milton pad

Lake Milton Hydroelectric Project Mahoning Hydropower, LLC

Pre-Application Document July 15, 2011

1

FERC Project No. 13953

Lake Milton Hydroelectric Project

PRE-APPLICATION DOCUMENT (PAD)

Of:

11365 Normandy Lane,

Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023 phone: 440-804-6627 fax: 216-361-9981

July 15, 2011

Mahoning

Hydropower, LLC



2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................................... 2

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 4

SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS CONSULTATION AND REGULATORY WORK .......................................................... 4

PLAN AND SCHEDULE FOR PRE‐APPLICATION ACTIVITIES ..................................................... 5

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ......................................................................................................... 6

EXISTING PROJECT FACILITIES ................................................................................................................. 6 Dam Characteristics ............................................................................................................................. 7 Reservoir Characteristics ..................................................................................................................... 7

ENERGY PRODUCTION ESTIMATE .............................................................................................................10

PROJECT OPERATIONS .........................................................................................................................11

CURRENT OPERATIONS .............................................................................................................................11 PROPOSED OPERATIONS ...........................................................................................................................12

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ..............................................................................................................15

General Description of Watershed ......................................................................................................15 Vegetative Cover ..................................................................................................................................15

Plants .............................................................................................................................................................. 15 Land Cover ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 Soil .................................................................................................................................................................. 20 Geology ........................................................................................................................................................... 23

Water Quality and Quantity .................................................................................................................30 Quantity .......................................................................................................................................................... 30 Wetlands ......................................................................................................................................................... 32 Streams ........................................................................................................................................................... 34 Quality ............................................................................................................................................................ 34 Dissolved Oxygen & Temperature Data ......................................................................................................... 40

Land and Water Uses ...........................................................................................................................49 Land Uses ........................................................................................................................................................ 49 Water Uses ..................................................................................................................................................... 51

Fish and Wildlife Resources ..................................................................................................................52 Fish .................................................................................................................................................................. 52 Invertebrate Community ................................................................................................................................ 60 Wildlife............................................................................................................................................................ 60

Recreational Uses .................................................................................................................................62 Socio-economic Conditions ..................................................................................................................64 Historical and Archeological Resources (sites included in or eligible for National Register) ................66 Aesthetic Resources .............................................................................................................................67 Endangered or Threatened Species, Critical Habitats ..........................................................................67 Tribal Resources ...................................................................................................................................68

PRELIMINARY ISSUES AND STUDIES LIST ......................................................................................68

PURPA BENEFITS .....................................................................................................................................69

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................70



3

APPENDIX A – LIST OF POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ENTITIES AND INTERESED PARTIES

.......................................................................................................................................................................72

APPENDIX B – SUMMARY OF CONTACTS (ATTACHED) ..............................................................77

APPENDIX C – FISH SAFETY ASSESSMENT BY HET (ATTACHED) ...........................................77

APPENDIX D – PRE-HYDRO WATER QUALITY STUDY BY HET (ATTACHED) ......................77



4

INTRODUCTION This PAD has been compiled in accordance with the FERC Integrated Licensing Process. The contents correspond with the requirements listed under 18CFR§5.6. It is the intent of the Applicant to request use of the FERC Traditional Licensing Process (TLP) as provided under 18CFR§5.3. Along with this request to use the TLP the Applicant intends to request that 1st Stage Consultation requirements including the Joint meeting with the public be waived as this has previously been completed by Anthony Marra (General Manager of Mahoning Hydropower, LLC) under the name Hydro Energy Technologies, LLC and previous docket number P-13402. The exact name and business address of the project Applicant is:

Mahoning Hydropower, LLC 11365 Normandy Lane

Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023 The exact name and business address of the agent authorized to act for the Applicant in this application is:

Anthony Marra 11365 Normandy Lane

Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023 440-804-6627

[email protected] The applicant is a limited liability company registered in the state of Ohio and is claiming preference under Section 7(a) of the Federal Power Act. The name and addresses of the owner of the existing project facilities is:

Ohio Department of Natural Resources 2045 Morse Road, Building G

Columbus, Ohio 43229

Summary of Previous Consultation and Regulatory Work



5

The Lake Milton Hydroelectric Project was previously being pursued by Hydro Energy Technologies, LLC (HET) under P-13402. Anthony Marra, who is General Manager of both Mahoning Hydropower (MH) and HET, also managed the project for HET. HET obtained the original preliminary permit in August 2009 and began efforts to pursue “Under 5 MW Exemption for Licensing” and completed all FERC stage 1 consultation requirements for that process as well as obtained a Provisional Nationwide Permit (NWP) 17 from the USACE for the project. Due to a change in ownership of HET, the project could no longer be pursued under that name therefore the permit was surrendered by HET in December 2010. Anthony Marra re-applied to pursue the project under the name Mahoning Hydropower, LLC. MH now wishes to pursue a FERC license rather than an Under 5 MW Exemption, and has consequently distributed the NOI and PAD to initiate the process. MH intends to request use of the TLP and to also request that stage 1 consultation be waived as it has already been completed. A summary of previous consultation and regulatory activity is shown in the table below:

ACTIVITY DATE COMPLETED

Preliminary Permit Issued to HET under P-13402 August 5, 2009

HET Distributed Initial Consultation Document to Interested Parties

November 10, 2009

HET Held Joint Meeting with Public December 16, 2009

HET Completed Fish Safety Study May 8, 2010

Obtained Provisional NWP 17 From USACE June 7, 2010

HET Completed Water Quality Study November 11, 2010

HET Requests to Surrender Preliminary Permit November 23, 2009

Preliminary permit of HET Terminated December 29, 2009

Application for Preliminary Permit of MH accepted under new docket P-13953

January 31, 2010

Issuance of new Preliminary Permit to MH May 10, 2011

PLAN AND SCHEDULE FOR PRE‐APPLICATION ACTIVITIES The plan and schedule for pre‐application activities is given below.

ACTIVITY TARGET DATE

Notification of Intent May 2011

File PAD and TLP Request May 2011

Site Visit and Scoping Meeting in Lake Milton, Ohio

July 2011



6

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

The proposed project will be located at the Lake Milton Dam currently owned by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. The dam is located on the Mahoning River in the town of Lake Milton in Mahoning County Ohio. The project includes the existing dam, outlet works and an existing distribution pole to the west of the dam.

The applicant proposes to construct a new 25’x 35’ powerhouse at the base of the existing dam over the existing gate 2 discharge pipe. Using a design head range of 25-40 feet and a hydraulic capacity of 250 cfs, this powerhouse will accommodate one tubular S-Type propeller turbine generator unit with a capacity of 650 KW with an estimated average annual energy production of 3,700 MWh. The project will use the existing 5’x7’ sluice intake at gate 2 and no new penstock is proposed as the turbine will utilize the existing 70 foot long 60” diameter cast iron conduit through the existing dam. A new trash rack with 1” clear bar spacing will be installed over the existing trashrack. No tailrace is proposed as the flows exiting the turbine would be discharged directly into the existing concrete stilling basin designed to evenly distribute flows downstream and prevent erosion. The system will operate strictly in “run-of-the-river” mode meaning the USACE and ODNR would continue to use the same discharge and lake elevation schedule it currently uses. MH would comply with the USACE and ODNR’s reservoir regulations and other terms to be determined in the MOA/Lease Agreement during the consultation process. The exact type, number, capacity, and arrangement of the turbine units may be modified after further engineering, design study, and consultation. A new 12.5 kV transmission line approximately 320 feet in length will be constructed to interconnect with the existing distribution line to the west.

Cleaning and erosion control and BMP measures will be part of the proposed construction.

Existing Project Facilities

The original dam was constructed in 1913 by the City of Youngstown for the purposes of flood protection and water supply to the steel mills located in the city. The Ohio Department of Natural Resources funded a reconstruction of the dam in 1987 and took ownership of the dam in June of 1988. Although the dam no longer supplies water to the steel mills in Youngstown, it continues to provide flood protection to the Mahoning Valley as well as an important recreational resource to the area. Dam operation is supervised by the USACOE – Pittsburgh District.

At reservoir elevation 946 ft MSL Lake Milton has a surface area of approximately 1,760 acres and a storage of approximately 21,600 acre feet. As the lake approaches the spillway elevation of 951 ft MSL the surface area reaches 1,940 acres and the total storage is 27,120 acre feet.



7

Dam Characteristics

Type of structure: Partially controlled concrete gravity type with center spillway flanked by rolled earth filled abutments

Height above streambed, feet 54 Length, feet (concrete section) 760

Width at base, feet (concrete section) 58

Length of Spillway (emergency only) 650

Outlet Works: There are four 60” gate valves (only gate 1 & 2 are currently operational)

Reservoir Characteristics

Location: On Mahoning River in Mahoning County, Ohio. Length at normal pool, miles 2

Area, acres: 1685 Elevation, feet above sea level: Maximum (reservoir full) 951 Normal (summer pool) 948 Normal (winter pool) 940 Streambed at dam 908



8

Project Area

Project Region EXHIBIT G-1

LAKE MILTON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT

FERC# P-13953

Mahoning

Hydropower, LLC

POWERHOUSE

INTERCONNECT

EX. INTAKE

NEW TRANSMISSION LINE

EX. DISTRIBUTION LINE

PROJECT BOUNDARY INCLUDES PR. POWERHOUSE, PR. TRANSMISSION LINE, EX. DAM, EX. INTAKE, AND EX. IMPOUNDMENT. BOUNDARY AROUND IMPOUNDMENT IS DETERMINED BY CONTOUR EL. 951’ (HIGH WATER MARK)

EX. DAM

PROJECT BOUNDARY (RESERVOIR BOUNDARY IS DETERMINED BY CONTOUR EL. 951)



9

480

480 V

480V

METERING POINT

FUSES

GANG OPERATED SWITCH

MAHONING HYDROPOWER, LLC

LAKE MILTON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC # P-13953



10

Energy Production Estimate

A power study was conducted by Mahnoning Hydropower, LLC using TURN PRO 3 software. According to site data entered into the system the average annual energy production is estimated to be approximately 3,659.21 MWh/year1 or approximately 304 MWh/month. With a total plant capacity of 650 KW the plant factor is estimated to be at 64.3%. The power output distribution curve and the annual energy production data are shown in Figure 1 and Table 1 respectively.

Table 1: Seasonal and Total Energy Production

Time Period Mean Daily Production (MW/h) Total Days Total Production (MW/h)

Winter (W) 8.16 74 603.84

Spring (WS) 8.21 47 385.87

Summer (S) 11.78 167 1,967.26

Fall (SW) 9.12 77 702.24

Total per Year 10.03 365 3,659.21

Power Out Put Distribution at Proposed Lake Milton Hydroelectric Project

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100

% Time Flow Exceeded

Po

we

r (K

W)

Winter

Spring

Summer

Fall

Figure 1

1 TURBNPRO software calculations do not include losses due to generator inefficiencies or losses due to

transformer and transmission line inefficiencies.



11

PROJECT OPERATIONS

Current Operations

The Lake Milton Dam is currently used in conjunction with the upstream USACE dam at Berlin Lake for flood protection, low flow regulation, and recreational purposes. There is no hydroelectricity currently being produced at the dam. The dam is operated by the Lake Milton State Park under the supervision of the USACE Pittsburgh District. Current flow operations at Lake Milton Dam were described by Robert Yue of the USACE Pittsburgh district in an email received by MH on January 20, 2010 attached below. Mean historical lake elevations are shown in Figure 2:

Anthony,

As you know, there are four 60" gate valves at Lake Milton. Gate Valves #1 & 2 are at invert 915 and Gate Valves #3 & 4 are at invert 908. Thus #1 & 2 have smaller discharge capacity. Lake Milton is operated at 942 or less during Jan-March. The lake starts to fill toward summer pool recreational pool of 948 from late March to 12 April and it remains at 948 through 15 Oct. From 15 October, it being drawdown slowly down to 942 by 20 Dec. On a 3-year trial basis, 2007-2010, the lake is being held at 940 or lower instead of 942. This is to check if the lower lake level helps in minimize the ice problems and if it has any negative impact in filling toward 948. So far this lower level seems to be ok for both aspects.

The discharge capacities for #1 & 2 GV's range from 0 to about 1500 cfs at 60" open. For the various target elevation the capacities (at 60" opening) are as follows:

Elevation Discharge, cfs 942.0 620 948.0 690 952.0 740

The discharge capacities for #3 & 4 GV's range from 0 to about 1600 cfs at 60" open. For the various target elevation the capacities (at 60" opening) are as follow:

Elevation Discharge, cfs 942.0 700 948.0 770 952.0 810

The crest elevation is at 951.0

As for the operating schedule, Gate Valves #1 & 2 are used from May thru Oct and Gate Valves from #3 & 4 are from Nov thru April. The dates serve as guidelines.

The minimum flow requirement from Lake Milton is 25 cfs.

In an email dated June 7, 2010, Werner Loehlein, Chief of the Water Management Branch of the Pittsburg District stated “We switch to the lower gates (#3 & 4) in the



12

winter in order to flush out the poorer water quality and enhance the lake's water quality.”

Mean Lake Elevation

934

936

938

940

942

944

946

948

950

El.

(ft

)

1990-2007

Jan 2008- Aug 2009

1990-2007 942.59 942.35 943.65 946.73 948.03 948.19 948.19 948.21 948.03 947.27 945.03 942.95

Jan 2008- Aug 2009 940.02 941.13 942.93 947.35 948.32 948.46 948.38 948.09 948.04 947.31 944.93 942.53

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Figure 2 - Mean Historical Lake Elevations obtained from the USACE Pittsburgh District

Proposed Operations

The Proposed Project will operate in a “run of the river” meaning it will not modify the existing flow discharge or reservoir elevation schedule at the dam. The daily discharge rates and reservoir elevations will continue to be under the control of USACE and will not be affected by the proposed project. The unit will be equipped with a governor system that will allow the turbine to operate at any flow rate between approximately 25–250 cfs. Flows above 250 cfs can be discharged through the three remaining 60” discharge pipes as determined by the USACE. If flows below 25 cfs are ordered, the unit will simply go “off line” and flows can be bypassed through one of the three remaining discharge pipes. Additionally the unit will be equipped with a pond leveling device so that the orders on discharge rates can be given in the form of an elevation to be maintained rather than a particular discharge.



13

During the December 16, 2009 joint meeting, USACE Chief of the Water Management Branch in the Pittsburgh District, Werner Loehlein, P.E. identified several potential impacts to existing dam operations by the proposed project including:

1. Reduced discharge capacity on gate 2 2. Using gate 2 as the primary gate during the winter instead of the lower gates (3

and 4) and how this might affect the existing water quality condition in Lake Milton as well as downstream of the dam.

3. How to prevent a “zero flow” condition during power outages when turbines typically trip off line.

With regard to the first potential impact, overall gate discharge capacity will be increased from the existing condition with the proposed project. MH will repair and maintain the existing dam gates as part of the dam lease agreement with ODNR. Currently only gates 3 and 4 are inoperable (see Table 2).

Table 2: Discharge Capacity at Lake Milton Dam

Lake E. (ft) GV 1 GV 2 GV 3 GV 4 Total

940 600 600 inoperable inoperable 1200

942 620 620 1240

948 690 690 1380

952 740 740 1480

Lake E. (ft) GV 1 GV 2 GV 3 GV 4 Total

940 600 250 690 690 2230

942 620 250 700 700 2270

948 690 250 770 770 2480

952 740 250 810 810 2610

EXISTING DISCHARGE CAPACITY (CFS)

DISCHARGE CAPACITY WITH HYDRO & MITIGATION (CFS)



14

To address Mr. Loehlein’s second concern, HET completed a water quality study (HET, 2010) during stage 1 consultation under P-13402. The study indicates that water quality will not be affected by using gate 2 as the primary gate during the winter as complete mixing (uniform temperature and DO levels top to bottom) typically occurs in Lake Milton before the winter months. Additionally MH proposes at its own cost and expense to test the DO and temperature levels just upstream of the dam intake at varying depth intervals each fall to confirm full mixing has occurred top to bottom prior to operating the turbine during the winter. If full mixing has occurred (as determined by uniform DO and temperature levels top to bottom) MH proposes that full turbine operation is authorized for the winter from gate 2. Any flows beyond 250 cfs would be discharged through gates three and/or four. These excess flows occur approximately 40% of the time from November to April, therefore the gate valves would continue to be exercised frequently and sediment build up at the lower intakes could continue to be cleared on a regular basis by excess flows without significant build up. If full mixing has not occurred prior to switching to the lower gates, MH will not operate the turbine until either full mixing occurs and is documented or until MH can provide other sufficient documentation that there will be no negative impacts to water quality by operating the turbine from gate 2 during the winter. As part of the provisional NW 17 Permit Issued for the project on June 7, 2010, MH must also monitor the DO levels below the dam from August to October to ensure that Pre-hydro conditions are met. If DO levels fall below the pre-hydro condition, flows shall be bypassed incrementally until either pre-hydro levels are met or 100% of flows are being bypassed (existing condition). To address number three (3) the hydropower facility will incorporate an automatic bypass system whereby water can be immediately routed past the turbine in the event that power generation goes offline. MH agrees to the terms outlined in an email from Mr. Loehlein to MH general manager, Anthony Marra, on June 10, 2010:

As far as tripping offline, and going to zero flow, it is really pretty simple. As soon as the clock hits 2 hours, flow is switched to the dam gates (period). That means that you have to have procedures in place that at the 2 hour mark that the pre-offline flow is being released, not that it will take



15

you another 30 minutes to get there. If the 2 hour rule is violated, we (ODNR/USACE) reserve the right to deny returning control until the corrective actions preventing a re-occurrence are in place and operating reliably.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

General Description of Watershed

The Mahoning River watershed covers an area of about 1,140 square miles (730,000 acres) in northeastern Ohio and western Pennsylvania. The watershed includes portions of seven counties (Mahoning, Trumbull, Portage, Columbiana, Stark, Geauga, and Ashtabula) in Ohio and one county (Lawrence) in Pennsylvania. The headwaters (origin) of the Mahoning River are located in the northwestern corner of Columbiana County. The river flows north between Sebring and Alliance, passes through Berlin Reservoir and Lake Milton, and joins the West Branch just north of Newton Falls. Near Warren, the Mahoning River changes direction, curving to the east and then the southeast. After passing through Warren, the river flows southeast through several cities that line its banks – Niles, McDonald, Girard, Youngstown, Campbell, Struthers, and Lowellville. The Mahoning River flows into Pennsylvania and joins the Shenango River near New Castle to form the Beaver River. The Beaver River is a tributary to the Ohio River, and the Ohio River is a tributary to the Mississippi River. So, water flowing through the Mahoning River and its tributaries eventually reaches the Gulf of Mexico (YSU, 2004, p. 13).

Vegetative Cover

Plants Lake Milton State Park lies in the portion of the Appalachian Plateau in Ohio that was overridden by glaciers some 12,000 years ago. This glaciated plateau contains a great variety of plants, animals and natural habitats. The plateau's rolling hills are interspersed with forests, bogs, old fields, streams and lakes (ODNR, 2010). The plateau is a major meeting ground of plants and forest types

from the southern Appalachians Figure 3 Typical Vegetation along the Mahoning River (USACE, 2010 )



16

and northern Allegheny regions. For instance, it is possible to see substantial stands of white oak and hickory which are typical of the southern Appalachians as well as northern hemlock forests which are more common in the northern Allegheny region. This tension zone accounts for the great diversity of plants in the area. Star flower, spring beauties, mountain maple, anemones and wood aster grace the floor of beech-maple woodlots (ODNR, 2010). A search of the Ohio Natural Heritage Database was conducted to identify any rare, threatened or endangered species potentially occurring in Mahoning County (Table 3).

Table 3



17

There will be no significant impacts to vegetative cover. The construction limits do not include any wetlands or riparian zones. The only vegetation affected is a field or prairie like area (open/urban land use) west of the left dam abutment where the access road and new transmission line will be constructed. This vegetation was previously disturbed during the 1988 dam repairs and is located above the

OHWM. Any vegetation disturbed during construction will be restored with the appropriate native species. Best management practices (BMP’s) will be implemented during construction to prevent sedimentation or other negative impacts. No plant species of concern were identified by ODNR within the construction limits.

OHWM

Area to

contain Concrete

Fill

Vegetation to be disturbed by construction of access road and

transmission line (age of vegetation is

approximately 22 years)

Area to be Disturbed

Figure 4 - Cross Section of Mahoning River Impacted by the Proposed Project



18

Figure 5 – Photo of Vegetation to be Disturbed during Access Road Construction

Land Cover Land cover in the Mahoning River Watershed is depicted in table 4 and figure 7 obtained from the 2004 Mahoning River Watershed Action Plan Prepared by Youngstown State University.

Table 4

Area to be Disturbed



19

Project

Location

Figure 6



20

Soil The major soil association in the Lake Milton area is the Sebring series (Figure 8). The project location is generally characterized by Udorthents Loamy and Glenford Silt Loam according to the web soil survey (Figure 9). Areas covered by major soil associations in the Mahoning River Watershed are shown below in Table 5.

Table 5: Major Soil Associations in the Mahoning River Watershed (YSU, 2004)



21

Project Location

Figure 7



22

Figure 8



23

Geology Several kinds of glacial drift cover Mahoning County, but only glacial drift of Wisconsin age is exposed at the surface. Glaciers apparently had crossed the county before the Wisconsin Glaciation, because deposits of Illinoian an d of pre-Illinoian drifts are buried beneath the Wisconsin drift in Columbiana County, which is south of Mahoning County.



24

The drifts of Wisconsin age were deposited during three substages of the Grand River Lobe of the Late Wisconsin glacial period. The glacial drift is underlain by sedimentary rocks of the Pennsylvania, Allegheny, and Pottsville Formations. These rocks are composed of alternating thick and thin layers of shale, sandstone, limestone and coal that dip slightly to the south and east. Some of the rocks are an important source of minerals, and all are mined for local use. Some natural gas is produced from the deeper formations (USDA, 1971, p. 115). At the project site directly downstream of the dam the river bank is composed of exposed bedrock and appears to be in stable condition with no potential erosion observed. As the proposed project will discharge water from within the existing concrete stilling basin in the same manner as it is currently discharged, therefore it is anticipated that no additional bank stabilization will be required (Figure 10). Shore lines along Lake Milton are characterized by gradual slopes and include undeveloped forested areas, as well as developed private and public areas, marinas and beaches. These shorelines generally appear stable and well maintained. No impacts to shore line stability are anticipated as there will be no changes to the existing lake elevation or flow schedule. Soil borings near the dam were taken during the 1988 dam rehabilitation and are include below (Figure 11).

Figure 9

River Bank

Composed of

Exposed Bedrock

Proposed Powerhouse

Location



25

Figure 10 – Soil Boring Locations from 1988 Lake Milton Dam Rehabilitation

Approximate Construction Limits-

Sedimentation during construction to

be contained using approved BMP’s



26



27



28



29



30

Water Quality and Quantity

Quantity

The proposed hydro plant shown in Figure 12 is located on the Mahoning River and is fed by a total drainage area of approximately 273 square miles. Flow levels at the proposed site were determined using the data from the USGS gaging station 03091500 on the Mahoning River located .3 miles downstream of the Proposed project on the Milton Dam near Pricetown. In general the flows are supervised by the USACE at the Lake Milton dam as well upstream at the Berlin Dam. Although data is available at gage 03091500 for years 1929 to Present, the USACE recommended that the last 30 years of data be used for any study of future flow patterns. This is why only 30 years of data were used to create the project flow duration curve (Figure 12 and Table 6) and hydrograph (Table 7).

Figure 11 – Mahoning River Watershed

USGS

Gaging

Station

Proposed

Project



31

Mahoning River FDC

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

% Time Flow Exceeded

Flo

w (

cfs

)

Figure 12

Table 6: Approximate Flow Duration Curve at Proposed Lake Milton Project

% Time Flow Exceeded Q (cfs)

0 2,430

5 1,110

10 835

15 615

20 466

25 362

30 289

35 247

40 213

45 186

50 172

55 162

60 152

65 138

70 129

75 115

80 97

85 85

90 70

95 47

100 13



32

Table 7: Monthly Mean, Min and Max Flows for Lake Milton Dam Project (USGS, 2009)

Other USGS gaging stations in the Mahoning River Watershed are shown in Table 8. Table 8

Wetlands The proposed project will be constructed below the OHWM below the Lake Miton Dam along the Mahoning River within the existing concrete stilling basin. No wetlands will be impacted (Figure 13).



33

Figure 13 – Wetland Location Map

Project

Construction

Limits Nearest Wetland is

outside Construction

Limits



34

Streams

No headwater streams were observed within the project construction limits. Approximately 100 ft of the Mahoning River is located within the construction limits, beginning at the upstream side of the dam extending to the end of the existing stilling basin. Quality

The Ohio EPA evaluates the attainment of the designated aquatic use for a water body using three biological indices – the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI), the Modified Index of Well-Being (MIwb), and the Invertebrate Community Index (ICI). The warmwater habitat (WWH) criteria (i.e., minimum scores for attainment) are:

“Full” attainment means that all measured biological indices meet the criteria; “Partial” attainment means that at least one criterion is met, but at least one is not; and “Non” attainment means that none of the measured indices meet the criteria. The proposed project is located in a section of the Mahoning River designated as Warm Water Habitat. The Ohio EPA’s 2008 Biological and Water Quality Study showed only partial attainment status at the sampling stations upstream and downstream of the proposed project (Figure 14). The study identified the causes of impairment as flow alteration as well as industrial and municipal wastewater discharges. A summary of Water Quality Data for this segment of the Mahoning River is shown below in Table 9. Table 9: Water Quality Data from EPA Sampling For Mahoning River Upstream and

Downstream of Proposed Project (OEPA, 2008). Low scores are shaded gray.

Location

Drainage

Area (sq.

miles)

Current

Aquatic

Life Use

Attain-

ment

Status IBI MIwb QHEI ICI

Mahoning River UST

of Lake Milton (RM

70.7) 248 WWH Partial 28-30 8.41-9 78.5 30Mahoning River DST

of Lake Milton (RM

62.7) 274 WWH Partial 26-34 8.14-9.18 80.5 34



35

Additional water quality data for the project area are included below:

Project

Location

Figure 14 – EPA Sampling Locations



36

Figure 15 (OEPA, 2008)



37

Figure 16: QHEI Attribute Checklist for areas upstream and downstream of the proposed project (OEPA, 2008).




38




39

Figure 19 – (YSU, 2004)



40

Dissolved Oxygen & Temperature Data

MH conducted a pre-hydro water quality study from August 2010 to October 2010 that included dissolved oxygen (DO) and temperature samples in the project area. The full study is included in Appendix D, however, several excerpts from the study are included below and are shown in italics:

Pre-Hydro DO Levels Below the Lake Milton Dam The data indicates that dam tailwaters below Lake Milton are well above the state average of 5 mg/L (Figure 22). Beginning with the initial splashing and spraying from the outlet pipe and continuing with the shallow fast moving tailwaters there is ample opportunity for re-aeration of discharge flows for several miles below the dam. Sample sites down stream of the stilling basin were consistently high throughout for several miles (figure 24).

DO (mg/L) Level Below Lake Milton Dam

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

7 8 9 10 11

Month

DO

(m

g/L

)

All HET Samplesin VaryingLocations BelowDamHET Median Value

EPA 2006Samples

Figure 20



41

DO (%) Levels Below Dam

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

7 8 9 10 11

Month

DO

(%

)

All HET Samplesin varyingLocations belowthe Dam

HET MedianValues

EPA 2006Samples

Figure 21

Figure 22 – Water Quality measurements taken by MH on September 6, 2010

Stilling Basin

8 mg/L

94.4 % sat

23.7 C

WWTP Outfall

8 mg/L

93.9 % sat

23.6 C

CR @ Gas Line

7.54 mg/L

88.4% sat

23.3 C

Pricetown @

Northbridge

8.1 mg/L

94.1% sat

22.8 C



42

Pre-Hydro Temperature Date Below Lake Milton Dam Approximately 91% of the Inflow at Lake Milton is from the Berlin Lake Dam, a 70 foot deep reservoir operated by the USACE located about 8 miles upstream of the proposed project. Berlin’s intake is at the bottom of the dam releasing the cooler water settling at the bottom during the summer (Figure 23). This cool water flowing in from Berlin is warmed in Lake Milton as evidenced by the warmer mean outflows below the Lake Milton Dam (Figure 24). According to USGS records, 2010 temperature samples obtained by MH during the study were warmer than previous years during August and closer to the mean in September and October (Figure 25 & Figure 26).

Berlin Thermal Stratification

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

7.0 9.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 17.0 19.0 21.0 23.0 25.0 27.0

Temp (C)

De

pth

(ft

)

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Figure 23 – Mean Thermal Stratification Patterns at Berlin Dam 1969 to 2009 (reservoir 8 mi upstream 70 ft deep with low level intake). Data was obtained from the USACE in 2009.

Approx. Intake El. At Berlin

Dam



43

Mean Temperature Data from USGS gages

0

5

10

15

20

25

jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Te

mp

(C

)

Milton Outflow Temp

Inflow from Berlin

Figure 24 – Mean Temperature Data from USGS gages upstream and downstream of the proposed project (1992-2010 for Lake Milton outflow and 1969-2009 for Berlin outflows).

Temperature Data .3 miles Downstream of Lake Milton Dam at USGS gage

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Tem

p (

C)

Mean

Max

Min

Figure 25 - Monthly Mean, Maximum and Minimum Value .3 miles downstream from project at USGS gage (1992-2010).



44

USGS Temp Data Below Dam During HET Study

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

8/9/

2010

8/11

/201

0

8/13

/201

0

8/15

/201

0

8/17

/201

0

8/19

/201

0

8/21

/201

0

8/23

/201

0

8/25

/201

0

8/27

/201

0

8/29

/201

0

8/31

/201

0

9/2/

2010

9/4/

2010

9/6/

2010

9/8/

2010

9/10

/201

0

9/12

/201

0

9/14

/201

0

9/16

/201

0

9/18

/201

0

9/20

/201

0

9/22

/201

0

9/24

/201

0

9/26

/201

0

9/28

/201

0

9/30

/201

0

10/2

/201

0

10/4

/201

0

10/6

/201

0

Te

mp

(C

)

Figure 26 – USGS Temperature Data .3 miles downstream of proposed project during study

Temperature Data (C) below Lake Milton Dam

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

7 8 9 10 11

Month

Te

mp

era

ture

(C

O

All HET Samples atvarying locationsbelow dam

HET median Values

Figure 27 – Temperature Data obtained from the 2010 MH study directly below the dam



45

Pre-Hydro DO & Temperature Levels in Lake Upstream of Dam The data shows that Lake Milton behaves like a run-of-river reservoir in terms of thermal stratification patterns (Figure 28). During the study period (August to October) stratification was greatest in on August 30th, 2010, and by October 6, 2010 the lake was completely unstratified and mixing was complete. The lake will likely remain uniform top to bottom until the weather begins to warm in the spring.

Lake Temperature Upstream of Dam

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0

Temp (C)

De

pth

16-Aug

30-Aug

18-Sep

6-Oct

Figure 28 – Temperature Profile of Lake Milton at the Dam Intake (note complete mixing and lack of thermal stratification by Oct 6

th)

In general dissolved oxygen levels at the dam intake mirrored temperature patterns showing the greatest top to bottom disparity in August and mostly uniform levels top to bottom were reached by October 6th (Figure 29 and Figure 30).

El. of Intakes 1 & 2




46

Lake DO levels

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

DO (mg/L)

Sa

mp

le D

ep

th (

ft)

Aug-16

30-Aug

18-Sep

6-Oct

Figure 29

DO (%) Upstreeam of Lake Milton Dam

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

DO (%)

De

pth

(ft

) 16-Aug

30-Aug

18-Sep

6-Oct

Figure 30







47

The proposed project will not significantly affect water quality. The Pre-Hydro Water Quality Study conducted by HET (2010) included in Appendix D provides an in depth analysis of the water quality impacts of the proposed project. The study presented the following data, conclusions, and proposed standards and procedures:

The pre-hydro DO levels below the Lake Milton Dam are well above the state average. This is most likely due to the re-aeration that currently occurs in the tailwaters beginning with the discharge splashing and spraying out of the outlet pipes and continuing with the shallow fast moving conditions of the river extending for several miles. Based on the results of this study MH proposes the following standards and operating procedures August to October:

1. Proposed Minimum Acceptable DO Levels & Temperature Range to be Maintained During Hydro Operation

Table 10: Proposed Minimum DO Levels to be Maintained During Hydro Operation

State

Average

State

Min

Level

State Max

Level

mg/L % Sat Temp © mg/L % Sat Temp © mg/L mg/L % Sat

August 3.19 - 7.48 37.8 - 89.2 19.7-26 6 70 19.7-26 5 4 110

September 6.23 - 8.31 71.5 - 92.7 15.8-29.2 6 70 15.8-29.2 5 4 110

October 6.56 - 8.82 67.3 - 90.5 10.2-22.5 6 70 10.2-22.5 5 4 110

Proposed Min Acceptable

Levels During Hydro

Pre-Hydro Sample Range (Includes

HET, EPA & USGS Data)

2. Proposed Mitigation for Lowered DO levels or Out of Range Water Temperature During Hydro Operation - If levels drop below the proposed standards, MH will use bypass flows until DO levels reach 6 mg/L and 70% saturation and temperature is within the pre-hydro range. MH proposes to use the selective withdrawal method as a secondary mitigation option if hydro operation is significantly reduced from August to October (more than 40% of the total flow is being bypassed). If no combination of bypass flows and selective withdrawal methods are able to maintain the pre-hydro standards, hydro operation will be shut down and 100% of flows will be bypassed (existing condition), until the proposed standards can be met.

3. DO Monitoring During Hydro Operation – MH will provide continuous, monitoring of DO levels below the dam during hydro operation from August to October for the first 3 years of operation. MH will use the YSI Pro ODO and post the real time data (mg/L and % sat) on the internet. The website address will be provided to all interested parties. Temperature and flow will continue to be monitored by the USGS gage .3 miles down stream and the data can be access through the USGS website.



48

4. Proposed Winter Hydro Operations - According to the ERPI report (1990) reservoirs that lack thermal stratification in the winter (such as Lake Milton) allow mixing of the water from all elevations. Therefore elevation of the intake is not a critical factor in the winter in terms of DO and temperature at Lake Milton. So the current practice of switching to the lower gates in the winter is not consequential in terms of temperature and dissolved oxygen above or below the dam. According to the EPRI report (1990) this practice makes sense for some storage reservoirs several hundred feet deep which typically use mid level intakes and where extreme stratification occurs in the late summer and fall (temperature range of approximately 20 degrees Celsius or more). Lake Milton does not meet any of these criteria. It is shallow (approximately 40 ft in the summer and 32 feet in the winter when the gate switch occurs), all intakes are toward the bottom, it has a short retention time of approximately 42 days while storage reservoirs have retention times of 200 days or greater, and there is minimal stratification in the late summer (difference of less than 6 degrees Celsius compared to the 20 degrees or more that typify storage reservoirs).

According to the results of this study MH submits that operating the hydro turbine from gate two during the winter will not alter DO or temperature levels in the lake or downstream during the winter and should be authorized. MH is willing to test the DO and temperature levels at the dam intake at varying depth intervals each fall to confirm full mixing has occurred top to bottom prior to operating the turbine during the winter. If full mixing has occurred (as determined by uniform DO and temperature levels top to bottom) MH proposes that full turbine operation is authorized for the winter from gate 2. If full mixing has not occurred prior to switching to the lower gates, MH will not operate the turbine until either full mixing occurs and is documented or until MH can provide other sufficient documentation that there will be no negative impacts to water quality by operating the turbine from gate 2 during the winter.

Other general conclusions reached based on the results of this study include the following:

Lake Milton behaves like a Run of River Reservoir in terms of thermal stratification during the late summer. Minimal stratification occurred in the late summer during this study with a maximum temperature disparity of about a 6 degree Celsius from surface to bottom.

Although the turbine will release water more gently and provide less initial re-aeration, the shallow fast moving tailwaters below the Lake Milton dam provide ample opportunity for re-aeration of discharge flows for several miles. So although there may be some temporary decrease in DO levels within the stilling basin during hydro operation compared the pre-hydro condition, it is anticipated that levels remain



49

within the pre-hydro range (min 6 mg/L or 70% saturation) and will continue to re-aerate as flows travel down stream.

The methodologies used in this study are based on recommendations from the

EPRI (1990) report and are more than adequate for determining the pre-hydro DO levels. The proposed standards to be maintained during hydro operation are well above the state average and consistent with the data obtained during this study.

Land and Water Uses

Land Uses Table 11: Land Use in the Upper Mahoning River Basin (YSU, 2004)



50

Figure 31 – (YSU, 2004)



51

Water Uses Table 12: (YSU, 2004)

Table 13: Reservoir Uses in the Upper Mahoning River Basin (OEPA, 2008).



52

Fish and Wildlife Resources

Fish Lake Milton has good populations of walleye, largemouth bass, bluegill, crappies, and channel catfish, plus fair populations of smallmouth bass, brown bullhead, yellow perch, white bass, suckers, and muskellunge. Walleye and surplus muskellunge are stocked by the Division of Wildlife of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Fishing in April, May, and June produces good to excellent catches of largemouth bass, walleye, and crappies (ODNR, 2010). The Ohio EPA collected fish samples from 2006 to 2007 (figure 32) from the Mahoning River Basin. Their results for the areas

upstream and downstream of the proposed project as shown in Figure 33. The proposed project is located near river mile 63.

Composition of Fish Species in the Mahoning River from RM 70.7 to 58.1 from EPA 2006-2007

Sampling

Smallmouth Bass, 7.2%

Other Bass Species, 4.9%

Sunfish/Bluegill, 6.1%

Esocidae (Muskie/Pickerel),

0.2%

Cyprinidae (Carp, Minnow,

Shiner), 27.8%

Ictaluridae (Catfish, Bullhead,

Madtom), 5.9%

Gizzard Shad, 12.1%

Walleye, 2.8%

Suckers, 6.0%

Yellow Perch, 21.9%

Other Perch/Darter, 2.9%

Crappie, 1.3%

other, 1.0%

Figure 33

Project

Location

Figure 32



53

Channel Catfish generally occur over a broad range of environmental conditions, but prefer warm water temperatures with high productivity and abundant cover. Overwintering habitat consist of deeper water with boulder and debris. In a lacustrine habitat, adults favor reefs and deep, protected areas with rocky substrates. Feeding usually occurs at night along the shoreline or in tributaries to the reservoir. Channel catfish spawn in late spring and early summer once water temperatures reach 21°C in areas of abundant cover. Strong orientation to cover and preference for shallower habitats limits the channel catfish exposure to entrainment (McMahon 1982). Smallmouth Bass typically spawn in the spring from April through June when water temperatures range from 58 to 70°F. Generally, males construct nests near the shore in a depth of 30-60 cm, on firm bottoms and often adjacent to cover. After hatching, young bass remain in shallow habitats following termination of parental care. Fry and juveniles inhabit areas of calm shallow, fringe areas with rocks and vegetation. After spawning, adult smallmouth bass are often found in littoral areas in the summer and fall and move into deeper waters in the winter that are away from vegetation (Scott and Crossman 1973). When water temperatures drop to 20°C, adults will seek deep dark areas (McMahon 1982). Adult smallmouth bass may be susceptible to entrainment because of their preferences to deep waters throughout the winter. During warm weather month, they would likely inhabit the littoral zone and young of the year (YOY) would be found in near shore areas associated with object cover. Largemouth Bass (Micropterus salmoides) prefer lacustrine environments with soft bottoms that can grow submerged aquatic vegetation (Scott and Crossman 1973). Largemouth bass will spawn in the spring when water temperatures typically reach 16 to 22°C, over gravel substrate in shallow areas. Entrainment of largemouth bass in the spring at Lake Milton may be limited due to their preferences of shallower habitats; however entrainment potential may increase in the winter months due to warm water preferences in deeper waters of the lake. During warmer months, largemouth bass would be found in the littoral zone near object cover. The YOY would be associated with near-shore shallows and object cover. Rock Bass prefer clear, cool and warm waters; they inhabit pools and backwaters of creeks streams, rivers and reservoirs. The habitat preferences of rock bass are very similar to smallmouth bass, but tend to prefer slower moving waters. Rock bass typically do well in both vegetated and unvegetated lakes. Spawning typically occurs between April and July when water temperatures range from 15.6 to 26°C. Males build nests in shallow areas with course sand to large gravel substrate. It is likely that juvenile and adult rock bass abundance would be highest in coves where habitat is less than 5 meters deep (Scott and Crossman 1973). Gizzard shad are primarily residents of shallow, littoral habitats. Spawning typically occurs in the spring, beginning in mid-May (Ney et al. 1988). Gizzard shad primarily spawn in littoral areas favoring coves over main channel sites. Gizzard shad will succumb or become moribund at prolonged water temperatures below about 3°C (37°F) (Williamson and Nelson 1985). Young gizzard shad typically pass out of temperate reservoirs during fall and early winter as their lower temperature threshold is



54

approached and swimming ability is reduced or lost. The loss of swimming ability creates their susceptibility to entrainment, and as a result fall/winter gizzard shad entrainment peaks are typical in reservoirs where they are abundant (FERC 1995). One behavioral factor of note is that shad are a schooling species. Because of this behavior, gizzard shad when entrained, may be entrained in large numbers.

Figure 34 – Gizzard Shad floating below the Lake Milton Dam December 16, 2009

Walleye prefer clear to slightly turbid waters of large lakes and rivers. They usually occur in greatest abundance over reefs, shoals of gravel, bedrock, and other firm bottoms. Although walleye can naturally reproduce in Ohio reservoirs, natural reproduction is not sufficient to maintain the fishery; therefore, each year the Division of Wildlife stocks Lake Milton with Walleye fry and fingerlings to maintain high-quality fishing. Walleye produced naturally are typically considered a “bonus” in these waters (ODNR 2010). Walleye spawning occurs in the spring between water temperatures 6 to 11°C in shallow shoreline areas with rocky substrate and water circulation from wave action or currents. Walleye that inhabit reservoirs will typically migrate up rivers to spawn. Demersal fry, juveniles and adults are photosensitive and will inhabit deep or turbid water or may find shelter under boulders, log piles, brush or dense beds of submerged vegetation during the day and will move inshore at night. Adult and juvenile walleye may be susceptible to entrainment as they inhabit deeper waters during the day due to photosensitivity. During the winter walleye will seek out deeper areas where forage fish congregate in search of warmer water (Scott and Crossman, 1973). Muskellunge, typically referred to as “muskie”, are stocked in Lake Milton by the Ohio Division of Wildlife. On average nearly 1650 fingerlings (approximately 1 fish per acre per year) are stocked in Lake Milton each September ranging in size from 8 to 10 inches. Muskie are native to Ohio and naturally reproduce in a limited number of streams along Lake Erie and the Ohio River. Prime Muskellunge



55

habitat is found in heavily vegetated lakes with lots of tree stumps and bays. Prime stream muskellunge habitat is generally considered to be long pools (at least 0.2 miles in length) with a minimum depth of at least three to four feet and an abundance of submerged woody structure. Muskellunge usually spawn in April and early May when water temperatures are in the low to mid-50s. Females will lay as many as 200,000 eggs on soft shallow substrate where they adhere to vegetation and other objects. After hatching, young muskellunge feed on microscopic animals until they are large enough to switch over to feeding on fish. Limited natural reproduction occurs in Lake Milton. Muskellunge is listed as Ohio Status: Sport fish and species of concern (ODNR, 2010).

As indicated by the reported catch of Muskellunge in Lake Milton compared to the rest of the Mahoning River downstream of the dam (Table 14), passage of muskellunge through the Lake Milton Dam is rare. This may be in part due to the deep intake elevation and the Muskie’s preference for vegetative cover, as well as its size, strength and swimming ability. Due to the size of this species entrainment is not likely through 1” inch bar spacing.

Table 14 - Reported Muskie Catch (ODNR, 2010)

Year

Caught In Lake

Milton

Caught in

Mahoning

River

1999 34 0

2000 27 0

2001 71 0

2002 44 0

2003 135 0

2004 84 0

2005 133 0

2006 239 0

2007 175 0

2008 176 0

2009 109 12

Total 1227 12

1988 to Present 2311 12

>30" in Length 86% 91%

Yellow Perch is found primarily in lakes, reservoirs, and occasionally in slow moving streams. They are most common in Lake Erie and in some of Ohio's larger reservoirs. They prefer relatively clear water and are often associated with rooted aquatic vegetation. Yellow perch spawn from mid-April to early May by depositing their eggs over vegetation or submerged brush and give no parental care (ODNR, 2010). Black Crappie prefer clearer water and more aquatic vegetation than white crappie. They are also less tolerant of silt and turbidity than are white crappie. Crappie spawn during May and June in Ohio. Males construct a nest by fanning out small depressions on the bottom in and around brush, rocks, or vegetation in water between one and five feet deep (ODNR, 2010).



56

White Suckers show little preference for a particular habitat and can be found in nearly every lake, reservoir, river and stream in Ohio. White suckers also are very tolerant of pollution, turbidity (muddy water), and low oxygen levels. White suckers spawn from April to early May when they run upstream, usually starting at night. They seek areas with swift water and a gravel substrate to randomly spread their eggs. The young hatch and remain in the gravel for one to two weeks before migrating downstream at night (ODNR, 2010). Suckers may be susceptible to entrainment at Lake Milton due to their bottom feeding behavior and high tolerance of low oxygen levels. Bluegill/Sunfish are most abundant in clear lakes and ponds that have some rooted aquatic vegetation. They are usually not the dominant sunfish species in most streams but do make up a portion of the over all sunfish population in nearly every stream. Both bluegill and green sunfish readily hybridize with other species of sunfish, most often each other. Hybrids between two other sunfish species are relatively rare. Bluegill sunfish typically build nests in large groups, or colonies. They spawn multiple times between May and August. Peak spawning, in Ohio, usually occurs in June. Males select an area in one to four feet of water and sweep out a saucer shaped nest with their tails (ODNR, 2010).

Regarding the fish community in the project area, the OEPA stated the following in their report (2008, p.151):

The fish communities between RM 70.75 and RM 58.13 were significantly influenced by the altered flow regime of the upstream and downstream dams. The most upstream site (RM 70.75) received an IBI of 30, the site near Pritchard-Ohltown Road (RM 62.68) received an IBI of 28, and the site near Starr Road (RM 58.13) in the backwaters of the Newton Falls dam received an IBI of 33. All of these scores are below WWH expectations.

During the first stage consultation under P-13402, Phil Hillman of the ODNR Division of Wildlife expressed concern regarding potential impacts of the proposed project to walleye and muskellunge species. Other agencies including the US Army Corps of Engineers and US Fish and Wildlife have requested “adequate documentation that fish mortality will be kept to a

minimum.”

Figure 35 - Installing Test Trashrack during 2010 Field Impingement Study



57

Using desktop and field study methods, HET conducted a fish safety assessment in 2010 (included in Appendix C) to determine impacts of the proposed project on fish species. The conclusions section from the study outlined estimated impacts to fish species as well as proposed mitigation measures (HET, 2010):

Qualitatively, with consideration to the proposed characteristics of the Lake Milton Project, the existing fisheries resources, and the abundance of reference information available, fish passage and fish losses due to entrainment and impingement mortality are likely to be low and comparable to the existing conditions. There are several key points of information that support this conclusion.

MH would pay a total of approximately $931.59 per year to ODNR in compensation for fish loss due to entrainment in the turbine for the estimated 1320 fish killed by the turbine annually (approximately .78 fish/acre). An additional 28.8 fish (mostly likely slower swimming species like blue gill or sunfish 5 to 8 inches) will be impinged annually costing an additional $29 in compensation per year.

The proposed project will utilize 1 inch trash racks compared to the 5.3” to 22.5” spacing at the existing trashrack. This change substantially limits the size of fish susceptible to entrainment and represents an element of entrainment protection relative to the current condition (possibility of decompression trauma, exposure to illegal fishing activity below the dam, etc.).

In general only fish < 8” TL would be susceptible to entrainment. For many species this would represent juveniles or even YOY as compared to adults which would be part of the reproductive cohort. Even moderate to high losses of young fish are not likely to affect most fisheries (Kleinschmidt Associates, 2010).

Turbine mortality rates for entrained fish would likely be due to blade strike probability associated with the turbines. However, some entrained fish would likely perish due to decompression trauma. While losses due to decompression are not quantifiable they could be substantial. The proposed project would reduce flows through the lower gates reducing risk of decompression trauma.

An excellent recreational fishery for several species exists at Lake Milton as well as below the dam. Because over 90% of fish passage will be maintained, the downstream fishery would be



58

maintained similar to the existing conditions. The fishery above the dam will be improved as larger individuals will have less opportunity to pass through the dam.

Having a hydro operator present below the dam on an almost daily basis would increase monitoring of illegal fishing activity below the dam. MH employees will watch for and aggressively report illegal fishing activities. Additionally MH is willing to post Ohio fishing laws on the powerhouse visible from the fishing decks. The possibility exists that this additional monitoring will offset impacts of any walleye killed by the turbine. Additionally compensation for the estimated 42 walleye killed by the turbine will be paid by MH while poachers often get away scott free.

Walleye fishing would not be significantly affected downstream and would improve in terms of more large individuals remaining upstream of the dam. The most popular time for anglers who fish walleye below the dam is spring. Since spring is spawning season for walleye and walleye that inhabit reservoirs will typically migrate up rivers to spawn (Scott and Crossman 1973), fisherman who make the assumption that the larger mature walleye they are catching are passing through the dam during the spring is erroneous. The reason for their success is because the walleye are generally coming from down stream and congregate at the tailwaters of the dam because they can’t go any further. This trend should continue and walleye up to 8” will continue to pass freely through the dam at all times to maintain the fishery downstream. Larger individuals will have opportunities to pass through gates 3 and 4 from November to April 40% of the time. Fishing at the tailwaters of the Berlin Dam will also improve as increased large individuals will make their way upstream in the spring. Due to the fast swim speeds documented for walleye, impingement is not likely to occur. This is supported by the fact that no walleye were impinged during the field study.

The Muskellunge population would not be significantly affected. The size of the fish when they are initially stocked (8”- 12”) generally excludes them from entrainment through or impingement on the new rack. These results were supported by the field study as no muskie were impinged during the impingement field study. Evidence was presented that with the current condition, Muskellunge rarely pass through the dam (ODNR, 2010). The new rack would provide protection to individuals that would have been entrained through the existing



59

rack from the current condition and will improve Muskie fishing above the dam as more large individuals would be kept in the Lake. The study shows that if muskellunge are entrained at proportionally equal rates as all species (which is very unlikely), an estimated 3.7 muskellunge may be killed by the turbine per year resulting in $52.54 in compensation to be paid by MH to ODNR each year.

Total fish passage will not be significantly restricted. An estimated 90% of current successful fish passage will continue during Hydro Operation. Some restriction of fish passage for fish 8 inches in length or longer will occur. However, passage for larger fish will be available through gates 3 and 4 from November to April.

The methodologies and rates presented in this report for estimating annual

fish entrainment and impingement at the Lake Milton Project were more stringent than approaches used in other hydro licensing/relicensing efforts of plants using one inch bar spacing. The Jennings Randolf Project desktop entrainment study, which also used the EPRI database for its source studies and proposes 1” bar spacing, shows an estimated annual mean entrainment of 0.19 fish/mcf (Kleinschmidt Ass-ociates, 2010). In comparison the entrainment rate used in this study is 8 times higher at 1.55 fish/mcf estimated entrainment. The Jennings study also did not include a field impingement test. As the results of this study are quite inflated compared to other impingement entrainment studies the information in this report should be used with confidence as a “worst case scenario” in the final assessment of the impacts of the Lake Milton Project on fish species.

After conducting a review of the study ONDR Division of Wildlife submitted the following response in an email dated May 14, 2010:

Anthony: Phil has reviewed the Lake Milton fish study report and is satisfied with the results. You can suspend any further studies.

Figure 36 - Only Fish Impinged during 2010 Field Study



60

John Navarro Program Administrator ODNR Division of Wildlife 2045 Morse Rd, G-3 Columbus, Ohio 43229 614-265-6346 (Phone) 614-262-1143 (Fax)

Invertebrate Community Table 12 summarizes the macroinvertebrate data collected in the Mahoning River. The OEPA’s report (2008, p. 154) states the following regarding the invertebrate community in the project vicinity:

Two of the sites, RM 70.75 and RM 62.68, were directly influenced by dam releases from Berlin Lake and Lake Milton, respectively. In spite of low taxa richness and some evidence of enrichment, both sites were at least marginally meeting WWH criteria. Although biocriteria may have been met, there is cause for concern regarding the predominance of the zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, in the Berlin Lake tailwaters. Large masses of this invasive bivalve were aggregated on the natural substrates, a phenomenon that was not observed when this reach was last sampled in 1994. The mollusk was also collected downstream from Lake Milton and into Newton Falls, though populations were not as dense. The incidence of zebra mussel populations has been correlated with declines in native mussel fauna and potential disruption of biological equilibrium. Currently, zebra mussels do not seem to imperil the Mahoning River in such a fashion; rather, flow regime changes due to dams and other impoundments are of more consequence to the river’s biological integrity.

Table 15: Summary of macroinvertebrate data collected from artificial substrates (quantitative sampling) and natural substrates (qualitative sampling) in the Mahoning River watershed June to September, 2006 (OEPA, 2008, p. 155).

The project will not have a significant impact to wildlife or to the invertebrate community. Wildlife

Mahoning County is home to a wide variety of wildlife (Table 16). The construction and operation of the proposed project will not have a negative impact on local wildlife. The construction limits are located within a developed/disturbed open space area where



61

there is no significant animal habitat. The entire footprint of the powerhouse is completely contained within the existing manmade concrete stilling basin and will not disturb any animal habitat. Table 16: Wildlife Status Report (ODNR, 2009) Animal Species Potentially Occurring in Mahoning

County

Species Status

American Crow

Beaver

Cottontail Rabbit

Mourning Dove

Osprey

River Otter

Swamp Sparrow

Willow Flycatcher

Bobolink

Canada Goose (migrant)

Canada Goose (resident)

Field Sparrow

Gray & Fox Squirrel

Gray Fox

Opossum

Ring-necked Pheasant

Red Fox

Skunk

White-tailed Deer

Wild Turkey

Acadian Flycatcher

American Woodcock

Barn Owl

Black Bear State Endangered

Blue-winged Warbler

Coyote

Eastern Meadowlark

Grasshopper Sparrow

Henslow's Sparrow

Northern Bobwhite

Raccoon

Scarlet Tanager

Great Egret Species of Concern

Bobcat State Endangered

Peregrine Falcon State Threatened

Snapping Turtle

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/LinkClick.aspx?link=19236&tabid=19230





































62

Midland Map Turtle

Red-Eared SliderQueen Snake

Common WaterSnake

Northern Red-Bellied Snake

Northern Black Racer & Blue Racer

Eastern Ratsnake

Eastern Milksnake

Eastern Gartersnake

Hellbender State Endangered

Common Mudpuppy

Red-Spotted Newt

Spotted Salamander

Mountain Dusky Salamander

Northern Dusky Salamander

Redback Salamander

Northern Ravine Salamander

Northern Slimy Salamander

Northern Two-Lined Salamander

Longtail Salamander

American Toad

Northern Spring Peeper

Gray Treefrog

Western Chorus Frog

Bullfrog

Green Frog

Northern Leopard Frog

Pickerel Frog

Wood Frog

Recreational Uses

Lake Milton State Park provides a wide variety of recreational activities including boating, fishing, swimming, hunting, hiking, and picnic areas, table 17 provides additional detail regarding recreational resources and opportunities at Lake Milton State Park.

The proposed project will not negatively impact recreational activities at Lake Milton State Park. According to the Lake Milton Association (LMA), the local organization dedicated to preserve, protect and improve Lake Milton and the surrounding area, the water level or lake elevation (along with water quality) is the critical issue that would affect recreation at Lake Milton. They do not want the lake level to be modified by the proposed hydro project as this would negatively impact recreation and the local



63

economy. As the proposed project will operate strictly in run-of-the-river mode, no modification to the existing flow and lake elevation schedule supervised by the USACE is proposed by MH. The lake levels will continue to be monitored by USACE and ODNR by the same standards and operations as is currently done. The proposed hydro project would simply benefit by capturing the discharge flows that are released under the existing schedule.

Recreational access to and within the lake will not be altered. Access the area below the dam will be improved due to the new access road to be constructed. Currently the slope leading to the fishing areas below the dam is too steep for the less agile anglers and site-seers to negotiate. The road will also provide improved access for canoeing and kayaking downstream of the dam as well as improved ability for park personnel and law enforcement to monitor and prevent illegal activity. This improved access to recreational opportunities below the dam is not viewed as a positive by all parties involved. The dam tail waters have historically been the scene of many illegal fishing practices such as snagging and other prohibited activities as well as significant littering and general mistreatment of the property. In general members of the Lake Milton community as well as the resource agencies do not give positive feedback regarding the behavior of those recreating below the dam. MH staff would be present on a regular basis and would monitor and report illegal activity below the dam as well as maintain the area to be clean and safe to the extent that is possible.

Table 17: Description of Recreational Opportunities at Lake Milton State Park (ODNR, 2010)

Recreation Facilities Quantity

Resource Land, acres 1006 Water, acres 1685 River, miles 2

Activities Fishing yes Hunting yes Hiking Trails, miles 1.25 Picnicking yes Picnic Shelters 4 Swimming Beach, feet 600 Summer Nature Program yes

Boating Boating Limits UNL Fuel for Sale yes Seasonal Dock Rental 100 Launch Ramps 3

Winter Rec Snow Mobiling yes Cross-Country Skiing yes Ice Fishing yes



64

Socio-economic Conditions

The current economic conditions in the project area (table 18) are generally below the state average. Table 18: U.S. Census Data for 2000 and 2008

Pop.

Growth

2000 2008 2000 2008 2000 2008 2000 2008 2000 2008

Village of Craig

Beach 1254 1159 -7.6% $38,594 $43,944 13.0% 13.0% 4.9% 7.5% $75,700 $93,796

Milton Township 4,107 4,078 -0.7% $39,912 $46,764 10.4% 10.4% 3.9%

una-

vail- $94,500 $138,931

Ohio 11,353,140 11,473,983 1.1% $40,956 $47,988 10.6% 13.3% 3.2% 4.6% $103,700 $140,200

Median Home ValuePopulation

median household

income

unemp -

loymentPoverty Rate

The proposed project would have a positive impact on the local economy. According to data presented by Navagant Consulting (2010) approximately 18 jobs are created per megawatt of capacity installed for this type of hydroelectric project. These include direct, indirect and induced jobs. The proposed Lake Milton Project has a capacity of .65 MW creating an estimated total of 11.7 jobs including 3.5 direct fulltime jobs, 2.3 indirect fulltime jobs and 5.9 induced jobs. MH will likely pay state and local taxes on revenues as well as applicable property taxes annually. ODNR will also receive annual dam use lease payments once the plant is in operation which is still pending ongoing lease nego-tiations. The estimated cost to construct the power plant is $1,200,000 to $1,800,000 much of which will be spent in the area for materials, equipment, fuel and subcontractor services. In terms of impacts to existing jobs, since the turbine will control the majority of the flow through the dam there will be less operation of the gates required by Lake Milton State Park (LMSP) staff. Typically the gates are operated by maintenance staff or park officers. Because LMSP has limited resources as it is, the park will benefit from less gate operation as these employees will be able to focus more on other responsibilities such as monitoring recreational activities in the Lake and maintaining the safety and other facilities of the park. No other jobs are anticipated to be impact-ed.



65

No impact to property values is anticipated. As explained in the previous section the project will not affect recreational opportunities in the area which are connected to the local economy. It is anticipated that recreational traffic will be increased as MH will be welcoming the community and education groups to tour the hydro facility and learn about renewable energy. Culturally the project is significant as it marks the revival of hydropower on the Mahoning River which historically powered several hydroelectric plants in the early 1900s and mechanical mills before that. Bait shops, restaurants, convenience marts, gas stations and other local business will all benefit from the additional traffic to the area.

Statewide, coal and other fossil fuel generators may be impacted as the power generated by the hydro plant will replace the power generated by fossil fuels in the area. This would perhaps reduce revenues very slightly for these companies as well as



66

the taxes paid by fossil fuel power companies. Those taxes would begin to be paid by MH so no net loss in taxes would occur.

Historical and Archeological Resources (sites included in or eligible for National Register)

In accordance with Section 106 of the National Preservation Act of 1966, a review of historic properties has been conducted. A search of the online database of the National Register of Historic Places in Ohio was completed and no properties on the project location were listed on the National Register.

The original Lake Milton Dam was constructed in 1913 by the City of Youngstown for the purposes of flood protection and water supply to the steel mills located in the city of Youngstown, Ohio. In 1970 seepage and evidence of instability on the downstream west abutment was noted. Youngstown relinquished control of the dam to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and ODNR began rehabilitation of the dam which it completed in 1988. Although the dam no longer supplies water to the steel mills in Youngstown, it continues to provide flood protection to the Mahoning Valley as well as an important recreational resource to the area (ODNR Div of Water, 2008).

Eventhough the dam is not registered as a historic property and it is not located within a historic district, it appears to be eligible as it is older than 50 years and represents the once thriving steel industry in the city of Youngstown. From an engineering perspective, there is nothing unique about the dam. It is a concrete, gravity dam (a common and simple design at the time of original construction). From a visual perspective, the structure was severely rehabilitated in 1987. Historically water power was an integral part of the area as well. The nearby city Newton Falls began as a “mill town” harnessing the power of the Mahoning River and just 7 miles down stream from the Lake Milton Dam was home to one of the earliest hydroelectric power plants. The Newton Falls plant is now in ruins and the turn to coal as the primary source of power lead to the water powered mills being abandoned. Today the demand for clean energy presents an exciting opportunity to re-tap these historical roots.

The project is proposed to be installed over the existing outlet works and stilling basin. This is an area that did not exist in the original structure prior to 1987. According to ODNR the the downstream gates and gatehouse were removed. New upstream sluice gates were installed with electrically powered operators and an entirely new stilling basin was installed. The proposed project will be constructed over an area that was newly constructed in 1987. Therefore no adverse effect on historic properties is anticipated by MH and the project may provide a net benefit to the historic value of the Mahoning River.

MH submitted a section 106 Project Summary Form and detailed supporting documentation regarding the proposed project to the Ohio Histortoric Preservation Office on April 22, 2010. This package was received by the OHPO on April 26, 2010. In a



67

response letter received from the OHPO on May 27, 2010 David Snyder PhD, Arcaeolical Reviews Manager for the OHPO, stated the following:

The correspondence provides a complete Project Summary Form with detailed information on the proposed undertaking. The dam was modified some 20 years ago. This housing and equipment necessary for this undertaking will be constructed on a portion of the dam that was modified 20 years ago. Based on available information, it is our opinion that the proposed project won’t alter any characteristics of the Lake Milton Dam that might qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The area needed for ground disturbance and work space appears to be severely disturbed or on steep slopes. We agree that no archaeological survey is needed for this project. Therefore it is our opinion that there will be no historic properties affected by the proposed undertaking. No further coordination with this office is necessary for this project unless there is a change in the sope of work.

The full OHPO response letter is included in the consultation record included in Appendix B.

Aesthetic Resources

Aesthetically the powerhouse will be consistent with the look of the existing dam. The new transmission line will be buried to enhance the aesthetics of the project as well. The amount of concrete structure will be increased at the dam but it will only be visible to those looking down into the valley below the dam and the powerhouse will not extend beyond the existing footprint of the dam. There may be a slight hum produced by the generator audible to those standing by the powerhouse but this sound will be a lower decibel level than the existing sound of the water discharging from the dam. The water discharge noise will be reduced as the turbine will capture the energy from the water and release it more gently as opposed to discharging it violently as is currently done. The plant will produce 100% clean renewable power compared to other forms of generation which pollute and create smog and degrade air quality. During construction all efforts will be made to reduce noise and maintain a clean and safe construction site.

Endangered or Threatened Species, Critical Habitats

Piping Plover: The project is within the range of the piping plover (Charadrius melodus), a state and federally endangered bird species. This species does not nest in the state but only utilize stopover habitat as they migrate through the region. According to comments received by USFW, due to the project type, location, and onsite habitat, this



68

species would not be expected within the project area, and no impact to this species is anticipated. Bald Eagle: According the ONDR and USFWS the project is within the range of the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), a state threatened species. No impacts to this species are expected as currently there are no nests within the construction limits. However, the location of bald eagle activity frequently changes. Therefore, closer to the actual date of construction, the MH will obtain an updated status of bald eagle activity in the area. To obtain any changes in status. If a nest is located within ½ mile of the project site, coordination with the DOW is required. Indiana Bat: ODNR and USFWS indicate the project is within the range of the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), a state and federally endangered species. The following species of trees have relatively high value as potential Indiana bat roost trees: Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), Shellbark hickory (Carya laciniosa), Bitternut hickory (Carya cordiformis), Black ash (Fraxinus nigra), Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), White ash (Fraxinus americana), Shingle oak (Quercus imbricaria), Northern red oak (Quercus rubra), Slippery elm (Ulmus rubra), American elm (Ulmus americana), Eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides), Silver maple (Acer saccharinum), Sassafras (Sassafras albidum), Post oak (Quercus stellata), and White oak (Quercus alba). Indiana bat habitat consists of suitable trees that include dead and dying trees of the species listed above with exfoliating bark, crevices, or cavities in upland areas or riparian corridors and living trees of the species listed above with exfoliating bark, cavities, or hollow areas formed from broken branches or tops. If suitable trees occur within the project area, these trees must be conserved. If suitable habitat occurs on the project area and trees must be cut, cutting must occur between September 30 and April 1. If suitable trees must be cut during the summer months of April 2 to September 29, a net survey must be conducted in May or June prior to cutting. If no tree removal is proposed, the project is not likely to impact this species. The proposed project will remove only 1 to 3 young pine trees during construction of the access road and transmission line. Therefore, no impacts to this species are anticipated.

Tribal Resources

According the Bureau of Indian Affairs there are no Indian tribes to be affected by the proposed project.

PRELIMINARY ISSUES AND STUDIES LIST

All studies and consultation requested by resource agencies during previous stage 1 consultation efforts under P-13402 have been completed. This includes consultation with state and local wildlife agencies, Ohio historic Preservation Office, Indian Tribes,



69

NOAA Fisheries, ODNR, USACE, and other Interested parties as well as conducting Power & Feasibility Studies, Fish Safety and Water Quality studies, and providing a thorough analysis of impacts to recreation, cultural resources, socio-economic conditions, fish & wildlife, water quality, dam operations, and soil, geology, terrestrial resources and other environmental resources. All information and data obtained during this period have been included in this NOI & PAD package. MH proposes to waive further stage 1 consultation studies and consultation in order to enter stage 2 consultation of the TLP (assuming FERC grants request to use TLP) and distribute the draft application. If any resource agencies disagree with this proposal, MH requests that written notification be sent to MH and/or FERC within 15 days of receiving the NOI and PAD package. This written notification can be sent to:

Mahoning Hydropower, LLC 11365 Normandy Lane

Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023 [email protected]

PURPA BENEFITS The applicant is seeking benefits under section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) by satisfying the requirements for qualifying hydroelectric small power production facilities in § 292.203 of this chapter. The applicant maintains that the project is located at an existing dam and is not located at a new dam or diversion (as that term is defined in § 292.202(p) of this chapter) and a requests for the agencies' view on that belief, if any.



70

REFERENCES

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 1990. Assessment and Guide for Meeting

Dissolved Oxygen Water Quality Standards for Hydroelectric Plant Discharges. GS-7001

Hydro Energy Technologies, LLC (HET). 2010. Fish Impingement, Entrainment And

Turbine Mortality Analysis. Lake Milton Hydroelectric Project P-13402.

Hydro Energy Technologies, LLC (HET). 2010. Pre-Hydro Water Quality Study. Lake

Milton Hydroelectric Project P-13402.

Kleinschmidt Associates. 2010. Jennings Randolph Hydroelectric Project Desktop Fish

Entrainment and Turbine Mortality Analysis. Prepared for Fairlawn Hydroelectric

Company, LLC.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), 2010. Lake Milton State Park

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/parks/lakemilton/tabid/759/Default.aspx Accessed November

27, 2010.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), 2010. A to Z Species Guide

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Home/species_a_to_z. Accessed May 4, 2010.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), 2010. Hunting and Fishing Regulations

http://www.ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulations/fishing_general.aspx. May 4, 2010.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), 2010. Muskie Angler Log

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/muskielog/sumall.aspx. Accessed May 4, 2010.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), 2004. Suspected Fish Poachers Netted

During Undercover Wildlife Investigation.,

http://www.ohiodnr.com/news/jun04/0601poachers/tabid/13461/Default.aspx. Accessed

May 4, 2010.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Water (ODNR Division of Water),

2008. Dam safety Inspection Report – Lake Milton Dam. Columbus, Ohio.

Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA), (2008). Biological and Water Quality Study

of the upper Mahoning River and Selected Tributaries 2006. OEPA Technical Report

EAS/2008-10-8, Columbus, Oh.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA), (2008). Appendices to the Biological

and Water Quality Study of the upper Mahoning River and Selected Tributaries 2006.

OEPA Technical Report EAS/2008-10-8, Columbus, Oh.

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/parks/lakemilton/tabid/759/Default.aspx

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Home/species_a_to_z

http://www.ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulations/fishing_general.aspx

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/muskielog/sumall.aspx

http://www.ohiodnr.com/news/



71

Navagant Consulting, 2010. Job Creation Opportunities in Hydropower. Presented to

National Hydropower Association Annual Conference on April 26, 2010.

United States Department of Agriculture, 1971. Soil Survey Mahoning County Ohio.

Washington, D.C.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Pittsburgh District, 1999. Mahoning River Environmental

Dredging Reconnaissance Study, Trumbull and Mahoning Counties, Ohio, May 1999

http://www.lrp.usace.army.mil/pm/mahonoh/ohrpt.htm Accessed November 29, 2010.

USGS. 2009. Water Data Report – 2009. 03091500 Mahoning River at Pricetown, OH.

http://wdr.water.usgs.gov/wy2009/pdfs/03091500.2009.pdf Accessed May 10, 2011

Youngstown State University, 2004. Mahoning River Watershed Action Plan.

Youngstown, Oh.

http://wdr.water.usgs.gov/wy2009/pdfs/03091500.2009.pdf



72

APPENDIX A – LIST OF POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ENTITIES AND INTERESED PARTIES



73

LIST OF POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ENTITIES AND INTERESTED PARTIES

Paul Wolf, President

Lake Milton Association

16910 Overlook Way

Lake Milton OH 44429

Lake Milton State Park

16801 Mahoning Ave.

Lake Milton, Oh 44429

Milton Township

15992 Milton Ave.

PO BOX 308


Village of Craig Beach

2538 Grandview Rd PO Box 99


Mahoning County

21 West Boardman St., Suite 200

Youngstown, OH 44503County

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

50 W. Town, Suite 700


Ohio Department of Natural Resources

2045 Morse Road, Bldg G


Ohio Historical Society

1982 Velma Avenue

Columbus, OH 43211

Ohio Historic Preservation Office

Resource Protection & Review

567 East Hudson Street

Columbus, Ohio 43211-1030

USACE - Pittsburgh District

ATTN: Jeffery Benedict, P.E.

2200 William S. Moorhead Federal Building

1000 Liberty Avenue

Pittsburgh, PA 15222-4186

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

4625 Morse Rd. Suit 104

Columbus, Oh 43230-8355

Department of the Interior

Office of Environmental Affairs

Room 2340 MIB

1849 C Street, NW

Washington, DC 20240

US Army Corps of Engineers

Great Lakes and Ohio River Division

550 Main Street

Cincinnati, OH 45202-7411

Bureau of Land Management

Office of Lands

7450 Boston Blvd.

Springfield, VA 22153-3121

STATE OF OHIO

705 OAKWOOD

RAVENNA, OH 44266

SWIERZ FLORENCE B

190 LOWELL AVE

YOUNGSTOWN, OH 44512

OLDE DUTCH MILL GOLF

2745 GRANDVIEW RD

LAKE MILTON, OH 44429

GOLF ENTERPRISES OF

2400 NE RIVER RD


LAKE MILTON BOAT CLUB

P O BOX 905

YOUNGSTOWN, OH 44501

DI BERNARDI, THOMAS

84 RED DOG LN




74

BRUMBAUGH, R C & ELAINE

1673 JERSEY


COSTIGAN, MARGARET A TRUSTEE

1579 JERSEY


COSTIGAN FAM PARTNERSHIP

JAMES COSTIGAN GEN PTNR

1585 JERSEY


APEL, GERALD W & KATHLEEN

1551 JERSEY ST


ALLEN, JACK D TRUSTEE

1525 JERSEY


DROTAR, JOHN W & BARBARA E

300 BENNING LN

DOWNINGTON, PA 19335

HANLON, JOHN J

1507 JERSEY


ROSE, ROBERT W & GLORIA W

17715 PORTAGE


MONTGOMERY, RICHARD KENT

17745 PORTAGE


SMITH, SUSAN

815 GRANDVIEW


KOSTA, BONNIE ETAL

767 GRANDVIEW


BUTLER, JAMES W & PATRICIA

755 GRANDVIEW


VAUGHN CEMETERY

P O BOX 397


MORELLO, JOHN & LISA L

17819 WILLARD PLACE


ALOIS LANE BEACH CLUB

18236 ALOIS DR


BAKER, ALOIS R

NO ADDRESS ON COUNTY RECORD

SEUFFERT, BRIGITTE TRUSTEE

18235 ALOIS LN


SUSOR, JOAN FRANCES

600 DRIFTWOOD DR


MOREY, SCOTT W & CLAIRE

577 DRIFTWOOD


MOORE, MARK C

2431 MAHONING AVE


GRISCHOW, A LYNNE & ANDREW

2135 COUNTY LINE RD


CAIRNS, KATHIE J

3020 Scottcliff Dr


SCHMELTZER, JULIUS TR &

17714 OHIO DR




75

JANSEN, PHILIP

611 PRIOI PARK DR

CUYAHOGA FALLS, OH 44223

MORLEY, MARY ROSE

17061 HEADLAND AVE


WARINO, NICHOLAS L JR

590 MILTON AVE


KIRIN, JOANN L

16896 MILTON AVE


RIVELLO, ROBERT SR

610 MILTON AVE


SCHROP, RICHARD

620 MILTON AVE


LAMPUS, COLLEEN

16940 OVERLOOK WY


UPPERMAN, JAMES J & KRISTI

16950 OVERLOOK WY


LAUGHLIN, JOHN & ROSEMARY

16930 OVERLOOK WY


KELLER, THOMAS G &

16920 OVERLOOK WY


SEIDNER, NEIL W

16900 OVERLOOK WY


DENNISON, WILLIAM E

16890 OVERLOOK WY


SHAFFER, SHARI R

778 HARBOR AVE


BARBONE, RONALD J &

870 NORTHEAST RIVER RD


SCHMITZ, PAULA ETAL

1046 RIVER RD


SERRINO, SAM



DOMIANO, JOSEPH C SUCCESSOR



SUMMIT INVESTMENTS LLC



LEONARD, JOSEPH & MARY ANN

1162 RIVER RD


ROGENSKI, PAUL D



SIMON, JOHN J



JACOB, TERRY C & DEBORAH A



BOWEN, DONNA J

1282 RIVER RD




76

THOMAS, PATRICK C & SUSAN

1286 RIVER RD


STAHL, STACEY



LIGHTLE, RODGER



FARMER, TERRY



NAFFAH, MICHAL A



GOMOLL LIMITED FAMILY



MILLIGAN, JAMES A &



LEMMON WM R & SUZAN B



SLAVIN, ROBERT J &



MACKALL, THOMAS & DENISE J



RIPPLE, WM J SR & RENA M



MISSIK, WILLIAM



DE SALVO, DONALD



BRAUN, MARIANNE K TR



EVERETT, SUSAN



WEAVER, THOMAS S &



WALSH, DENNIS

1916 N E RIVER RD


BOYD, JANE M TRUSTEE



TOM, YUEL D & JOYCE W



SPENCE, LINDA C TR



NAVARRO, FLOR S TRUSTEE



CUCKOVICH, GEORGE





77

KUBIAK, RICHARD L



POMA, KIMBERLY S



WEXLER, MARSHALL & MARY J



WASYLYCHYN, ALLEN M

2154 NE RIVER RD


WARE, CHRISTOPHER C



BRACKBILL, BRUCE D

432 SETTLERS VILLAGE CR

CRANBERRY TWP, PA 16066

KOMOSKI, KERRY M &

11213 LADET AVE

CLEVELAND, OH 44104

APPENDIX B – SUMMARY OF CONTACTS (Attached)

APPENDIX C – FISH SAFETY ASSESSMENT BY HET (Attached)

APPENDIX D – PRE-HYDRO WATER QUALITY STUDY BY HET (Attached)

Figure 37 –

EPA

Sampling

Locations

Pricetown @

Northbridge

8.1 mg/L

94.1% sat

22.8 C

Project

Location

Table 19: El. of Intakes 1

& 2

Stilling Basin

8 mg/L

94.4 % sat

23.7 C

Project

Location

Approx. Intake El. At Berlin

Dam

Approximate Construction

Limits-

Sedimentation during

construction to

be contained using approved

BMP’s

Proposed Powerhouse

Location

River Bank Composed of

Exposed Bedrock

Proposed

Hydro Site

USGS

Gaging

Station

Figure 38 Figure 39 Table 20:

Major Soil

Associations

in the

Mahoning

River

Watershed

(YSU, 2004)

CR @ Gas Line

7.54 mg/L

88.4% sat

23.3 C

Vegetation to be disturbed by

construction of

access road and transmission line

(age of

vegetation is approximately 22

years)

Project

Location

Area to contain

Concrete Fill OHWM Nearest

Wetland is

outside

Constructio

n Limits

Project

Construction

Limits

WWTP Outfall

8 mg/L

93.9 % sat

23.6 C

Figure 40

(OEPA,

2008)

El. of Intakes 1

& 2

El. of Intakes 3

& 4

milton pad

Documents