The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07.15.26 Board Correspondence - FW_ General Correspondence issued in FERC P-803-121From:Clerk of the Board To:Clerk of the Board; Connelly, Bill; Cook, Holly; Cook, Robin; Durfee, Peter; Jessee, Meegan; Kimmelshue, Tod; Kitts, Melissa; Krater, Sharleen; Lee, Lewis; Little, Melissa; Pickett, Andy; Ritter, Tami; Stephens, Brad J.; Sweeney, Kathleen; Teeter, Doug; Zepeda, Elizabeth Cc:Loeser, Kamie; Cannon, Jamie Subject:Board Correspondence - FW: General Correspondence issued in FERC P-803-121 Date:Thursday, July 16, 2026 11:56:41 AM Please see Board Correspondence - Lewis Lee Administrative Technician - Confidential Butte County Administration 25 County Center Drive, Suite 200 • Oroville, CA 95965 T: 530.552.3326 www.buttecounty.ca.gov | lelee@buttecounty.ca.gov -----Original Message----- From: 'FERC eSubscription' <eSubscription@ferc.gov> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2026 6:26 AM Subject: General Correspondence issued in FERC P-803-121 .ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening attachments, clicking on links, or replying.. .ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening attachments, clicking on links, or replying.. On 7/15/2026, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Washington D.C., issued this document: Docket(s): P-803-121 Lead Applicant: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Filing Type: General Correspondence Request for Additional Information Description: Letter to Pacific Gas and Electric Company requesting additional information to be filed within 30 days re the 01/30/2026 Butte Creek Fisheries Mitigation Plan for the DeSabla-Centerville Hydroelectric Project under P-803. To view the document for this Issuance, click here https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/filelist? accession_num=20260715-3011__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!DL6BOldsPyHH0AWvkUg1zA1UnxrqA- 7B7rS0KWAfPZZGcNOmkYDO1ZMiET052afy9nDs9umg1U9Yhi6FYh82hZEywHltMZqyA0_S$ To modify your subscriptions, click here: 7B7rS0KWAfPZZGcNOmkYDO1ZMiET052afy9nDs9umg1U9Yhi6FYh82hZEywHltMY825PG7$ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please do not respond to this email. Online help is available here: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.ferc.gov/efiling-help.asp__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!DL6BOldsPyHH0AWvkUg1zA1UnxrqA- 7B7rS0KWAfPZZGcNOmkYDO1ZMiET052afy9nDs9umg1U9Yhi6FYh82hZEywHltMZEW-cRt$ or for phone support, call 866-208-3676. Comments and Suggestions can be sent to this email address: mailto:FERCOnlineSupport@Ferc.gov FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Washington D.C. 20426 OFFICE OF ENERGY PROJECTS Project No. 803-121 — California DeSabla-Centerville Project Pacific Gas and Electric Company July 15, 2026 VIA Electronic Mail Ms. Stephanie Maggard Pacific Gas and Electric Company Stephanie.maggard@pge.com Subject: Additional Information Request- January 30, 2026, Butte Creek Fisheries Mitigation Plan Dear Ms. Maggard: This letter concerns your January 30, 2026, filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), which contains the Butte Creek Fisheries Mitigation Plan (Plan) for the DeSabla-Centerville Hydroelectric Project No. 803. Following review of your filing, Commission staff have identified additional information and actions that are needed within 30 days of the date of this letter. Your January 30, 2026, filing provided the Plan for Commission approval. The Plan is required by the Commission’s November 19, 2024, letter (2024 letter) to address the adverse environmental effects of the Butte Creek Canal failure in 2023. The Plan must contain provisions to mitigate for the loss of federally listed Central Valley spring- run Chinook salmon (CVSRCS). Mitigative actions may include habitat improvement, fish stocking, fish passage improvements, funding for habitat improvement projects or broodstock rearing, or other similar measures. The Plan must be developed in consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (California DFW) (collectively, agencies) and filed with the Commission no later than February 17, 2025. The deadline was extended multiple times, most recently until January 31, 2026.1 1 See the Commission’s November 26, 2025, Order Granting Extension of Time. Project No. 803-121 - 2 - Your Plan outlines the timeline of developing the Plan following the Commission’s 2024 letter and proposes implementing one of two strategies to address the effect of the canal failure on the Butte Creek fishery. The first strategy entails habitat enhancement measures consisting of a combination of gravel augmentation and large woody debris placement to increase spawning, incubation, and rearing opportunity above existing conditions. The second strategy entails contributing $5.1 million over two years to a captive broodstock rearing program. Your filing contains a summary of how the Plan was developed, as well as a description of your initial response to the canal failure incident, including the removal of sediment introduced the Butte Creek following the canal failure, water quality monitoring and reporting, a benthic macroinvertebrate assessment, and a habitat assessment. It explains how you arrived at the two mitigation strategies described above and cites various meetings held with the agencies since the Commission’s 2024 letter. The filing does not contain minutes from these meetings. Other than reference to these meetings, you consultation record consists of: 1) your staff’s November 20, 2025, request to California DFW to further elaborate on the breakdown of costs tied to the broodstock program in preparation for a meeting scheduled for December 3, 2025, with the agencies to discuss the Plan; 2) NMFS’s November 20, 2025, email to you and the California DFW reiterating its commitment to continue consulting on the Plan; 3) California DFW’s December 2, 2025, response to your November 20, 2025, email, stating that it needs to better understand your staff’s November 20, 2025, request before it can formally respond; and 4) what appears to be a follow-up email sent by California DFW with a detailed breakdown on the broodstock program estimate dated January 20, 2026. Your filing recognizes that the agencies do not support the concept of habitat enhancement measures to satisfy the requirements of the Plan and instead, support and prefer the development of a captive broodstock rearing program. According to California DFW’s calculations, the cost of such a program is approximately $21.2 million over seven years. Upon review of this information, you believe the captive broodstock program proposed by California DFW is more consistent with a recovery-scale conservation program than a program that addresses the partial spawning cohort loss of a single year event (i.e., the estimated reproductive loss of the presumed 51-55 holding CVSRCS adults resulting from the canal failure incident). You go on to explain that “the agencies emphasize the effects of the 2023 incident were magnified by low population abundance in recent years and that the resulting cohort reduction created a genetic bottleneck”, and in response to this, state that “PGE is not responsible for mitigating the causes of reduced population trends preceding the event, which includes activities that influence various life stages through the Sacramento River, Delta, and Pacific Ocean”. Project No. 803-121 - 3 - One day prior to your filing, the California DFW filed extensive comments on the Plan with the Commission and elaborated on some of the timeline for developing the Plan. Specifically, while California DFW agrees that a captive broodstock rearing program is the most appropriate strategy, it maintains that a contribution of $5.1 million toward a program is nearly $16 million short of the estimated cost associated with running such a program and that the program should last seven years, not two. California DFW explains how it arrived at the $21.2 million estimate in its filing and explains why it fundamentally disagrees with your method for calculating what you consider to be a reasonable contribution to the broodstock program and provides its reasons. California DFW also states that it discussed the budget for the broodstock program with you during the December 3, 2025, meeting, followed by an email to you containing more detailed information dated January 20, 2026. Further, California DFW mentions an additional meeting between it and you took place on January 21, 2026, presumably to discuss the budget in more detail; however, according the California DFW, the meeting was brief and largely consisted of you informing it that you disagree with the scope of mitigation required by the Commission’s 2024 letter. Nine days later, you filed the Plan with the Commission for approval. In your filing, you state that you are aware of California DFW’s filing and will respond if necessary. As of the date of this letter, you have not filed a response. Upon reviewing your Plan and California DFW’s comments, it is evident that further consultation is needed on the Plan, as mitigation expectations widely differ between you and California DFW. This seems largely attributable to a fundamental disagreement regarding what the scope of mitigation should entail. As stated in our November 18, 2024, letter, the Plan is to mitigate for the effects for the loss of 54-59 percent (51-55 adults) of adult spring-run Chinook, or the assumed quantity of juvenile salmon that would have resulted from the partially-lost 2023 cohort. We recommend that you respond to California DFW’s January 29, 2026, comments. Because the Commission’s letter requires the Plan to be developed in consultation with the agencies, and it is apparent that further consultation is needed, we encourage you to continue working together with the agencies on the Plan. During future consultation efforts, we encourage all parties to keep in mind the intended scope of the Plan (to offset the adverse effects to fishery resources from the 2023 Butte Creek Canal failure incident) and to work together to develop a mutually-agreeable approach that balances identifying an effective mitigation strategy with the economic feasibility of implementing that strategy. Project No. 803-121 - 4 - To that end, please file the following information within 30 days of the date of this letter: 1) A response to the California DFW’s January 29, 2026, filing, using project- specific information to support your reasons for any comments that you do not incorporate into the Plan. The response should justify, in detail, why your funding proposed amount will meet the mitigation requirement compared to the California DFW’s funding estimate and how the plan mitigates the effects of the canal failure over a two-year span versus the seven-year span mentioned above. 2) Identify a plan and schedule for meeting with the agencies to make progress on a plan that effectively mitigates for the effects to the Butte Creek fishery following the failure of Butte Creek Canal. 3) Identify a new deadline for filing the Plan, taking the abovementioned requests into consideration. As a reminder, a complete consultation record should be included in your filing. This must include documentation of consultation with both agencies, including their specific comments, thereby demonstrating that each agency was included in the development of the Plan and that each agency’s comments were considered. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (202) 502-6760. Sincerely, Joy Kurtz Aquatic Ecologist Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance Cc: VIA Electronic Mail Mr. Matt Joseph Pacific Gas and Electric Company MWJA@pge.com Project No. 803-121 - 5 - Mr. Sky Ramirez-Doble Pacific Gas and Electric Company s9rv@pge.com Ms. Megan Young Pacific Gas and Electric Company mry2@pge.com Ms. Cathy Marcinkevage NMFS cathy.marcinkevage@noaa.gov Ms. Ellen Roots NMFS Ellen.roots@noaa.gov Ms. Hannah Mone NMFS hannah.mone@noaa.gov Ms. Morgan Kilgour California DFW morgan.kilgour@wildlife.ca.gov Ms. Anna Allison California DFW Anna.allison@wildlife.ca.gov Ms. Beth Lawson California DFW Beth.lawson@wildlife.ca.gov Mr. Colin Purdy California DFW colin.purdy@wildlife.ca.gov