CSPA
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)
Multi River, Multi Dam Transmission Issue
Protest to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Subject: PG&E - Transmission Issue
Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 14:28:30 +0000
From: BOB BAIOCCHI <cspa@psln.com>
Organization: CSPA
To: CSPA Board via email
United States of America
Before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Application for Amendments to Licenses - Proposal to Delete
Non-Jurisdictional Transmission Lines and Their Associated Facilities
from FERC Licenses
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Applicant and Licensee
FERC Project Nos. 96-028; 137-022; 233-066, 619-075, 803-044; 1121-045;
1333-029; 1354-021; 1962-026; 1988-023; 2105-069; 2107-005; 2130-025;
and 2130-093 - 14 FERC Licensed Project
FERC Licensed Projects - Kerchoff Project 1 & 2; Upper Mokelumne
Project; Pit 3, 4, and 5 Project; Bucks Creek Project;
DeSabla-Centerville Project; Battle Creek Project; Tule River Project;
Crane Valley Project; Rock Creek-Cresta Project; Haas-Kings River
Project; Upper North Fork Feather River Project; Poe Project; Spring
Gap-Stanislaus Project; and Drum-Spaulding Project
San Joaquin River in Madera and Fresno Counties; Mokelumne River in
Amador and Calaveras Counties; North Fork Feather River in Plumas
County; Pit River in Shasta County; West Branch Feather River and Butte
Creek in Butte County; Battle Creek in Shasta and Tehama Counties; North
Fork of the Middle Fork Tule River in Tulare County; Willow Creek and
San Joaquin River in Madera and Fresno Counties; North Fork Feather
River in Plumas and Butte Counties; North Fork Kings River in Fresno
County; North Fork Feather River in Butte County; Stanislaus River in
Calaveras and Tuolumne Counties; South Fork Yuba River, American River,
and Bear Rivers in Nevada and Placer Counties
State of California
Motion to Intervene by the
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
1. In accordance with the Commission's rules of procedures, the
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance hereby file a motion to
intervene regarding the Pacific Gas and Electric Company's amendment of
licenses as shown above to delete non-jurisdictional transmission lines
and their associated facilities from FERC Licenses at 14 FERC licensed
projects in California.
The Amendments to Licenses - The Proposed Project
2. The Pacific Gas and Electric Company (hereinafter known as "PG&E")
proposes to delete non-jurisdictional transmission lines and their
associated facilities from their licenses.
Studies conducted by PG&E of their transmission system claims that the
transmission lines (and transmission corridors) proposed for deletion
carry energy from other electric generating sources and are no longer
primary transmission lines. PG&E claims that removing these transmission
lines from the project licenses will not result in any physical changes
to these transmission facilities or to their operation.
The CSPA disagrees with PG&E's conclusion as shown below. i.e. North
Fork Feather River; Plumas County FERC Project No. 1962 (PG&E's Rock
Creek - Cresta Project) No. 2105 (Upper North Fork Feather River
Project), and 2107 (Poe Project (North Fork Feather River).
The Commission notice stated that the Commission is presently
processing applications for new licenses for four of the projects. Those
projects are: PG&E's Upper Mokelumne River Project No. 137-022; PG&E's
Rock Creek-Cresta Project No. 1962-026; Crane Valley Project No.
1354-021; and the Haas-Kings River Project No. 1988-023.
The Commission will be processing additional PG&E FERC licensed
projects in California for relicensing which are part of the amendments.
Consequently, the proposed amendment affects more than the relicensing
of only four (4) projects in California. Those additional FERC licensed
projects are: FERC Project No. 2687 (Pit No. 1) (Fall River and Pit
River - Shasta County); FERC Project No. 2105 (Upper North Fork Feather
River and Butt Creek - Plumas County); and FERC Project No. 2107 (North
Fork Feather River - Plumas and Butte Counties).
Standing of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
3. The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (hereinafter known as
"CSPA") has significant standing on FERC licensed hydroelectric projects
in California. The CSPA reference the Commission's records in which the
CSPA was a party of record in many matters before the Commission.
The CSPA represents California anglers who recreate throughout
California, including the above mentioned watersheds. In California, the
state's fishery resources, the water resources, and the wildlife
resources, belong to and are the property of the people of the State of
California. The fishery and wildlife resources and water resources of
the State of California are public trust resources and assets. The
approval of hydroelectric projects and associated transmission lines in
California over the years by the Commission has adversely affected the
resident and anadromous fisheries of many rivers and streams in the
State of California. The Commission's approval of this intervention
would be in the public interest.
The mailing address of the petitioner is: California Sportfishing
Protection Alliance, P.O. Box 357, Quincy, CA 95971, c/o Robert J.
Baiocchi, Consultant, CSPA.
The Applicant
4. The Applicant for amendments to licenses is the Pacific Gas and
Electric Company. The mailing address of the agent for PG&E is Terry
Morford, Manager, Hydro Generation Department, Pacific Gas and Electric
Company, P.O. Box 7700000, Mail Code N11C, San Francisco, California
94177.
Statement of Facts and Reasons for Motion to Intervene
Commission's Notice of April 3, 1998 was Ambiguous and Absent Site
Specific Information and Data Affecting the Human and Social
Environments of the State of California
5. Commission's notice of April 3, 1998 was vague and ambiguous, and
stated very little regarding the potential impacts to the human and
social environments of the affected counties and lands in California
where the fourteen (14) FERC licensed projects are located in
California.
PG&E proposes to delete non-jurisdictional transmission lines and their
associated facilities from their license. Associated facilities means
dams, diversions, and powerhouses. The powerhouses are connected to the
transmission lines, and the dams and diversions provides water to be
diverted to the powerhouses to produce power which is transitted to the
transmission systems.
In order for the public to response to the Commission's notice, it is
only reasonable that the Commission's notice provides information so
that the public is aware of what will happen in the event the Commission
approves the amendments to 14 FERC licensed projects in California.
Simply put, the public need more information.
The Unanswered Questions
6. The proposed amendment will affect 14 FERC licensed projects in
California, and hundreds, if not thousands of miles of transmission
lines and transmission corridors, including FERC licensed dams and
diversions affecting many rivers and streams in California.
7. A newspaper source in northern California indicated that PG&E is
proposing to sell and/or walk away from their hydro projects. We
reference Sacramento Bee; Tuesday, May 5, 1998, Superior California -
"PG&E TO Leave Hydro Behind".
In doing what ever PG&E is proposing to do, it is clear they do not
want the Commission to regulate their federally licensed projects.
8. The Commission and PG&E claim there will be no physical changes to
these facilities in the event the transmission lines and transmission
corridors are deleted from PG&E's licenses.
The CSPA disagree. Maintenance of the transmission corridors occur and
should occur on a regular basis to protect private and public lands.
i.e. clearing and thinning trees and vegetation, protection of wildlife
species and their habitat, water quality, etc.
9. What federal agency will regulate and protect the human and social
environments affected by the regular maintenance of the transmission
lines and transmission corridors? i.e. wildlife species and their
habitat, water quality, etc.
10. What FERC licensees will be responsible for maintaining the
transmission lines and transmission corridors? In what manner? Who will
bear the cost? How will the transmission line and corridor maintenance
be shared by all parties using the transmission lines for power
generation?
11. What federal agencies will regulate the transmission lines and
transmission corridors to protect the human and social environments in
the counties affected by the transmission lines and corridors?
12. What is the specific saving to the Commission's annual budget for
not regulating PG&E's transmission systems?
13. What FERC licensees will be responsible for maintaining the
transmission lines and transmission corridors to prevent wildfires in
the affected counties?
14. What FERC licensees would be liable and responsible for wildfires
affecting private and public lands associated with the transmission
lines in the affected counties?
15. What presently is the percentage of energy being transmitted in all
of the individual systems by PG&E?
16. What presently is the percentage of energy being transmitted in all
of the individual systems by other parties other than PG&E?
17. What federal agency will approve interties from proposed new hydro
and energy projects into any of the affected transmission systems?
18. What authority does the U.S. Forest Service have with the proposed
amendments on public lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service?
19. What authority do the affected counties have with the proposed
amendments on private lands?
20. What are the existing environmental and operational conditions of
the affected transmission lines and transmission corridors?
21. Will the Commission and its staff inspect all of the affected PG&E
transmission lines and transmission corridors to assure the public that
they are in sound environmental and operational condition before the
Commission even considers approving the amendments?
22. Will the Commission require the affected transmission lines in
PG&E's systems to be upgraded by PG&E to protect raptor species from
being harmed before approving the amendments?
23. In cases of federally threatened and endangered species protected
under the provisions of the federal Endangered Species Act, will the
Commission consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine
whether the existing transmission systems do not affect and jeopardize
threatened and endangered species?
24. What role does the deregulation of energy in California play into
the proposed amendment by PG&E?
25. There are many unknown factors and circumstances involved in PG&E's
application for amendments to licensees which were not disclosed in the
Commission's notice of April 21, 1998. The public is entitled to full
public disclosure and due process.
Request for Environmental Impact Statement
26. The proposed amendments to licenses will be a major federal action
affecting the human and social environments of California. The CSPA
believes that the Commission should prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement for the proposed amendments to licenses because the proposed
amendments to the FERC licenses by PG&E will affect 14 FERC licensed
projects in California as well as numerous counties in the State of
California, and has the potential to cause adverse impacts to threatened
and endangered species and their habitat as well as other wildlife
species and their habitat.
All Affected FERC Licenses Should be Re-opened by the Commission to
Mitigate All Existing Adverse Impacts to the Human Environment in
Accordance with the Public Trust Doctrine, Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act, Federal Endangered Species Act, and Applicable State of
California Statutes
27. All affected FERC licenses proposed for amendments by PG&E should be
re-opened by the Commission to mitigate fully for all existing adverse
impacts to the human environment in accordance with the Public Trust
Doctrine, Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, Federal Endangered Species
Act, and applicable state of California statutes before PG&E sells the
projects to outside parties, and also before the Commission considers
approving the proposed amendments to 14 FERC licensed projects in
California.
Public Scoping Meetings
28. The CSPA believes it would be reasonable and in the public interest
for the Commission to hold public scoping meetings in each county
affected by the proposed amendments. The CSPA request a public scoping
meeting in Plumas County at the county seat at Quincy, California. i.e.
North Fork Feather River transmission system.
Request for Information
29. The CSPA request the Commission to require PG&E to submit and
forward copies of PG&E's transmission studies and application for
amendments to the CSPA's agent (Bob Baiocchi) and other intervenors and
interested parties.
The CSPA respectfully request the Commission to accept this motion to
intervene because it is in the public interest.
Respectfully Submitted
______________________________________________
Robert J. Baiocchi, Consultant
For: California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
P.O. Box 357
Quincy, CA 95971
Bus Tel: 530-836-1115; Fax: 530-836-2062
Date: May 6, 1998
Certificate of Service
David P. Boergers, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20426
(the original and 15 copies)
Carol L. Sampson, Director
Office of Hydropower Licensing
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20426
Steve Volker, Esquire
Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund
180 Montgomery Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94104
Michael Jackson, Counsel
RCRC - Rural Counties
P.O. Box 207
Quincy, CA 95971
Wayne White, State Supervisor
c/o Gary Taylor, Energy and Power
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
3310 El Camino Avenue, Suite 130
Sacramento, CA 95821-6340
Jim Crenshaw, President
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
1248 East Oak Avenue, Suite D
Woodland, CA 95695
Mike Fitzwater
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
California Hydro Reform Coalition
2730 Third Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95818
Kevin Lewis, Director
Shasta Paddlers
4641 Hornbeck Lane
Anderson, CA 96007
John Gangemi, Conservation Director
American Whitewater Affiliation
482 Electric Avenue
Big Fork, MT 59911
Hydro Reform Coalition
1025 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Suite 720
Washington, D.C. 2000
Terry Morford, Manager
Hydro Generation Department
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
P.O. Box 7700000, Mail Code N11C
San Francisco, CA 94177
Interested Parties
For further information contact Bob Baiocchi at either 916-836-1115 or
at e-mail address: cspa@psln.com
The mailing address for the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
is P.O. Box 357, Quincy, CA 95971.