fish propagation 2010 annual report - pse.com · pdf fileegg incubation tray collection. ......

BAK SA 101 Annual Report 2010.Doc PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Doc ID: BAK.2012.0413.0583.PSE.FERC 16 April 2012

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ARTICLE 101

FISH PROPAGATION 2010 ANNUAL REPORT

REPORTING PERIOD JUNE 1, 2010 – MAY 31, 2011

BAKER RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC No. 2150

April 2012

Fish Propagation – 2010 Annual Report CONTENTS

BAK SA 101 Annual Report 2010.Doc PUGET SOUND ENERGY 16 April 2012 Doc ID: BAK.2012.0413.0583.PSE.FERC Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page ii

CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................... 1

3.0 Activity Report .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2

3.1 Principal Management Activities ...................................................................................................................................... 2

3.2 Monitoring Results, Observations, and Analyses........................................................................................................... 28

3.3 Acquisition and Related Activities .................................................................................................................................. 28

3.4 Special Consultation....................................................................................................................................................... 28

3.5 Design and Planning Activities ....................................................................................................................................... 28

3.6 Documents Submitted .................................................................................................................................................... 28

3.7 Modifications to or Deviations from Implementation Plan .............................................................................................. 29

4.0 Issues and Resolution............................................................................................................................................................ 29

5.0 Proposed Changes to the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan ............................................................................................... 29

6.0 Accounting .............................................................................................................................................................................. 29

6.1 Funding .......................................................................................................................................................................... 29

6.2 Expenditures .................................................................................................................................................................. 29

6.3 Adjustments.................................................................................................................................................................... 30

7.0 Supporting Documents .......................................................................................................................................................... 30

8.0 References............................................................................................................................................................................... 31

9.0 Review Comments and Responses ...................................................................................................................................... 32

9.1 Distribution List............................................................................................................................................................... 32

9.2 Transmittal Message ...................................................................................................................................................... 33

9.3 Summary of Reviewer Replies ....................................................................................................................................... 33

9.4 Reviewer Comments and PSE Responses.................................................................................................................... 34

Fish Propagation – 2010 Annual Report List of Tables

BAK SA 101 Annual Report 2010.Doc PUGET SOUND ENERGY 16 April 2012 Doc ID: BAK.2012.0413.0583.PSE.FERC Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page iii

List of Tables Table 1. Fish Co-Managers’ preseason sockeye broodstock loading plan and actual broodstock loading, 2010......................... 14 Table 2. An approach for sequential sockeye development at production facilities at Sulphur Springs, 2010 to 2015. ................ 15 Table 3. Salmon production from Baker fish propagation facilities, June 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011. ............................................. 15 Table 4. Salmon releases from Baker River fish propagation facilities, June 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011. ....................................... 17 Table 5. Salmon rearing inventory at fish propagation facilities as of May 31, 2011. .................................................................... 18 Table 6. ARG representatives who received the draft Fish Propagation 2010 Annual Report as part of the SA 102 review process. ................................................................................................................................................................ 32 Table 7. Comments following formal review of the Fish Propagation 2010 Annual Report. .......................................................... 34

List of Figures Figure 1. Baker fish hatchery site layout.......................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2. Baker fish hatchery constructed facilities. Clockwise from top left: egg incubation, adult holding and fry transfer hoppers, outdoor rearing, early rearing............................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 3. Spawning Beach 4 prior to modifications.......................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 4. Spawning Beach 4 during modifications, showing isolated water supply to each segment and the concrete walls between segments........................................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 5. New pond liner.................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Figure 6. Crane and outlet structure improvements......................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 7. Pad for spawning beach access during operation and maintenance activities................................................................. 9 Figure 8. Completed spawning beach sections. .............................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 9. Installation of fry outlet screens and fry enumeration stations........................................................................................ 10 Figure 10. Post-modification testing at Spawning Beach 4............................................................................................................ 10 Figure 11. Fish hatchery and improved Spawning Beach 4, spring 2011...................................................................................... 11 Figure 12. Yearly number of sockeye fry released into the reservoirs from Baker fish propagation programs, 1957-2010. ......... 16 Figure 13. Baker fish hatchery facilities in first-year operation concurrent with Spawning Beach 4 modifications ........................ 19 Figure 14. Baker fish hatchery facilities during first-year operation. Sockeye females selected for egg-take. .............................. 20 Figure 15. Egg incubation tray collection. 5.2 million eggs were collected in 2010. ..................................................................... 20 Figure 16. One of 784 egg incubators. The facility can incubate up to 7.8 million eggs............................................................... 21 Figure 17. Newly-hatched fry in one of many swim-up troughs ..................................................................................................... 21 Figure 18. The hatchery building houses 22 swim-up troughs and 10 early rearing tanks............................................................ 22 Figure 19. These fry swim-up troughs, along with other components of the sockeye program, are in separate “walled” areas shielded from other functions of rearing in order to isolate, control, and reduce the risk of disease outbreaks.................................................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 20. Sockeye fry in a holding pond, a staging area for the transfer hoppers that will release them to Baker Lake ............. 23 Figure 21. Juvenile fish rearing facilities in use in 2010 for sockeye and coho salmon and rainbow trout. .................................. 24 Figure 22. Juvenile fish rearing facilities with capacity for 20,000 pounds instantaneous production. ......................................... 25 Figure 23. Transferring and releasing juvenile salmon from a transport tank................................................................................ 26 Figure 24. E-mail message from PSE accompanying the Fish Propagation 2010 Annual Report. ............................................... 33

BAK SA 101 Annual Report 2010.Doc PUGET SOUND ENERGY 16 April 2012 Doc ID: BAK.2012.0413.0583.PSE.FERC Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 1

1.0 Executive Summary This annual report reviews activities undertaken by Puget Sound Energy (PSE) during the reporting period of June 1, 2010 – May 31, 2011 to implement settlement agreement article 101, “Fish Propagation” (SA 101) of the Order on Offer of Settlement, Issuing New License and Dismissing Amendment Application as Moot (the license) issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on October 17, 2008 for the Baker River Hydroelectric Project. It has been prepared in consistence with SA 102, “Aquatics Reporting,” and SA 101.

The report covers the SA 101 reporting period of June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011, as outlined in the reporting schedule contained in SA 102.

In this reporting period, PSE efforts under SA 101 included:

Continuing to implement the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan in accordance with the plan’s schedule.

Substantially completing construction of additional fish culture facilities at the Sulphur Springs site, including additional Sulphur Springs water supply intake protection, and modifying Sockeye Spawning Beach 4 (also referred to as the Baker River fish hatchery renovation in the 100% final design documentation report) in accordance with SA 101 and the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan.

Completing a study required by SA 101 c (1), estimating sockeye productive capacity in Baker Lake and Lake Shannon.

Consulting with the U.S. Forest Service to develop a decommissioning proposal to restore Channel Creek to natural conditions at the site of Sockeye Spawning Beaches 1, 2, and 3.

Funding fish propagation and enhancement programs for 2010 in the new hatchery and achieving the first-year production goal of 5 million sockeye fry.

2.0 Introduction This Fish Propagation Report has been prepared for the Baker River Hydroelectric Project (the Project), pursuant to the Order on Offer of Settlement, Issuing New License and Dismissing Amendment Application as Moot dated October 17, 2008 (the license). In the license, settlement agreement article (SA) 101, “Fish Propagation” (appendix A), sets forth the applicable requirements for the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan (the Plan), which in turn sets forth the requirements of this annual report.

This annual report summarizes the activities conducted under SA 101 from June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011, including management activities, monitoring, design and planning, surveys and data collection activities, consultation, documents prepared, modifications to or deviations from the Plan, issues and resolution, accounting, and purposed changes to the FERC-approved Plan. This report provides the ongoing format for future reports.

Fish Propagation – 2010 Annual Report Activity Report


3.0 Activity Report

3.1 Principal Management Activities Principal activities during the 2010 reporting period (June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011) included the following (which are described in greater detail in sections 3.1.1 through 3.1.7).

Implementing the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan approved by the FERC on May 26, 2010.

Substantially completing the improvements to Spawning Beach 4 as designed per the Baker Fish Hatchery Renovation 100% Final Design Documentation Report (dated March 11, 2009). Interim construction updates were provided to the Aquatic Resource Group at meetings during June, July, August, September, October, and November 2010; and March and April 2011.

Operating the newly-constructed fish culture facilities at the Sulphur Springs site with a sockeye fry production goal of 5 million as established by the Fish Co-managers.

Continuing the existing propagation and enhancement programs. The 20,000-pound production program, as determined by the Fish Co-managers, remained unchanged from 2009 (status quo) for sockeye, coho, and rainbow trout production. Allocated to this extended rearing program were approximately 130,000 sockeye, 60,000 coho, and 20,000 rainbow trout fry. Rearing and release objectives were achieved during the reporting period.

Completing the study estimating sockeye productive capacity in Baker Lake and Lake Shannon, as prescribed by SA 101 c (1).

Consulting with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USDA-FS) to develop a decommissioning proposal for the site of Sockeye Spawning Beaches 1, 2 and 3 on Channel Creek to restore site to natural conditions.

Consulting with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) on interim hatchery operational protocols and the continuing PSE funding of fish propagation/enhancement programs and an onsite manager.

3.1.1 Fish Propagation Facilities Plan Per SA 101, PSE is implementing the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan (FPFP) which FERC approved on May 26, 2010.

The FPFP identifies the following projects that will have information updates in future SA 101 annual reports. A short report on each project is provided below.

Sockeye Spawning Beach 4. Interim construction updates will be provided until the final project completion report is submitted following completion of the Baker River fish hatchery renovation. Section 3.1.2 contains an update.

Sulphur Springs fish culture facility. Interim construction updates will be provided until the final project completion report is submitted following completion of the Baker River fish hatchery renovation. Section 3.1.2 contains an update.



Sockeye smolt capacity. Interim study progress updates will be provided until submittal of the final study report including Baker River Aquatic Resource Group (ARG) comments and recommendations. Section 3.1.4 contains an update.

Empirically-derived sockeye production estimate. A study plan and interim study progress updates will be provided, followed by submittal of the final study report including ARG comments and recommendations. This project has not started; a schedule will be determined in consultation with the ARG. One approach to managing the juvenile sockeye population would be to gradually increase the number of fry released and then monitor for subsequent indications of density-dependence in the form of reduced smolt size or length to weight ratio (condition factor). PSE collects juvenile sockeye size information at the juvenile downstream fish passage facilities.

Sockeye Spawning Beach 4 production limits. A study plan and interim study progress updates will be provided until submittal of the final study report including ARG comments and recommendations. This project has not started; a schedule will be determined in consultation with the ARG.

Spawning Beaches 1–3 (Channel Creek site). A decommissioning plan, documentation confirming U.S. Forest Service approval of the decommissioning plan, and interim progress updates will be provided until completion of Channel Creek site decommissioning activities. PSE has initiated discussions with the U.S. Forest Service, the ARG, and the Cultural Resource Advisory Group (CRAG). These consultations are continuing; a schedule will be determined in consultation with the USDA-FS. Per SA 101, decommissioning and restoration activities at this site are expected to be completed within five years of license issuance (October 2013), as outlined in the settlement agreement. Section 3.1.5 includes an update.

Confirmation of annual PSE funding of the Fish Propagation and Enhancement Program and the annual fish production plan. The Fish Co-Managers will provide an annual fish production plan to PSE. PSE funded the fish propagation and enhancement program during the reporting period. Following completion of the Baker fish hatchery renovation, PSE will request that the Fish Co-Managers provide the annual fish production plan to PSE annually by September 30 to accommodate the PSE budget, reporting processes, and timeline requirements. In an e-mail to Arnie Aspelund of PSE on June 21, 2010, the Fish Co-Managers provided a plan to PSE to distribute 3,800 adult sockeye from the 2010 return to the artificial incubation program in the new fish culture facilities, and to achieve a goal of 5 million eggs. During an ARG meeting on August 10, 2010, PSE requested that the Fish Co-managers provide the annual production plan. The WDFW informed PSE in an e-mail to Arnie Aspelund on August 12, 2010 that important information such as the smolt capacity report when completed in December would help inform their planning. In a subsequent e-mail to Arnie Aspelund on March 7, 2011 WDFW provided PSE with a fry ponding and planting plan for the resulting production of sockeye.

Annual confirmation of PSE funding of the Reservoir Nutrient Enhancement Program. Funding, which is not to exceed $60,000 annually, will start in October 2013. Funding is scheduled for license years 5–50.



Fish facility operations manual for the Sulphur Springs site. A manual will be provided following completion of the Baker fish hatchery renovation, with updates to the manual as needed. Section 3.1.6 includes an update on this project.

Annual contract and budgeting report governing operation of fisheries enhancement programs. This will report the annual budget and actual costs. A schedule will be determined in consultation with the ARG. PSE met with the WDFW in April 2011 to discuss items related to the Baker Fish Hatchery operations and the need for an interim operating process to assign work until settlement provisions for future contractor operating protocols are developed. WDFW is under a PSE contract, whereby PSE funds an onsite manager for operations. Expenditures from the WDFW contract during the reporting period are reported in Section 6.2.

Updates on fisheries enhancement studies approved by the Fish Co-managers to optimize program success. These will be provided annually following completion of the Baker fish hatchery renovation. A schedule will be determined in consultation with the ARG.

Fish propagation facilities operations audit. This will be included with the annual fish propagation facilities and programs report based on a June 1 to May 31 operating year. The audit will address financial accounting, fish handling and disease management operations, hazardous materials handling, and spill prevention and control countermeasures (SPCC) compliance. Prior to the start of Baker fish hatchery renovation, PSE contracted with a hazardous materials consultant (Phillips Environmental Services) to assess the presence of any hazardous materials associated with the removal of any structures, and it was determined that there were none. PSE, per the FERC license, developed an SPCC plan for the project. This plan was submitted to the FERC prior to construction, and compliance is mandatory. At the time of this report, there have been no incidents. Section 3.1.7 includes an update.

3.1.2 SA 101 A & B – Sockeye Spawning Beach 4 and Sulphur Springs Fish Culture Facility 100% Design Report, “Baker Fish Hatchery Renovation Design” There was substantial completion of the construction of new fish culture facilities and modification of Spawning Beach 4 at Sulphur Springs, which is based upon the Baker Fish Hatchery Renovation 100% Final Design Documentation Report of March 11, 2009. Interim construction updates were provided to the Aquatic Resources Group at regular meetings during June, July, August, September, October, and November 2010; and March and April 2011.

The new hatchery and modified spawning beach facilities are intended to provide substantially increased artificial incubation program for up to 7,000,000 sockeye fry (with provisions to construct future facilities for up to 11,000,000 fry), support a 20,000 pound production program, and improve Spawning Beach 4.

PSE developed the design for the Baker fish hatchery renovation, including a hatchery building, rearing units, adult holding ponds, improved alarm systems, renovation of the existing spawning beach, sediment reduction features for the existing water supply, and infrastructure improvements in the vicinity of the existing operation to support incrementally increased sockeye fry production. The design fully addressed the fish



propagation facility improvements and additional facilities required in sections A and B of SA 101.

The Baker Fish Hatchery Renovation 100% Final Design Documentation Report (McMillen, 2009) serves as the record of the final design effort and provides the plans and specifications to begin construction. All of the aforementioned facilities were substantially completed by May 2011.

The hatchery was placed into operational service in early June 2010, accepting adult sockeye broodstock. Beach 4 was shut down, and replacement production was transferred into the new fish culture facilities. Modifications to Sockeye Spawning Beach 4, including isolating the water supply and installing concrete walls between the segments, began in earnest in June 2010 and was completed in May 2011. The next Beach 4 operating cycle begins by accepting sockeye brood stock in June 2011.

There were no significant deviations from the approved design as contained in the Baker Fish Hatchery Renovation 100% Final Design Documentation Report (McMillen, 2009). One addition was the installation of a pre-filter at the intake box for the hatchery water supply. The approved design included sand separators to filter out fine particulates from the water supply. However, upon hatchery start-up it became apparent that some organic matter was entering the intake box and making its way through into the filters. Because the filters were not intended to capture this type of material, a screen was designed, fabricated, and installed at the intake box. It was installed in May 2011, and has been effective at removing organic matter before it reaches the sand separators.

Once final as-built drawings are completed, it is expected that the Baker Fish Hatchery Renovation Project will be declared complete in the fall of 2011. Final project completion will be documented in the 2011 annual report.

Figures 1–10 show the Baker fish hatchery site layout, constructed facilities, modifications to Spawning Beach 4, and the substantially completed facilities at the Sulphur Springs site as of Spring 2011.



Figure 1. Baker fish hatchery site layout.

Figure 2. Baker fish hatchery constructed facilities. Clockwise from top left: egg incubation, adult holding and fry transfer hoppers, outdoor rearing, early rearing.



Figure 3. Spawning Beach 4 prior to modifications.

Figure 4. Spawning Beach 4 during modifications, showing isolated water supply to each segment and

the concrete walls between segments.



Figure 5. New pond liner.

Figure 6. Crane (at right) and outlet structure improvements.



Figure 7. Pad for spawning beach access during operation and maintenance activities.

Figure 8. Completed spawning beach sections.



Figure 9. Installation of fry outlet screens and fry enumeration stations.

Figure 10. Post-modification testing at Spawning Beach 4.



Figure 11. Fish hatchery and improved Spawning Beach 4, spring 2011.



3.1.3 Fish Propagation /Enhancement Programs The following sections 3.1.3.1 through 3.1.3.12 present the results of the fish propagation programs during the reporting period. The information and results also represent an audit of the existing propagation and enhancement program. The audit describes results of biological, operational, and maintenance efforts related to implementing fish propagation and enhancement facilities and programs, and report whether the program goals were met based on the biologically-established June 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011 operating year. This calendar coincides with the operational cycle for the Baker Project fish propagation facilities, which starts with the first yearly adult sockeye returns to the Baker Project and ends with the completion of fry emigration from the sockeye spawning beaches. The audit summarizes the production results of the sockeye spawning beach and artificial propagation facilities, as well as the production results of the coho supplementation and rainbow trout enhancement programs. The information reported includes:

Sockeye fry production numbers. A discussion of disease management and results. Reporting related to adult returns, facility loading, production totals, and release

numbers for juvenile sockeye, coho, and the other fish propagation and enhancement programs for rainbow trout.

The current fish production program at the Baker River Project is directed by the Fish Co-Managers and is a combination of sockeye, coho, and rainbow trout production. The program continues the previous propagation and enhancement programs established by PSE with the WDFW, the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, the Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, and the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, the USFWS, NOAA Fisheries, and the USDA-FS — except that these programs are now contained in the newly-constructed Baker River fish hatchery and will enable the continued sequential development of population enhancement for sockeye and a 20,000-pound-capacity production program made up of any one or any combination of several species. Program updates, directives, and changes are provided by the Fish Co-Managers and reviewed at scheduled ARG meetings.

3.1.3.1 Sockeye Salmon Spawning Beaches

Spawning Beach 4, completed in 1990 to replace the aging, isolated, and vulnerable Beaches 2 and 3, is operated as four isolated compartments (A, B, C, and D) to reduce and contain the outbreaks of infectious hematopoietic necrosis (IHN), a viral disease endemic to sockeye populations. The WDFW provides on-site management of Spawning Beach 4, with support from PSE in the form of funds and personnel. Spawning beach 4 was not used during this reporting period. Modifications were completed, including an isolated water supply, concrete barriers for compartment isolation, a new pond liner, outlet structure improvements, and cranes and concrete pads for carcass removal and better access.

If the IHN virus is detected above the threshold level for any one of the compartments during routine testing, a chlorination treatment system is activated and a protocol to stop collection of fry in that segment is triggered at the direction of the fish co-managers. The



fry emerging from the infected compartment are terminated, and effluent is diverted to the chlorination treatment system in accordance with the disease management protocol developed by the Fish Co-Managers for the facility. The disease management protocol (see section 7.0, “Supporting Documents”) is a set of agreements on how to determine when to stop taking fry from a beach section. This protocol has been in place for the past 15 years, and is revised annually as more is learned about the disease. During this reporting period (winter/spring 2011), viral sampling detected no IHN in either Spawning Beach 4 (not operated during this reporting period) or the artificial incubation sockeye fry that were produced in the new hatchery.

Surplus adult sockeye salmon may be released into Baker Lake for spawning in the upper Baker River and its tributaries. Spawning Beach 3 has been operated periodically as an unattended production facility until replacement production can be provided from the new fish culture facilities at Sulphur Springs. When operated, Spawning Beach 3 usually requires pumping to supplement the gravity water supply. PSE provides support in the form of equipment and personnel, at the request of the WDFW. Spawning Beach 3 was not operated during this reporting period.

3.1.3.2 Sockeye Adult Returns (2010 season)

Each year, the Fish Co-Managers set spawning beach loading goals based on the predicted sockeye run size and ideal loading conditions. Spawning density goals help maximize production and manage for disease. The 2010 beach loading plan was suspended until renovations to Spawning Beach 4 were completed. Spawning Beach 4 is intended to be used again in 2011. In the interim, the plan called for holding 3,800 sockeye as brood stock for the artificial incubation (AI) program. The plan did not call for use of Spawning Beach 3, though the beach was considered available as a backup resource.

A total of 18,806 sockeye returned to the Baker River adult trap during 2010. The return exceeded the Fish Co-Managers’ 2010 allocation for the fish propagation facilities, so 10,414 sockeye were placed into Baker Lake, while 4,542 were allocated to tribal harvest. A distribution methodology developed by the Fish Co-Managers allocated fish between the artificial incubation program, and lake release and tribal harvest based on representative portions of the expected run timing. Artificial incubation ponds were seeded with a total of 3,827 fish. Beach 3 was not seeded with fish. The loading plan and actual loading count are reported in table 1.



Table 1. Fish Co-Managers’ preseason sockeye broodstock loading plan and actual broodstock loading, 2010.

Number of Adults

Location/Program

Loading Plan based on Pre-season Forecast

Actual Loading based on Available Returns

AI pond 1 950 950

AI pond 2 950 950

AI pond 3 950 953

AI pond 4 950 974

Total 3,800 3,827

3.1.3.3 Facilities Operations Monitoring - Water Supply

Monitoring alarms detected two turbidity incidents on February 14, 2011 in the primary water supply to the Upper Baker fish rearing facilities at Sulphur Springs. Because of the potential for soil slippage at the springs supplying water to the fish production facilities, turbidity events are monitored by alarm systems. Past events have resulted in temporary turbidity excursions in the water supply. PSE has responded to these by providing an alternate water supply until the primary supply could be restored. The newly-installed sand separators are designed to have sediment protection and removal built into the primary water supply to address these events. In the spring of 2011, the addition of an intake screen at the Sulphur Springs headworks also reduced the amount of organic debris entering the system; in the past, this debris had accumulated in pipe manifolds.

3.1.3.4 Sockeye Artificial Incubation Program

This hatchery program, which as a pilot program had been producing 1 million fry annually in temporary incubation facilities, has now transitioned into the newly-constructed fish culture facilities that will enable the sequential development of additional population enhancement for sockeye up to the capacity for 7 million fry annually, and which provide added protection in the event of losses from infectious hematopoietic necrosis (IHN). The production goal for 2010 at the artificial incubation facility was 5 million including 130,000 fry reserved for a delayed-release experiment.

Table 2 shows an example approach for scheduling and increasing future sockeye fry production per SA 101 (c), “Sequential Development of Sockeye Population,” using both the spawning beach program and the artificial incubation (AI) program for enhancement. In this approach, PSE would provide for facility operations as directed by the Fish Co-managers.



Table 2. An approach for sequential sockeye development at production facilities at Sulphur Springs, 2010 to 2015.

Brood Year Spawning Beach 4 AI Program Total Fry Production

2010 [Modify Beach 4] 5,000,000 5,000,000

2011 3,000,000+ 3,000,000 6,000,000

2012 3,000,000+ 4,000,000 7,000,000

2013 3,000,000+ 5,000,000 8,000,000

2014 3,000,000+ 6,000,000 9,000,000

2015 3,000,000+ 7,000,000 10,000,000

The Fish Co-Managers determine the allocation percentage of fry to Lake Shannon and Baker Lake. In 2010, roughly 80% (4,004,680) of the fed fry were allocated to Baker Lake, while approximately 20% (950,180) were planted into Lake Shannon.

3.1.3.5 Sockeye Egg Production

Artificial egg incubation occurred in the renovated Baker Fish Hatchery for the 2010 brood year. The AI program yielded a total of 5,199,858 eyed eggs. Air bubbles were observed inside the trays of some egg incubation stacks. Some egg mortality was observed adjacent to these bubbles. In the future, the incubation stacks will be sloped approximately 5% to help dissipate any bubbles. The modifications will occur in the off season.

3.1.3.6 Sockeye Fry Production

According to WDFW records, the AI program produced approximately 5,095,860 fry, meeting the fry production goal established for 2010 by the Fish Co-managers for the artificial incubation program (table 3).

Table 3. Salmon production from Baker fish propagation facilities, June 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011.

Production Year

Brood Year Species Program Stock Number

Release Size Release Site

Mar. - May 2011 2010 Sockeye Artificial

Incubation Baker 5,095,860a Fed Fry Baker Lake,

Lake Shannon

Mar. - May 2011 2010 Coho Extended Rearing Baker 289,318b Fed Fry (see table 5)

a Approximately 130,000 are held in the extended rearing program and will be released in June 2011 and November 2011 (table 5). b Approximately 60,000 are held in the extended rearing program and will be released in April 2012 and May 2012 (table 5).

3.1.3.7 Sockeye Fry Disposition

According to WDFW records, 4,004,680 fry from the artificial incubation program were released into Baker Lake, and 950,180 fry from the artificial incubation program were released into Lake Shannon. Most artificial incubation fry were transported to swim-up troughs and fed for a minimum of one week before release into Baker Lake The intent of this action was to allow the fry to swim up and become active before release, to develop foraging behavior to increase survival, and to postpone release until



zooplankton populations were more likely to be available in Baker Lake. However, 403,216 fry were planted directly into AI pond #3 and reared for four weeks before being planted into Lake Shannon. The intent of rearing in AI pond #3 was to test the fry transport hopper system and to evaluate using the artificial incubation ponds as a rearing vessel. Of the 2011 fry production, approximately 127,486 sockeye fry (as of May 31, 2011) are being reared for use in future studies and for continuing fish propagation and enhancement programs (the goal was 130,000). Fry production in 2010 resulted in approximately 156,780 sockeye fry released as sub-yearlings: 365 fish per pound (fpp) released into Baker Lake during June 2010, and 46 fpp in November 2010. Approximately 4,819 yearlings, or 12 fpp, were released into Baker Lake in April 2011 to contribute to mark-recapture studies (table 4). All fish were raised to appropriate release sizes and released on schedule. In past years, swim-up fry from spawning at Beach 3 or Beach 4 were captured for the rearing program; however, since 2002 the source of fry has been from AI production.

3.1.3.8 Yearly Sockeye Fry Propagation

Sockeye fry recruitment to the reservoirs since 1957 has come from four constructed spawning beaches, hatchery production using artificial incubation, and limited natural spawning. Figure 12 shows the trend of fry releases from spawning beaches and hatchery production. During the 2010 reporting period, the AI program (not including the spawning beach, which was being modified) produced the second-largest number of fry to be released from the Baker fish propagation facilities during a single season — approximately 5,095,860 fry.

Figure 12. Yearly number of sockeye fry released into the reservoirs from Baker fish propagation

programs, 1957-2010.



3.1.3.9 Coho Supplementation program

The coho supplementation program continues to produce juvenile coho from the stock of naturally-reproduced “wild origin” coho adults in the Baker River system for use in studies and for the ongoing fish propagation and enhancement objectives determined by the Fish Co-Managers. From the 2010 fry production, 154,234 surplus coho fry (150 fpp) were released into Lake Shannon at Sulphur Creek in June 2010. Approximately 65,000 fry were allocated for extended rearing and released as smolts in the spring of 2011 to continue migration experiments and contribute to adult returns. These fry, reared in raceways at Upper Baker, resulted in a total of 64,950 yearlings. Of these fish, 10,300 (20 fpp) were released into Baker Lake in April 2011, 5287 (20 fpp) were released into Lake Shannon in April 2011 as part of the annual mark-recapture (reservoir migration response) studies, and 3443 were used for juvenile passage biological studies. The remaining 45,920 yearling fish (22 fpp) were released into the Baker River in April 2011 below both dams to contribute to future fall adult returns. All fish were raised to appropriate sizes and released on schedule (table 4).

Table 4. Salmon releases from Baker River fish propagation facilities, June 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011.

Release Date Brood Year Species Stock Number

Size (fish/lb.)

Pounds Planted Release Site

June 23, 2010 2009 Sockeye Baker 100,080 365 274 Baker Lake

June 23, 2010 2009 Coho Baker 154,234 150 1,026 Sulphur Creek

Nov. 17, 2010 2009 Sockeye Baker 56,700 46 1,227 Baker Lake

March 23, 2011 2009 Sockeye Baker 3,410 16 213 Baker Lake

March 23, 2011 2009 Coho Baker 3,443 28 125 Baker Lake

April 7, 2011 2009 Coho Baker 45,920 22 2,050 Skagit River

April 12, 2011 2009 Coho Baker 5,287 20 267 Sulphur Creek

April 27, 2011 2009 Coho Baker 5,200 20 263 Baker Lake

April 27, 2011 2009 Coho Baker 5,100 20 259 Baker Lake

April 27, 2011 2009 Sockeye Baker 4,819 13 386 Baker Lake

Total Releases 384,913 6,090

3.1.3.10 Coho Adult Returns (2010 season)

A total of 3,282 coho adults returned to the Baker River trap in 2010, of which 217 were removed from the trap for the supplementation program. These fish were held at the Upper Baker rearing facility until sexually mature and then spawned. The coded wire tags were recovered from their carcasses for stock identification.

3.1.3.11 Coho Egg and Fry Production

For the 2010 brood year (2011 fry production), 94 coho females were spawned and an estimated total of 321,734 eyed eggs were incubated at the renovated Upper Baker facility. Bubbles were also observed inside the coho incubation stacks. Modifications will occur in the off season to remedy the issue.

An inventory of fry based on weight samples provided a count of 289,318. Approximately, 60,000 fry will be allocated to the extended rearing program (the



program goal is 60,000), resulting in a surplus of approximately 229,000 coho fry. The surplus fry will be released into Lake Shannon at Sulphur Creek in June 2011.

The estimated 60,000 fry allocated for extended rearing will be released as yearlings (~20 fpp) in the spring of 2012 to continue migration experiments and contribute to adult returns. About 10,000 smolts from this program will be marked with a freeze brand and released into Baker Lake in April 2012, and 5,000 will be marked with a freeze brand and released into Lake Shannon that same month. All of these fish reared at the Upper Baker rearing facility will be used for the annual mark-recapture (reservoir migration response) experiments. The remaining 45,000 yearling fish will be released into the Baker River below both dams to contribute to future fall returns (table 5).

Table 5. Salmon rearing inventory at fish propagation facilities as of May 31, 2011.

Planned Release Date Brood Year Species Program Stock Inventory

Planned Release (fish/lb.)

Planned Release

Site

June /Nov. 2011a 2010 Sockeye Extended Rearing Baker 127,486 600/60 Baker

Lake

June 2011 2010 Coho Extended Rearing Baker 151,325 300

Sulphur Creek

April 2012 2010 Coho Extended Rearing Baker 10,000 20

Baker Lake

April 2012 2010 Coho Extended Rearing Baker 5,000 20

Sulphur Creek

May 2012 2010 Coho Extended Rearing Baker 45,000 20

Baker River

a Approximately 100,000 fish will be released in June 2011 and 60,000 will be released in November 2011. (5,000 are anticipated to be released in April 2012.)

3.1.3.12 Rainbow Trout Production

A cooperative trout stocking program initiated by the WDFW and PSE in the 1970s was continued during this reporting period. The WDFW provided 21,000 rainbow trout fingerlings for the program in June 2010.

PSE supplied labor, rearing facilities, and food during this rearing period, and 20,770 fish at an average of 3.25 fish per pound were planted in 2011. Of those, 19,390 fish were released into Depression Lake for recreational fishing, 1,080 fish were allocated to the Upper Skagit tribe for their fishing derby, and 300 more were allocated for local charity-sponsored events. All fish were raised to appropriate sizes and released on schedule. Most trout (14,792) were released a month earlier than scheduled in an attempt to reduce water demand due to the installation of a new headworks screen. This resulted in overall smaller fish size at planting.

Figures 13 – 23 show the newly constructed Baker fish hatchery in its first-year operating cycle, which began in June 2010 with the holding of the 2010 returning adult sockeye designated for broodstock, subsequent spawning, egg take, artificial egg incubation, fry swim-up, release and juvenile fish rearing for the 20,000 pound capacity production program directed by the Fish Co-manager’s annual fish production goals at the constructed hatchery facilities.



Figure 13. Baker fish hatchery facilities in first-year operation concurrent with Spawning Beach 4

modifications. The holding raceways contain 3,800 adult sockeye, and are capable of holding up to 6,000 broodstock).



Figure 14. Baker fish hatchery facilities during first-year operation.

Sockeye females selected for egg-take.

Figure 15. Egg incubation tray collection. 5.2 million eggs were collected in 2010.



Figure 16. One of 784 egg incubators. The facility can incubate up to 7.8 million eggs.

Figure 17. Newly-hatched fry in one of many swim-up troughs



Figure 18. The hatchery building houses 22 swim-up troughs and 10 early rearing tanks.



Figure 19. These fry swim-up troughs, along with other components of the sockeye program, are in

separate “walled” areas shielded from other functions of rearing in order to isolate, control, and reduce the risk of disease outbreaks.

Figure 20. Sockeye fry in a holding pond, a staging area for the transfer hoppers that will

release them to Baker Lake



Figure 21. Juvenile fish rearing facilities in use in 2010 for sockeye and coho salmon

and rainbow trout. Raceways and rectangular and circular tanks are provided for program flexibility and multiple species.



Figure 22. Juvenile fish rearing facilities with capacity for 20,000 pounds

instantaneous production.



Figure 23. Transferring and releasing juvenile salmon from a transport tank.

3.1.4 SA 101 c (1) – Sockeye Smolt Capacity Study Plan Following license issuance, a technical subgroup of the Aquatic Resources Group (ARG) was formed to review potential study methods and determine a recommended approach to estimate the sockeye smolt capacity of Baker Lake and Lake Shannon. Several meetings were held in the fall of 2008, and a draft study plan was developed and approved by the ARG. The subgroup examined pre-license study recommendations



(Mazumder, 2004), studied alternatives, and recommended a study methodology. Rather than a single study, the effort consisted of four independent estimating methodologies conducted simultaneously: zooplankton sampling, nutrient analysis, euphotic zone depth measurement, and translation of Mazumder (2004) smolt capacity estimates. The study plan was implemented and site-specific data collected during 2009 and 2010. The field sampling effort of the study (PSE, February 2009) began in February 2009 and continued through October 2009, resumed in February 2010, and continued through April 2010. Sample processing continued through July 2010, followed by analysis in August 2010. PSE provided interim study updates to the Aquatic Resources Group at ARG meetings in August, September, October, and December 2010. On September 14, 2010, the ARG decided to extend the deadline to complete the final report to November 15, 2010. PSE submitted a draft study report to the ARG for 30-day review on October 1, 2010. On October 22, 2010, the ARG decided to extend the comment period an additional 30 days and to move the final report deadline to December 15, 2010. PSE submitted the final report Sockeye Smolt Production Capacity in Baker Lake and Lake Shannon, including comments and replies to the ARG, on December 15, 2010 thus completing the requirements of settlement agreement 101(c)1.

3.1.5 SA 101 d – Maintain, Then Restore Natural Conditions at Spawning Beaches 1,2 & 3 When renovation of the Spawning Beach 4 site is complete, a Channel Creek decommissioning plan will be developed that identifies decommissioning procedures. Actual decommissioning of the Channel Creek site will not occur until the USDA-FS authorizes decommissioning. During the reporting period, PSE consulted informally with the USDA-FS towards an understanding of the decommissioning procedures. PSE and the USDA-FS sought input from the Aquatic Resources Group at meetings in July, September, October, November, and December 2010; and March, April, and May 2011. A joint ARG workshop with the Cultural Resources Advisory Group was held in March 2011 to clarify historical resources implications, review a draft scope-of-work document provided by the USDA-FS, and list possible decommissioning alternatives. In subsequent meetings conducted by PSE in April and May 2011, the ARG and CRAG reviewed a matrix developed by PSE outlining the various options. This process resulted in a scope of work agreed upon by the USDA-FS. The conceptual design process will begin in late 2011.

3.1.6 SA 101 g – Fish Facility Operations Manual for Sockeye Spawning Beach 4 and Sulphur Springs Fish Culture Facility Puget Sound Energy will provide an updated manual within six months following final project completion of renovation or construction of new facilities as part of the Baker fish hatchery renovation project. The updated manual will replace the April 2009 manual completed for the previous fish culture facilities. PSE and the Baker fish hatchery design and construction contractor, McMillen-McDougall, prepared operations and maintenance procedures for the Baker fish hatchery renovation project to be included in the updated manual.

3.1.7 SA 101 – Fish Propagation Facilities Operations Audit Financial accounting. This information is reported in section 6.0, “Accounting.”



Fish handling and disease management operations. The results of the propagation and enhancement programs are reported in section 3.1.3. This information includes operation of the sockeye salmon spawning beaches, loading results, monitoring of the facility water supply, sockeye AI program, sockeye egg & fry production, sockeye fry disposition, coho supplementation, coho returns, coho egg and fry production, and rainbow trout production. The goal for every hatchery program is to provide optimum rearing conditions to produce healthy fish. Fish production goals were met for healthy fish (such as numbers of fish, growth, and release) for this reporting period. “Best management practices” were followed. Disease management procedures for IHN were in place. No IHN incidents occurred during this reporting period. Preventative treatments were applied when necessary. PSE works closely with the Fish Co-Managers’ fish health staff to determine when and what types of treatments are warranted.

Hazardous materials handling. Prior to the start of the renovation of the Baker fish hatchery, PSE contracted with a hazardous materials consultant (Phillips Environmental Services) to assess the presence of any hazardous materials associated with the removal of any structures, and it was determined that there were none.

Spill prevention and control countermeasures (SPCC) compliance. PSE, per the FERC license, developed an SPCC plan for the project. This plan was submitted to the FERC prior to construction, and compliance is mandatory. There have been no incidents. Several PSE documents currently address the management of water quality protection at the Baker Project. These are the SPCC Plan, the Upper Baker Generation Plan (GeoEngineers, August 2008), the Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for the Upper Baker River hatchery (GeoEngineers, June 2008), and the SA 401 Water Quality Protection Plan (PSE, August 2009).

3.2 Monitoring Results, Observations, and Analyses SA 101 implementation activities did not produce monitoring data or other notable observations during the reporting period.

3.3 Acquisition and Related Activities No acquisitions or related activities under SA 101 occurred during the reporting period.

3.4 Special Consultation No special consultation under SA 101 occurred during the reporting period.

3.5 Design and Planning Activities No design or planning activities under SA 101 occurred during the reporting period.

3.6 Documents Submitted The final report summarizing the study of the sockeye smolt production capacity of Baker Lake and Lake Shannon, which was conducted in response to settlement agreement article 101(c)1 and developed in collaboration with the Aquatic Resources Group, was completed on December 15, 2010. Comments and responses from the ARG review have been included in the final report.

Fish Propagation – 2010 Annual Report Issues and Resolution


The 2009 annual report that covers the SA 101 reporting period of June 1, 2009 through May 31, 2010, as prescribed by SA 102, was submitted to the ARG for comment on October 29, 2010. Comments and responses from the ARG review have been included in the revised 2009 report submitted to the FERC on December 13, 2010 under the May 26, 2010 Order Modifying and Approving Fish Propagation Facilities Plan, Settlement Agreement Article 101.

3.7 Modifications to or Deviations from Implementation Plan PSE executed a schedule change for the 101(c)1 Sockeye Smolt Capacity Study based on a decision by representatives of the ARG to extend the comment period on the draft report, and subsequently to extend the deadline for completion of the final report to December 15, 2010 (October 25, 2010 e-mail from Arnie Aspelund to the ARG). The final report was completed on December 15, 2010 and describes results of the study, including ARG comments and recommendations.

4.0 Issues and Resolution No SA 101 implementation issues were identified during the reporting period.

5.0 Proposed Changes to the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan There were no proposed changes to the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan during the reporting period.

6.0 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, including pre-license expenditures such as costs incurred for early land acquisition efforts.

All disbursement adjustments and relevant calculations were determined using the guidelines provided in settlement agreement article 602.

6.1 Funding No funding was prescribed for SA 101 implementation during the reporting period.

6.2 Expenditures PSE budgeted to fund a contract with the WDFW to operate Sockeye Spawning Beach 4. $237,169 was spent on this contract during the reporting period. PSE budgeted for additional operations and maintenance costs for SA 101 implementation and spent $685,135 during the reporting period. This number represents costs attributed to continuing existing fish propagation and enhancement programs and implementation of the Fish Propagation Facilities Plan.

Fish Propagation – 2010 Annual Report Supporting Documents


PSE spent $3,005,650 in capital costs for SA 101 implementation during the reporting period. This number represents costs attributed to the Baker fish hatchery renovation including modifications to Spawning Beach 4.

PSE spent $58,949 in additional capital costs for SA 101 implementation during the reporting period. This number represents costs attributed to continuing the study for estimating sockeye productive capacity in Baker Lake and Lake Shannon.

The total expenditure of all funds for SA 101 during the reporting period was $3,986,904.

6.3 Adjustments There were no adjustments to the funding for SA 101 during the reporting period.

7.0 Supporting Documents The attached CD contains the following documents.

Baker River Fish Hatchery Renovation, Interim Construction Updates to the Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. June 8, 2010.

Baker River Fish Hatchery Renovation, Interim Construction Updates to the Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. July 13, 2010.

Baker River Fish Hatchery Renovation, Interim Construction Updates to the Aquatic Resources Group. PowerPoint. August 10, 2010.

Baker River Fish Hatchery Renovation, Interim Construction Updates to the Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. September 14, 2010.

Baker River Fish Hatchery Renovation, Interim Construction Updates to the Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. October 12, 2010.

Baker River Fish Hatchery Renovation, Interim Construction Updates to the Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. November 9, 2010.

Baker River Fish Hatchery Renovation, Interim Construction Updates to the Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. March 8, 2011.

Baker River Fish Hatchery Renovation, Interim Construction Updates to the Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. April 12, 2011.

Sockeye Smolt Production Capacity in Baker Lake and Lake Shannon. Final Report. Prepared by R2 Resource Consultants for distribution to the Aquatic Resources Group. December 15, 2010. 76pp.

Sockeye Production Capacity – Interim Progress Update.to the Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. August 10, 2010.

Sockeye Production Capacity – Interim Progress Update. Prepared by R2 Resource Consultants to the Aquatic Resources Group. September 14, 2010.

Sockeye Production Capacity – Interim Progress Update. Prepared by R2 Resource Consultants to the Aquatic Resources Group. October 12, 2010.

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

Fish Propagation – 2010 Annual Report References


Sockeye Production Capacity – Interim Progress Update. Prepared by R2 Resource Consultants to the Aquatic Resources Group. December 14, 2010.

Notice for Decision to Extend Deadline for 101(c)1 Sockeye Production Capacity Study. E-mail from Arnie Aspelund to the ARG. August 31, 2010.

Decision to Extend Deadline for 101(c)1 Sockeye Production Capacity Study. E-mail from Arnie Aspelund to the ARG. October 25, 2010.

Sockeye 2010 Return Distribution, Fish Co-Managers. E-mail to Arnie Aspelund. June 21, 2010.

Request for Annual Fish Production Plan, Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. August 10, 2010.

Fish Production Plan Correspondence, Fish Co-Managers. E-mail to Arnie Aspelund, et. al. August 12, 2010.

Request for Annual Fish Production Plan, Aquatic Resources Group. Meeting Notes. September 14, 2010.

Fry Ponding and Planting Plan, WDFW. E-mail to Arnie Aspelund. March 7, 2011.

8.0 References GeoEngineers, Inc. 2008. Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, Upper

Baker Fish Hatchery, prepared by GeoEngineers, Inc, prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Bellevue, Washington. June 2008.

GeoEngineers, 2008a. Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan, Upper Baker Generation Plant, prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Bellevue, Washington. August 2008.

Henningson, Durham and Richardson (HDR). 2007. Baker Fish Hatchery Renovation, Design Criteria Package, Volume 1. Prepared by FishPro, Port Orchard, Washington, a division of HDR Engineering, for Puget Sound Energy, Bellevue, Washington. July 2007.

Mazumder, A. 2004. Sockeye and Reservoir Production Potential, Baker River Project Relicensing Study A-26a, prepared by University of Victoria, Department of Biology, Victoria, British Columbia, prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Bellevue, Washington.

McMillen, M.D. 2009. Baker Fish Hatchery Renovation, 100% Final Design Documentation Report. Prepared by McMillen Engineering, LLC for Puget Sound Energy, Inc., Bellevue, Washington.

Puget Sound Energy (PSE). 2009. Final Water Quality Protection Plan, Baker River Hydroelectric Project. Puget Sound Energy, Inc., Bellevue, Washington. August 2009.

PSE, 2009a. Fish Propagation Facilities Plan. Puget Sound Energy. August 2009.

PSE. 2009b. Operation and Maintenance Manual for Baker Lake Fish Hatchery. Puget Sound Energy. April 2009.

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

ahunti

Underline

Fish Propagation – 2010 Annual Report Review Comments and Responses


PSE, 2009c. Sampling and Containment Protocol for Baker Sockeye Beach 4 Emergent Fry. Revision dated April 2009. Puget Sound Energy. April 2009.

PSE. 2009d. Study to Estimate the Sockeye Smolt Production Capacity for Baker Lake and Lake Shannon. Puget Sound Energy. February 2009.

9.0 Review Comments and Responses PSE provided the draft annual report to the ARG for a 30-day review period per the schedule in SA 102. Comments and recommendations by the ARG will be included and addressed in the report submitted to the FERC. If a recommendation is not adopted, the filing will include PSE's explanation based on project-specific information.

9.1 Distribution List Table 6. ARG representatives who received the draft Fish Propagation 2010 Annual Report as part of the

SA 102 review process.

Name Organization Email Brock Applegate WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife [email protected] Arnold Aspelund Puget Sound Energy [email protected] Brett Barkdull WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife [email protected] Len Barson The Nature Conservancy [email protected] Ellen Bynum Skagit County Resident [email protected] Bob Carey The Nature Conservancy [email protected] Jeff Chan US Fish and Wildlife Service [email protected] Rick Cisar Town of Concrete [email protected] Chuck Ebel US Army Corps of Engineers [email protected] Lorna Ellestad Skagit County [email protected] Cary Feldmann Puget Sound Energy [email protected] Robert Franklin Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe [email protected] Steve Fransen NOAA Fisheries [email protected] Reed Glesne North Cascades National Park [email protected] JoAnn Gustafson WA Dept. Natural Resources [email protected]

Bob Helton Skagit County Resident Hard copy mailed to: 21032 Little Mountain Rd. Mount Vernon, WA 98274

Dan Johnson US Army Corps of Engineers [email protected] Lou Ellyn Jones US Fish and Wildlife Service [email protected] Monika Kannadaguli WA Department of Ecology [email protected] Lisa Kaufman WA Dept. Natural Resources [email protected] Alice Kelly WA Department of Ecology [email protected] Sue Madsen Skagit Fisheries Enhancement Group [email protected] Jeff McGowan Skagit County [email protected] Greta Movassaghi USDA Forest Service [email protected] Ashley Rawhouser North Cascades National Park [email protected] Scott Schuyler Upper Skagit Indian Tribe [email protected] Jon-Paul Shannahan Upper Skagit Indian Tribe [email protected]



Name Organization Email Tom Van Gelder The WA Council of Trout Unlimited [email protected] Jon Vanderheyden USDA Forest Service [email protected] Stan Walsh Swinomish Indian Tribal Community

& Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe [email protected]

9.2 Transmittal Message

From: Aspelund, Arnie Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 1:12 PM To: Alice Kelly ([email protected]); Applegate, Brock A (DFW); [email protected]; Aspelund, Arnie; Bob Helton; Brett Barkdull ([email protected]); Carey, Bob; Dan Johnson ([email protected]); Ebel, Chuck; Ellen Bynum ([email protected]); Ellestad, Lorna; Feldmann, Cary; Fransen, Steve; Glesne, Reed; Jeff Chan ([email protected]); Joann Gustafson ([email protected]); Jones, Lou Ellyn; [email protected]; KAUFMAN, LISA (DNR); Len Barson ([email protected]); McGowan, Jeff; Monika Kannadaguli ([email protected]); Movassaghi, Greta; [email protected]; Rick Cisar ([email protected]); Schuyler, Scott; Sue Madsen; Tom Van Gelder ([email protected]); Vanderheyden, Jon; Walsh, Stan Cc: Maddox, Kathleen; Sibley, Hillary D; Wingfield, Anna C; Hunting, Andrew; Carleton, Ruth A Subject: Baker SA 101 Annual Report 2010 30-day ARG review Attachments: BAK SA 101 Annual Report 2010 - RevDraft.pdf

Aquatic Resources Group:

PSE is forwarding the 2010 draft annual report for Settlement Agreement Article 101 - Fish Propagation to the Aquatic Resources Group designated representatives for the 30-day review period and seeks comments and suggestions. Please send comments to me via mail or e-mail by the end of business November 18, 2011. This review is part of the Aquatics Resources Group review cycle established per Article 102 - Aquatics Reporting.

We placed the supporting documents listed in 7.0 of the report on an ftp server. To download these, either copy and paste the url into your internet browser or select the hyperlink below and when prompted enter the user ID and password exactly (case sensitive).

The location is ftp://204.61.33.75/Baker_License/BAK_SA101_Annual_Report/ The user ID is eeeeee The password is Eeeeeeeee

Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for your efforts.

Arnie

(paper copy to Bob Helton)

Arnold A. Aspelund Consulting Natural Resource Scientist Puget Sound Energy, Compliance & Resource Sciences P.O. Box 97034 PSE-09S Bellevue, WA 98009-9734 Phone: (425) 462-3442 FAX: (425) 462-3223 [email protected]

Figure 24. E-mail message from PSE accompanying the Fish Propagation 2010 Annual Report.

9.3 Summary of Reviewer Replies The following reviewer concurred with the report and had no further comments.

Greta Movassaghi, USDA Forest Service



9.4 Reviewer Comments and PSE Responses

Table 7. Comments following formal review of the Fish Propagation 2010 Annual Report.

Comment Puget Sound Energy Response

Greta Movassaghi, USDA Forest Service, received November 15, 2011

We concur, thanks. Thank you for your response.