Middle Fork American River Project Cultural Resources Technical Working Group Meeting

1. Middle Fork American River ProjectCultural ResourcesTechnical Working Group Meeting November 17, 2009

2. Cultural Resources Schedule Update

3. Cultural Resources Schedule Update • Cultural Resources Inventory Studies • Phase 1 - Conducted research to identify all known cultural resources within an “expanded study area”. • Expanded study area = the area within one-mile of the FERC Project boundary or any Project facility outside of the FERC Project boundary. • Research efforts focused on developing an overall prehistoric, historic, and ethnographic context for the MFP. • Field surveys were not conducted in the expanded study area.

4. Cultural Resources Schedule Update • Cultural Resources Inventory Studies • Phase 2 - Conducted field surveys in 2006, 2007, and 2008 to: • Relocate all previously known resources; and • Identify any previously unknown resources in the “study area”. • The study area was defined in the FERC-approved CUL-1 Cultural Resources Study Plan as all lands within the existing FERC Project boundary and within a 200-foot area surrounding any: • Existing Project facility or feature; • Project recreation facility or feature; • Dispersed concentrated use area; and • Potential Project betterment.

5. Cultural Resources Schedule Update • Cultural Resources Inventory Studies • Identified 44 cultural resources within the study area, including: • Native American archaeological sites; • Historic buildings, structures, objects, and sites; and • Isolated artifacts.

6. Cultural Resources Schedule Update • Cultural Resources Inventory Studies • All study results are documented in the following reports: • 2005 Cultural Resources Inventory Study Report (PCWA 2006); • 2006 Cultural Resources Inventory Study Report (PCWA 2007); • CUL 1 – Cultural Resources Technical Study Report – 2007 (PCWA 2008); and • CUL 1 – Cultural Resources Technical Study Report – 2008 (PCWA 2009).

7. Cultural Resources Schedule Update • National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Eligibility Studies • Evaluated specific sites to determine whether they may be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. • NRHP eligibility studies focused on 18 resources that lie within the study area and could potentially be affected by: • Project operation and maintenance activities; or • Construction, operation, and/or maintenance of potential Project betterments/improvements.

8. Cultural Resources Schedule Update • NRHP Eligibility Studies • Documentation is in progress. • Study methods and results will be presented in a Draft report, which will be distributed to the Cultural TWG for review and comment by the end of the year.

9. Cultural Resources Schedule Update • Section 106 Consultation Schedule • Handout #1 – MFP Section 106 Process and Related Cultural Resources Activities

10. Proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE)

11. Proposed APE • Overview • The Area of Potential Effects (APE) is defined in the regulations implementing Section 106 of the NHPA as follows: • “the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist. The area of potential effects is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking and may be different for different kinds of effects caused by the undertaking.”

12. Proposed APE • Handout # 2 – Draft Proposed APE and associated tables. • PCWA’s proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE) comprises all lands within the existing FERC Project boundary and within a 200-foot area surrounding any: • Project facility or feature (Table 1); • Project recreation facility or feature (Table 2); • Proposed facility or feature, or disturbance area (e.g. construction and staging areas), associated with a potential Project betterment referred to as the Hell Hole Seasonal Storage Increase (Table 3).

13. Proposed APE • Handout # 2 – Draft Proposed APE and associated tables. • The proposed APE does not include lands above any tunnels because no ground-disturbing activities associated with the Project occur in these areas.

14. Proposed APE • Handout # 2 – Draft Proposed APE and associated tables. • The proposed APE boundaries may be adjusted in the future to: • Exclude or include specific areas as more detailed information about Project betterments or operation and maintenance activities is developed; and • Include areas that may be identified in association with the development of protection, mitigation, and enhancement (PM&E) measures or USDA-FS 4(e) conditions.

15. Proposed APE • Handout # 2 – Draft Proposed APE and associated tables. • The proposed APE is smaller than the study area for the following reasons: • The proposed APE does not include two roads and four snow courses that were included in the original Project description but have been excluded from the current Project description. • The proposed APE does not include Project betterments that are no longer under consideration. • The proposed APE does not include dispersed concentrated use areas. • The proposed APE does not include areas that lie within the “expanded study area”.

16. Development of a Historic Properties Management Plan (HPMP)

17. HPMP Development • Purpose • An HPMP defines how the FERC and PCWA will manage historic properties that could be affected by the Project during the term of the new license. • It identifies the roles and responsibilities of the participants, e.g., FERC, PCWA, USFS, stakeholders. • It defines what actions would be taken should previously unknown resources are discovered or if there are changes in the Project.

18. HPMP Development • Consultation • The HPMP will be developed in consultation with the following parties: • SHPO • USFS - Eldorado and Tahoe National Forests • Tribes • Technical Working Groups (TWGs) • FERC • Other agencies if there are issues related to other resource management plans (e.g., recreation, vegetation management).

19. HPMP Development • Timing/Schedule • NRHP Eligibility Evaluation Report • Distribute Draft NRHP Eligibility Evaluation Report to Cultural TWG and SHPO for review and comment by end of 2009. • Address comments and finalize NRHP Eligibility Evaluation Report (March 2010). • Receive NRHP Eligibility determination from SHPO (April 2010).

20. HPMP Development Timing/Schedule HPMP Development Initiate discussions regarding HPMP (January - February 2010). Distribute draft HPMP to Cultural TWG and SHPO for review and comment (April 2010). Consult with Cultural TWG and SHPO regarding draft HPMP (May – June 2010). Finalize HPMP in consultation with Cultural TWG (July – August 2010). Submit final HPMP to SHPO concurrent with Draft Application for New License (September 2010).

21. Other Resource Studies

22. Status of Draft Technical Study Reports Distributed to the Technical Working Group (TWG) Pending

23. Resource Management Plans

24. Next Steps

25. Next Steps • 2010 Meeting Schedule • Handout #3 – Proposed 2010 Meeting Schedule

26. Next Steps • Next Cultural Resources TWG • January 2010