -foot -long, 5 -foot -wide, and
7.5 -foot -tall penstock made of rock, reinforced concrete and steel; (4) a 60 -foot -long, 20 -
foot -wide powerhouse integrated into the south end of the dam, containing two generating
units with a total capacity of 168 kW; (5) a 45 -foot -long, 12.48 -kilovolt transmission line;
and (6) appurtenant facilities (see Figure 2).
The Ward Mill Project is able to generate from below 290,000 to over 599,000
kilowatt-hours annually.
3.1.2 Existing Project Operation
Mr. Ray F. Ward operates the Ward Mill Project in run -of -river mode at all times,
whereby water flowing into the project impoundment equals water flowing out. The
Ward Mill Project is designed for manual starting and operating, and automatic shutdown.
Any fluctuations in the pond surface elevation are the result of fluctuations in river flow.
E

Figure 2. Facilities of the Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project (Source: License
application and Staff).
10

3.2.1 Proposed Project Facilities and Operations
Mr. Ray F. Ward proposes no changes to project facilities or operation.
3.2.2 Proposed Environmental Measures
Mr. Ray F. Ward, working with the consulted entities, has identified measures to
protect and enhance environmental resources of the project area. Mr. Ray F. Ward
proposes to operate the Ward Mill Project with the environmental protection and
enhancement measures described below.
Geologic and Soil Resources
Existing Measures
® The Ward Mill Project currently has two sand gates in the dam that can be
used for sediment removal.
Proposed Measures
Develop and implement a Sediment Management Plan to properly remove
sediment from the impoundment when necessary.
® Develop and implement a Shoreline Management Plan to prevent
streambank erosion along the reservoir and sedimentation into the reservoir.
® Develop and implement an Impoundment Drawdown and Refill Plan to
prevent release of sediment from the impoundment and erosion downstream
from the dam.
Aquatic Resources
Existing Measures
® Mr. Ray F. Ward monitors flow daily to ensure run -of -river operation
throughout the year.
The Ward Mill Project has an automatic cut-off float and switch that
11

automatically shuts off generation to prevent drawdown of the reservoir
when the water level drops below the top of the dam during low flow
periods.
The Ward Mill Project has trash racks with 1 -inch bar spacing to reduce
fish impingement and entrainment at the project intake.
Proposed Measures
® There are no proposed PM&E measures related to aquatic resources for the
Ward Mill Project. The potential need for PM&E measures will be
evaluated during the relicensing process.
Terrestrial Resources
® There are no existing or proposed PM&E measures related to terrestrial
resources for the Ward Mill Project. The potential need for PM&E
measures will be evaluated during the relicensing process.
Threatened and Endangered Species
There are no existing or proposed PM&E measures related to threatened
and endangered species for the Ward Mill Project. The potential need for
PM&E measures will be evaluated during the relicensing process.
Recreation and Land Use
Existing Measures
® Mr. Ray F. Ward currently provides public access to the Watauga River
along the length of the impoundment and operates and maintains a canoe
portage around the project.
Proposed Measures
® There are no proposed PM&E measures related to recreation resources.
The potential need for PM&E measures will be evaluated during the
relicensing process.
12

Cultural Resources
There are no existing or proposed PM&E measures related to cultural
resources. The potential need for PM&E measures will be evaluated during
the relicensing process.
Commission staff will consider and assess all alternative recommendations for
operational or facility modifications, as well as protection, mitigation, and enhancement
measures identified by us, the agencies, Indian tribes, NGOs, and the public.
STUDY3.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILE:V
At present, we propose to eliminate the following alternatives from detailed study
in the EA.
3.4.1 Federal Government Takeover
In accordance with § 16.14 of the Commission's regulations, a federal department
or agency may file a recommendation that the United States exercise its right to take over
a hydroelectric power project with a license that is subject to sections 14 and 15 of the
FPA.4 We do not consider federal takeover to be a reasonable alternative. Federal
takeover of the project would require congressional approval. While that fact alone
would not preclude further consideration of this alternative, there is currently no evidence
showing that federal takeover should be recommended to Congress. No party has
suggested that federal takeover would be appropriate and no federal agency has expressed
interest in operating the project.
3.4.2 Non -power License
A non -power license is a temporary license the Commission would terminate
whenever it determines that another governmental agency is authorized and willing to
assume regulatory authority and supervision over the lands and facilities covered by the
non -power license. At this time, no governmental agency has suggested a willingness or
ability to take over the project. No party has sought a non -power license, and we have no
4 16 U.S.C. §§ 791(a) -825(r).
13

basis for concluding that the Ward Mill Project should no longer be used to produce
power. Thus, we do not consider a non -power license a reasonable alternative to
relicensing the project.
3.4.3 Project Decommissioning
Decommissioning of the project could be accomplished with or without dam
removal. Either alternative would require denying the relicense application and surrender
or termination of the existing license with appropriate conditions. There would be
significant costs involved with decommissioning the project and/or removing any project
facilities. The project provides a viable, safe, and clean renewable source of power to the
region. With decommissioning, the project would no longer be authorized to generate
power.
No party has suggested project decommissioning would be appropriate in this case,
and we have no basis for recommending it. Thus, we do not consider project
decommissioning a reasonable alternative to relicensing the project with appropriate
environmental enhancement measures.
4.0RESOURCE
ISSUES
According to the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations for implementing
NEPA (40 C.F.R. 1508.7), a cumulative effect is the effect on the environment that
results from the incremental effect of the action when added to other past, present and
reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal)
or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative effects can result from individually
minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time, including
hydropower and other land and water development activities.
Based on our review of the license application and agency and public comments,
we have not identified any resources that may be cumulatively affected by the proposed
operation and maintenance of the Ward Mill Project.
In this section, we present a preliminary list of environmental issues to be
addressed in the EA. We have identified these issues, which are listed by resource area,
14

by reviewing the license application and the Commission's record for the Ward Mill
Project. This list is not intended to be exhaustive or final, but contains those issues raised
to date that could have substantial effects. After the scoping process is complete, we will
review this list and determine the appropriate level of analysis needed to address each
issue in the EA.
We have not identified substantive issues relating to terrestrial resources,
aesthetics or socioeconomics, and therefore, do not intend on conducting a detailed
analysis of these resources.
4.2.1 Geologic and Soil Resources
Effects of project operation and maintenance on erosion and sedimentation
within the project boundary.
4.2.2 Aquatic Resources
® Effects of project operation and maintenance on water quality, including
DO concentrations and water temperatures in the Ward Mill impoundment
and downstream from the project dam.
® Effects of project operation and maintenance on resident fishery resources.
Effects of leakage through the sand gates, during low inflow and drought
conditions, on aquatic habitat and communities in the impoundment and
downstream of the dam.
® Effects of impingement and entrainment on fish populations in the Ward
Mill impoundment and in the Watauga River downstream from the project.
® Effects of project operation and maintenance on the green floater mussel
and eastern hellbender salamander, which are state endangered and state
species of concern, respectively, that could potentially occur within the
project boundary.
Adequacy of existing public access and recreation facilities in the project
boundary to meet current and future recreational demand.
ILI

® Effects of project operation on recreation opportunities on the Watauga
River.
4.2.5 Cultural resources
Effects of project -related activities on previously unidentified historic or
archeological resources or traditional cultural properties that may be eligible
for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.
4.2.6 Developmental resources
® Effects of the proposed project and alternatives, including any
recommended environmental PM&E measures, on project economics.
* L3,11r,•
We are asking federal, state, and local resource agencies, Indian tribes, NGOs, and
the public to forward to the Commission any information that will assist us in conducting
an accurate and thorough analysis of the project -specific and cumulative effects
associated with relicensing the Ward Mill Project. The types of information requested
include, but are not limited to:
information, quantitative data, or professional opinions that may help define
the geographic and temporal scope of the analysis (both site-specificand
cumulative effects), and that helps identify significant environmental issues;
® identification of, and information from, any other EA, Environmental
Impact Statement, or similar environmental study (previous, on-going, or
planned) relevant to the proposed relicensing of the Ward Mill Project;
® existing information and any data that would help to describe the past and
present actions and effects of the project and other developmental activities
on environmental and socioeconomic resources;
® information that would help characterize the existing environmental
conditions and habitats;
16

® the identification of any federal, state, or local resource plans, and any
future project proposals in the affected resource area (e.g., proposals to
construct or operate water treatment facilities, recreation areas, water
diversions, timber harvest activities, or fish management programs) along
with any implementation schedules;
® documentation that the proposed project would or would not contribute to
cumulative adverse or beneficial effects on any resources. Documentation
can include, but need not be limited to, how the project would interact with
other projects in the area and other developmental activities; study results;
resource management policies; and reports from federal and state agencies,
local agencies, Indian tribes, NGOs, and the public; and
® documentation showing why any resources should be excluded from further
study or consideration.
The requested information and comments on SDI may be filed electronically via
the Internet no later than May 21, 2015 See 18 C.F.R. 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's website ;ml)�! ; ;1� s-��f; ,,.
— ._- -__ _e _
Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at 11MY ANN A'cic (-�, � �lIOCS- � lrll" "COII Alii eL S ). You must
include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance,
please contact FERC Online Support at 1 J ( liric° pyrt�d l(.rc,gm or toll free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY, [phone]. Although the Commission strongly
encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper -filed. To paper -file, mail an
original and five copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20426.
Register online at [ ): c ,
� 3 161 1100 (10C-S-h!11,1U; C SUbsciplion,aso to be notified
via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support.
Intervenors — those on the Commission's service list for this proceeding — are
reminded that if they file comments with the Commission, they must also serve a copy of
their filing on each person whose name appears on the official service list. Note that the
list is periodically updated. The official service list can be obtained on the Commission's
web site (hitpu,_/www.fe-c.gov_) - click on Documents and Filing and click on eService - or
call the Office of the Secretary, Dockets Branch at [phone]. In addition, if any
party files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue
IrA

that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a
copy of the document on the resource agency.
Any questions concerning the scoping meetings, Environmental Site Reviews, or
how to file written comments with the Commission should be directed to Adam Peer at
[phone] or aclann_ Additional information about the Commission's
licensing process and the Ward Mill Project may be obtained from the Commission's
website,rww.Ierc gov.
At this time, we anticipate the need to prepare a draft and final EA. The draft EA
will be sent to all persons and entities on the Commission's service and mailing lists for
the Ward Mill Project. The EA will include our recommendations for operating
procedures, as well as environmental protection and enhancement measures that should
be part of any new license issued by the Commission. All recipients will then have 30
days to review the EA and file written comments with the Commission. All comments on
the draft EA filed with the Commission will be considered in preparation of the Final EA.
The major milestones, including those for preparing the EA, are as follows:
Major Milestone Target Date
Scoping Meetings April 2015
Scoping Document 2 Issued (if necessary) July 2015
Ready for Environmental Analysis Notice Issued August 2015
Deadline for Filing Comments, Recommendations and
Agency Terms and Conditions/Prescriptions October 2015
EA Issued February 2016
If Commission staff determines that there is a need for additional information or
additional studies, the issuance of the Ready for Environmental Analysis notice could be
delayed. If this occurs, all subsequent milestones would be delayed by the time allowed
for EWEB to respond to the Commission's request.
IN

The preliminary outline for the Ward Mill Project EA is as follows:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Application
1.2 Purpose of Action and Need for Power
1.3 Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
1.3.1 Federal Power Act
1.3.1.1 Section 18 Fishway Prescriptions
1.3.1.2 Section 100) Recommendations
1.3.2 Clean Water Act
1.3.3 Endangered Species Act
1.3.4 Coastal Zone Management Act
1.3.5 National Historic Preservation Act
1.4 Public Review and Comment
1.4.1 Scoping
1.4.2 Interventions
1.4.3 Comments on the Application
1.4.4 Comments on EA
2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES
2.1 No -action Alternative
2.1.1 Existing Project Facilities
2.1.2 Project Safety
2.1.3 Existing Project Operation
2.1.4 Existing Environmental Measures
2.2 Applicant's Proposal
2.2.1 Proposed Project Facilities
2.2.2 Proposed Project Operation
2.2.3 Proposed Environmental Measures
2.2.4 Modifications to Applicant's Proposal—Mandatory Conditions
19

APPENDICES
A --License Conditions Recommended by Staff
B --Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment
®1
2.3
Staff Alternative
2.4
Staff Alternative with Mandatory Conditions
2.5
Other Alternatives (as appropriate)
2.6
Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study
2.6.1 Federal Government Takeover of the Project
2.6.2 Issuing a Nonpower License
2.6.3 Retiring the Project
3.0
ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYSIS
3.1
General Description of the River Basin
3.2
Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis
3.2.1 Geographic Scope
3.2.2 Temporal Scope
3.3
Proposed Action and Action Alternatives
3.3.1 Geologic and Soil Resources
3.3.2 Aquatic Resources
3.3.3 Terrestrial Resources
3.3.4 Threatened and Endangered Species
3.3.5 Recreation and Land Use
3.3.6 Cultural Resources
3.4
No -action Alternative
4.0
DEVELOPMENTAL
ANALYSIS
4.1
Power and Economic Benefits of the Project
4.2
Comparison of Alternatives
4.3
Cost of Environmental Measures
5.0
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1
Comparison of Alternatives
5.2
Comprehensive Development and Recommended Alternative
5.3
Unavoidable Adverse Effects
5.4
Recommendations of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
5.5
Consistency with Comprehensive Plans
6.0
FINDING
OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (OR OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACT)
(EAs
only)
7.0
LITERATURE
CITED
8.0
LIST OF PREPARERS
APPENDICES
A --License Conditions Recommended by Staff
B --Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment
®1

Section 10(a)(2) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C, section 803(a)(2)(A), requires the
Commission to consider the extent to which a project is consistent with federal or state
comprehensive plans for improving, developing, or conserving a waterway or waterways
affected by a project. The staff has preliminary identified and reviewed the plans listed
below that may be relevant to the Ward Mill Project. Agencies are requested to review
this list and inform the Commission staff of any changes. If there are other
comprehensive plans that should be considered for this list that are not on file with the
Commission, or if there are more recent versions of the plans already listed, they can be
filed for consideration with the Commission according to 18 CFR section 2.19 of the
Commission's regulations. Please follow the instructions for filing a plan at
-c ".o, irl 'ust i s 11V d 000\ ,e '
The following is a list of comprehensive plans currently on file with the
Commission that may be relevant to the Ward Mill Project:
North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources. 2000. Sub -chapter
213 -Surface water and wetland standards. Raleigh, North Carolina. August 1,
2000.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources. 2000. Water
Quality Progress in North Carolina 1998-1999 305(b) Report. Raleigh, North
Carolina. April 2000.
North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources. North Carolina State
Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP): 2009-2013. Raleigh, North Carolina.
December 2008.
North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources. 2005. North Carolina
wildlife action plan. Raleigh, North Carolina. December 2005.
Southern Appalachian Forest Coalition and Pacific Rivers Council. n.d. Protection of
aquatic biodiversity in the Southern Appalachian National Forests and their
watersheds.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Canadian Wildlife Service. 1986. North American
Waterfowl Management Plan. Department of the Interior. Environment Canada.
May 1986.
21

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Undated. n.d. Fisheries USA: the recreational fisheries
policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, DC.
The list below is the Commission's official mailing list for the Ward Mill Project
(FERC No. 9842). Names in italics are additional stakeholders that are part of Ray F.
Ward's distribution list, but not yet part of the Commission's official mailing list. If you
want to receive future mailings for the Ward Mill Project from the Commission and are
not included in the list below, please send your request by email to etilimg(, ?if rcagw - or by
mail to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, N.E., Room IA, Washington, DC 20426. All written and emailed requests to be
added to the Commission's mailing list must clearly identify the following on the first
page: Ward Mill Project No. 9842-006. You may use the same method if requesting
removal from the mailing list below.
Register online at li th w vN w e r gox 'docs -1,111112 SL1hSC1 J f tiwn,aso to be notified
via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support atFRCOnlineSuppert!� ferc.gov or toll
free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, [phone] _
Mailing List
Peter Raabe
Illark Singleton
Lee I,cyton
American Rivers
Alnerican Whiteir,ater
Blue Ridge Electric
331 W. Main St.
PCS Box 1540
Membership Corporation
Durham, NC 27701
Cullowhee, NC 28680
PO Box 112
Lenoir, NC 28645-0112
Rick Miller
Andrew Givens
Bill John Baker
Utility Director
Cardinal Energy Service,
Principal Chief.
Town of Boone
Inc.
Cherokee ,,ration of
567 West King St.
620 N. West St., Suite 103
Oklahoma
Boone, NC 28607
Raleigh, NC 27603
PO Box 948
Tahlequah, OK 74465
22

Tyler Howe
Rick Herndon
North Carolina Department
Tribal Historic Preservation
High Country, Council of
of Environment and Natural
Specialist
Govcrnincnrs
Resources
Eastern Band of Cherokee
PO Box 1820
Director
Indians
Boone, NC 28607
Division of Land Resources
PO Box 455
1612 Mail Set -vice Center
Cherokee, NC 28 719
Raleigh,
Raleigh, NC 27699-1612
Fred R. Tarver, III
Jim Mead
C177di KM'01y
North Carolina Department
North Carolina Department
North Carolina Department
of Environmental and
of Environmental and
of Environmental and
Natural Resources
Natural Resources
Natural Resources
1611 Mail Service Center
Division of Water Quality
Division of Water Quality
512 North Salisbury Street
1611 Mail Service Center
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite
Raleigh, NC 27699
Raleigh, NC 27699
250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Ian McMillan
J0717ilcr Burdetle
Karen Hi�,,qins
North Carolina Department
North Carolina Department
North Carolina Department
of Environmental and
qfEnvironmental and
of Environmental and
Natural Resources
iVatttral Resources
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Division of Water Resources
Division Resources
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite
1650 jVail Service Center
1650 ,Mail Service Center
250
Raleioqh, NC 27699
Raleigh, NC 27699
Raleigh, NC 27604
North Carolina Department
North Carolina Department
Renee Gledhill-Earlet,
of Agriculture and
of Agriculture and
North Carolina Department
Consumer Services
Consumer Services
(Y*Cultural Resources
Hydropower Contact
Division of Soil and Water
North Carolina Historic
PO Box 27647
Conservation
Preservation Office
Raleigh, NC 27611-7647
Director
4617 Mail Service Center
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, N('27699-4617
Raleigh, NC 27604-1148
Sheila Green
North Carolina Office of the
North Carolina Utilities
North Carolina
Attorney General
Commission
Environmental
PO Box 629
PO Box 29520
Clearinghouse
Raleigh, NC 27602-06219
Raleigh, NC 27626-0520
North Carolina Department
qfAdininiSiration
1301 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1301
23

Christopher GoudreaLI
Ali('17(ICI Snaith
U.S. Army Corps of
I lydropower Licensing
Trout LInflinited
Engineers
Coordinator
PO Box 1612
Water Management
North Carolina Wildlife
i'Vlorgan ton, NC" 286803
69 Darlington Ave.
Resources Commission
Wifi-nington, NC 28403-
645 Fish Hatchery Road
1343
Marion, NC 28752-82541
U.S. Army Cor -lis of
George Piner
John h-(-TIIIS017
Engineers
U.S. Arnily Corps of
U.S. Arni.v Corps of
550 Main Street
Engineers
Engincers
Cincinnati, OH 45202
69 Darlington 4 ve.
60 Forsyth St. SW
If"ilinin-ton, NC28403
Door? I03N115
Atlanta, GA 30335-6801
Office of the Solicitor
John M. Sullivan
Commander
U.S. Bureau of Indian
U.S. Bureau of Land
U.S. Coast Guard
Affairs
Management
Sector North Carolina
1849 C. Street, NW, NIS
411 Briarwood Dr., Suite
721 Medical Center Drive,
6557
404
Suite 100
Washington, DC 20240
Jackson, NIS 39206-3058
Wilmington, NC 28401-
7596
Shwilln Alam
.lances Giattina
Wanda Hudson
U.S. Department of the
U.S. Environmental
U.S. Environmental
Interior
Protection Agency
Protection Agency
, ice o 'Environmental
14,"ater Protection Division
Water" Protection Division
Polic -1) and Compliance
61 rors ' vth St. ST,'V
61 1�"ors ' yth St. SW
1849 ('Street NW
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104
Allanta, GA 30303-3104
If"'ashington, DC 20240
Mark Cantrell
Jerry Ziewitz
Bill Pickens
U.S.Fish and Wildlife
U.S.Fish and Wildlife
U.S. Forest Service
Service
Service
2411 Old US Highway 70
160 Zillicoa St.
2639 N. Monroe St.
W
Asheville, NC 28801
Tallahassee, FL 32303
Clayton, NC 27520
Julie 11,loore
..Jeff
Lisa Baker
L'. S. Fo rE's t Se i - i1, i c c
U.S. A'ational Park Service
Tribal lli..storic Preservation
160 ZilliC0a St.
175 Hamm Rd, Szfitc C
officer
Asheville, VC 28801
Chattanooga, TV37405
United Keetoo ivah Band of
the Cherokee Indians
PO Box 746
Tahlequah, OK 74465
24

Ray F. Ward
Joseph Fite -than
Domm Lisenl) ' v
443 Old Watauga River Rd.
Director ofPhtnning wid
Wa toug6i River Keeper
Sugar Grove, NC 28679-
Inspections
191 1 -to ivcird A
9560
County
Bootie, N( 28607
331 Qileen �/_ '511ile ,4
Boone, ,,%'C 28607
Ken Noland
Town of Wilkesboro North
Carolina
PO Box 1056
Wilkesboro., NC 28697
25