C05_08_Att__3_to_PWS_BattleCreek_EIP_May2025_(1).pdf

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project

Shasta and Tehama Counties, California

Environmental Implementation Plan

May 2025

Prepared for:

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 2800 Cottage Way, RCO-125 Sacramento, California 95825 Contact: Trang Nguyen

(916) 978-5336

Prepared by:

Sequoia Ecological Consulting, Inc.

1342 Creekside Drive Walnut Creek, California 94596

(925) 855-5500

Prepared for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation by Sequoia Ecological Consulting, Inc. under Contract No. 140R2020P0098.

Environmental Implementation Plan

Volume 0, Table of Contents May 2025

TOC-i

CONTENTS: BATTLE CREEK SALMON AND STEELHEAD RESTORATION PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Introduction

Plan Schedule

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

Volume 2, Worker Environmental Education Program

Volume 3, Vegetation Protection and Exclusion Area Fencing Plan

Volume 4, Environmental Compliance Construction Monitoring Program

Volume 4.1, Vegetation Protection and Exclusion Area Fencing Monitoring Plan

Volume 4.2, Construction Area Fish Management Program

Volume 4.3, Migratory Bird Treaty Act Compliance Program

Volume 4.4, Threatened, Endangered, and Special-Status Species Monitoring Program

Volume 5, Comprehensive Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Program

Volume 5.1, Habitat Compensation Approach

Volume 5.2, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan

Volume 5.3, Riparian Restoration Plan

Volume 5.4, Oak Planting Plan

Volume 5.5, Upland Vegetation Conservation Easement Plan

Volume 5.6, Stillwater Plains Mitigation Bank Plan

Volume 5.7, Inskip Visual Mitigation Plan

Volume 6, Noxious Weed Inventory Survey Plan

Volume 7, Construction Contractor Plans and Programs

Introduction

Volume 0, Introduction

I-i

CONTENTS: INTRODUCTION

1.0 PURPOSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

2.0 BATTLE CREEK SALMON AND STEELHEAD RESTORATION PROJECT OVERVIEW

2.1. Background

2.2. Location

2.3. Project Description

2.4. Restoration Activities—Phase 2

3.0 HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT

3.1. Organization

3.2. Parallelism in the Implementation Plan

3.3. Audience

3.4. Intent as a Living Document

4.0 ORGANIZATION OF THIS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

5.0 REFERENCES

FIGURES

Figure I-1. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project location

Figure I-2. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project facilities prior to the start of construction and project construction phases

TABLES

Table I-1. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project components

Volume 0, Introduction

I-1

1.0 PURPOSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

The purpose of the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project (Restoration Project) Environmental Implementation Plan (EIP) is to serve as a stand-alone document that provides detailed instructions for implementing mitigation measures outlined in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Plan (MMRP; California Department of Fish and Game 2007) and the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) findings (State Water Board 2008) that were prepared for the restoration project in compliance with CEQA. Portions of the EIP were also prepared in compliance with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Biological Opinion (USFWS 2005a) and Reinitiation of Formal Consultation (USFWS 2016), the USFWS Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report (USFWS 2005b), the USFWS Conference Opinion (USFWS 2025), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Biological Opinion (NMFS 2005), and the State Water Board Water Quality Certification for the Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project: Phase 2 No Regrets (FERC Project No. 1121; State Water Board 2024) that were prepared for the Restoration Project.

The Performance Work Statement (Reclamation 2020) requires periodic updates to the EIP to maintain relevance with current project design and environmental commitments. Sequoia has adopted this version of the EIP from ICF International’s 2013 EIP (ICF 2013), and it was prepared in coordination with the U.S.

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), NMFS, USFWS, CDFW, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), the State Water Board, Stantec, and other parties as noted throughout this EIP.

2.0 BATTLE CREEK SALMON AND STEELHEAD RESTORATION PROJECT

OVERVIEW

2.1. Background

The signatories to the 1999 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)—Reclamation, USFWS, NMFS, CDFW, and PG&E—proposed the Restoration Project as an opportunity to reestablish approximately 42 miles of prime salmon and steelhead habitat on Battle Creek, plus an additional 6 miles of habitat on its tributaries (Figure 1). Restoration will be accomplished primarily through the modification of PG&E’s Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project’s (Hydroelectric Project; Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [FERC] Project No.

1121) facilities and operations, including in-stream flow releases.

Volume 0, Introduction

I-2

Figure I-1. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project location.

Volume 0, Introduction

I-3

2.2. Location

Battle Creek is a tributary to the Sacramento River. The Battle Creek watershed is situated on the volcanic slopes of Mount Lassen in southeastern Shasta and northeastern Tehama counties. The Restoration Project area is on North Fork and South Fork Battle Creek in southern Shasta and northern Tehama counties on land south of Shingletown and State Route (SR) 44 and north of Paynes Creek and SR 36 (Figure I-1).

The Restoration Project includes the portion of the Hydroelectric Project downstream from the natural fish barriers (Figure I-2). The upper project limit on North Fork Battle Creek is the natural fish barrier upstream from the North Battle Creek Feeder Diversion Dam, 14 miles upstream from the confluence with South Fork Battle Creek. The upper project limit on South Fork Battle Creek is Angel Falls, the natural fish barrier approximately 6 miles upstream from the South Diversion Dam. The lower project limit is the confluence of the Coleman Powerhouse tailrace channel and mainstem Battle Creek.

2.3. Project Description

The Restoration Project is being accomplished in three phases: Phase 1A, 1B, and 2. The Restoration Project involves modificat ions to the following facilit ies at nine dam sites located on North Fork Battle Creek and South Fork Battle Creek and three of its tributaries: Soap, Ripley, and Baldwin Creeks (Figure I- 2). The nine dam sites are as follows:

• North Battle Creek Feeder Diversion Dam

• Eagle Canyon Diversion Dam

• Wildcat Diversion Dam, Pipeline, and Canal

• Baldwin Creek Fish Barrier

• Coleman Diversion Dam/Inskip Powerhouse

• Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam

• Soap Creek Feeder Diversion Dam

• South Diversion Dam/South Canal

The Restoration Project includes reoperation and modification of these hydropower facilities, which will increase and stabilize streamflow, significantly increase cold water and stream area, and provide a reliable migratory pathway over obstacles in the Restoration Project area. The Restoration Project also includes modifying the facilities at remaining diversion dams to substantially improve the reliability and effectiveness of upstream and downstream fish passage.

Volume 0, Introduction

I-4

Figure I-2. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project facilities prior to the start of construction and project construction phases.

Volume 0, Introduction

I-5

The project includes installation of new fish screens and fish ladders that meet NMFS and CDFW criteria at three diversion dams (North Battle Creek Feeder, Eagle Canyon, and Inskip Diversion), and removal of five diversion dams (Wildcat, Coleman, South, Soap Creek Feeder, and Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion). Higher minimum flow requirements (i.e., MOU minimum in-stream flow requirements) will increase in-stream flows, subsequently lowering water temperature, increasing stream area, and providing reliable passage conditions for adult salmonids in downstream reaches. In addition, the MOU minimum in-stream flow requirements support future adaptive management that may incorporate new information related to flows needed to facilitate passage, increase habitat area, and improve water temperature conditions. Table I-1 summarizes the Restoration Project components by project location.

Table I-1. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project components.

Project Site Name Phase 1A Components Phase 1B Components Phase 2 Components

North Battle Creek Feeder Diversion Dam

• Install fish screen and ladder

• Set new minimum in-stream flow for North Battle Creek Feeder reach ranging from 47 to 88 cfs

• Improve access road

N/A N/A

Eagle Canyon Diversion Dam

• Install fish screen and ladder

• Remove segment of the Eagle Canyon spring collection facility

• Set new minimum in-stream flow for Eagle Canyon reach ranging from 35 to 46 cfs

• Improve access trail

N/A N/A

Wildcat Diversion Dam, Pipeline, and Canal

• Remove dam, pipeline, and canal

• Improve access roads and trail

N/A N/A

Baldwin Creek Fish Barrier

• Install in-stream flow release monitoring and recording equipment

• Set minimum in-stream flow for Baldwin Creek at 5 cfs

• Install fish barrier

N/A N/A

Volume 0, Introduction

I-6

Project Site Name Phase 1A Components Phase 1B Components Phase 2 Components

Coleman Diversion Dam and Inskip Powerhouse N/A

• Construct Inskip Powerhouse and Coleman Canal connector

• Replace Inskip Powerhouse bypass Improve access road

• Coleman Diversion Dam Removal

• Coleman Canal Diversion/Weir Closure

Inskip Diversion Dam and South Powerhouse* N/A N/A

• Install fish screen and ladder

• Construct South Powerhouse and Inskip Canal connector (tunnel)

• Set minimum instream flow for Inskip reach ranging from 40 to 86 cfs

Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam N/A N/A Remove dam

Soap Creek Feeder Diversion Dam N/A N/A Remove dam

South Diversion Dam/South Canal N/A N/A Remove dam

Decommission canal cfs = cubic feet per second

N/A = not applicable

* The construction of the Inskip Diversion Dam/South Powerhouse Phase 2 Components is no longer planned because PG&E’s Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project is going through a surrender and decommissioning process.

Phases 1A and 1B of the Restoration Project have been completed and are addressed in the 2013 EIP (ICF International). This 2025 EIP builds on the 2013 EIP and focused on Phase 2 of the Restoration Project, which includes removal of Coleman Diversion Dam, Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam, Soap Creek Feeder Diversion Dam, and South Diversion Dam/South Canal, and restoration of fish passage and habitat.

2.4. Restoration Activities—Phase 2

Currently, Phase 2 of the Restoration Project is limited to fish passage improvements on South Fork Battle Creek by removing the South, Soap Creek Feeder, Lower Ripley Creek Feeder, and Coleman Diversion Dams and decommissioning the South Canal. Previously considered Phase 2 components at Inskip Diversion Dam and South Powerhouse (fish screen and ladder installation, connector construction, and in-stream flow modification) were removed from the scope after PG&E decided to not renew the FERC license authorizing the Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project and is removing Inskip Diversion Dam as a separate action.

Volume 0, Introduction

I-7

3.0 HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT

The EIP is divided into seven separate volumes, providing detailed instructions on how to implement mitigation measures described in CDFW’s MMRP (California Department of Fish and Game 2007) and the State Water Board’s CEQA Findings (State Water Board 2008). The EIP has also been designed for optimum accessibility, readability, and ease of use, guided by the concepts and tools described below.

3.1. Organization

Recognizing the importance of CDFW’s MMRP and the State Water Board’s CEQA Findings in directing the EIP’s content, a parallel outline has been adopted for presentation of the various mitigation measures, which are described in the volumes that follow this introduction. Similar terminology used in the MMRP is retained in the EIP unless otherwise indicated. The EIP was also prepared to be consistent with USFWS’s Biological Opinion (USFWS 2005a), the USFWS Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report (USFWS 2005b), and the NMFS Biological Opinion (NMFS 2005) that were prepared for the Restoration Project.

3.2. Parallelism in the Implementation Plan

Each volume in the EIP follows a consistent structure and format to facilitate review and use based on mitigation requirements for the Restoration Project. There are seven mitigation requirements presented in this EIP:

• Pre-construction wildlife and plant surveys

• Worker environmental education

• Vegetation protection and exclusion area fencing

• Environmental compliance construction monitoring

• Comprehensive habitat mitigation and monitoring

• Noxious weed inventories

• Construction contractor plans and programs

In each mitigation measure-based volume, the following information is discussed: introduction, background and purpose, definitions (optional, included if needed), methods, schedule, reporting, and references.

3.3. Audience

The EIP has been written for two groups: field survey staff and field monitoring staff, plus Reclamation staff who are interested in following along with Restoration Project mitigation requirements. As a result, the level of detail and writing tone are tailored to the skill sets and backgrounds of these target audiences.

Volume 0, Introduction

I-8

3.4. Intent as a Living Document

The EIP should be updated in response to major revisions to the MMRP based on Battle Creek Environmental Team recommendations. The EIP may also be updated by field survey staff and field monitoring staff to include efficiencies in conducting the work as well as lessons learned after surveying and monitoring at past project sites in preparation for surveying and monitoring at future project sites.

4.0 ORGANIZATION OF THIS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

This EIP is organized as follows:

• Introduction to the Battle Creek EIP

• Phase 2: Restoration Project Schedule

• Volume 1. Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

• Volume 2. Worker Environmental Education Program

• Volume 3. Vegetation Protection and Exclusion Area Fencing Plan

• Volume 4. Environmental Compliance Construction Monitoring Program o Volume 4.1. Vegetation Protection and Exclusion Area Fencing Monitoring Plan o Volume 4.2. Construction Area Fish Management Plan o Volume 4.3. Migratory Bird Treaty Act Compliance Program o Volume 4.4. Threatened, Endangered, and Special-Status Species Monitoring Program

• Volume 5. Comprehensive Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Program o Volume 5.1. Habitat Compensation Approach o Volume 5.2. Corps Jurisdictional Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan o Volume 5.3. Riparian Restoration Plan o Volume 5.4. Oak Planting Plan o Volume 5.5. Upland Vegetation Conservation Easement Plan o Volume 5.6. Stillwater Plains Mitigation Bank Plan

• Volume 6. Noxious Weed Inventory Survey Plan

• Volume 7. Construction Contractor Plans and Programs

Volume 0, Introduction

I-9

5.0 REFERENCES

California Department of Fish and Game. 2007. Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Plan, adopted by the California Department of Fish and Game as a Responsible Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code § 21000 et seq.) for a Funding Approval for the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project as analyzed in the Final EIR/EIS Certified by the Lead Agency. March 14.

California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). 2008. Application for a 401 Water Quality Certification for the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project in Shasta County.

Attachment A, California Environmental Quality Act Findings and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project. December 12.

https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/water_quality_cert/docs/battl e_creek/bureau_401cert.pdf.

State Water Board. 2024. In the Matter of Water Quality Certification for Pacific Gas and Electric Company and United States Bureau of Reclamation Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project: Phase 2 No Regrets Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project No. 1121. Water Quality Certification for Federal Permit or License. February 1, 2024.

ICF International (ICF). 2013. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project Environmental Implementation Plan. December. (ICF 00104.09.) Redding, CA. Prepared for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Sacramento, CA.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2005. Biological and Conference Opinion for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project. Southwest Region, National Marine Fisheries Service. File Number 151422SWR1999SA1277:MET. Issued June 22, 2005.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). 2020. Performance Work Statement - Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project, Environmental Compliance and Commitments.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005a. Biological Opinion (1-1-04-F-0190), Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project, Shasta and Tehama Counties, California. June. Sacramento, CA.

USFWS. 2005b. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project. Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office. Sacramento, CA. June.

https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/water_quality_cert/docs/battle_creek/bureau_401cert.pdf https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/water_quality_cert/docs/battle_creek/bureau_401cert.pdf

Volume 0, Introduction

I-10

USFWS. 2016. Reinitiation of Formal Consultation under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act and Biological Opinion Amendment for the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project, Shasta and Tehama Counties, California. October 14, 2016.

USFWS. 2025. Formal Conference and Informal Consultation for New Phase 2 Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project in Shasta and Tehama Counties, California. Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office. Sacramento, CA. March.

Phase 2 Plan Schedule

Volume 0, Plan Schedule

PS-i

CONTENTS: PLAN SCHEDULE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 PHASED APPROACH AND PROJECT SCHEDULE

3.0 PRE-CONSTRUCTION, DURING CONSTRUCTION, AND POST-CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TIMEFRAMES

TABLES

Table PS-1. Proposed construction schedule for the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project Phase 2 by project site

Table PS-2. Implementation of mitigation measures before, during, and after Phase 2 construction

Table PS-3. Environmental timeframes for the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project

APPENDIX

Appendix PS-A. Working Draft Construction Contracts Summary Schedule for the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project

Volume 0, Plan Schedule

PS-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Developing a schedule for implementing Phase 2 of the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project (Restoration Project) Environmental Implementation Plan (EIP) is complicated by several factors.

• There are three phases of Restoration Project construction: Phase 1A, Phase 1B, and Phase 2;

this version of the EIP will cover Phase 2 (Table PS-1; Appendix PS-A)

• Implementation of each mitigation measure may take place before the start of construction, during construction, or after construction is complete (Table PS-2)

• Some mitigation measures have a unique schedule or specific environmental timeframes that they must follow (Table PS-3)

To address the complexities of developing a schedule for implementing the EIP, a set of tables (Tables PS- 1, PS-2, and PS-3) that takes the reader through each step of the scheduling process to arrive at a comprehensive schedule for all mitigation measures that are referenced in this EIP has been developed.

Each table is explained below.

2.0 PHASED APPROACH AND PROJECT SCHEDULE

Implementation of the Restoration Project has been divided into three separate construction phases:

Phase 1A, Phase 1B, and Phase 2. Phases 1A and 1B are complete. The project sites that will be constructed under Phase 2 more or less follow their own schedule. The most current version of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s working draft construction contract summary schedule for the Restoration Project is presented in Appendix PS-A. A shortened version of this schedule, which is referenced throughout this EIP, is presented in Table PS-1 and presents the overall construction schedule for each project site for Phase 2.

3.0 PRE-CONSTRUCTION, DURING CONSTRUCTION, AND POST-

CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION

Each mitigation measure was scheduled to take place before construction begins (pre-construction), during construction, or after construction is complete (post-construction). Some mitigation actions are complete or no longer needed. Table PS-2 outlines the timing of when each mitigation measure should take place and how the timing relates to the Restoration Project construction schedule. A more detailed schedule for each measure is described in the volumes referenced in the table.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TIMEFRAMES

Some mitigation measures have a unique schedule that they must follow, as they can be implemented only during certain times of the year. Table PS-3 presents the environmental timeframes associated with

Volume 0, Plan Schedule

PS-2

each project site. The purpose for implement ing these t imeframes is to minimize impacts on fish and wildlife (i.e., migratory birds) and perform biological surveys during the optimal time of year when the surveys should occur. Table PS-3 includes the following information:

• In-stream work timeframes (Volume 4.2)

• Migratory Bird Treaty Act vegetation removal timeframes (Volume 4.3)

• Pre-construction survey timeframe for raptors, riparian birds, bats, and special-status plants

(Volume 1.0)

The timeframes are described in greater detail in the volumes referenced above.

Table PS-1. Proposed construction schedule for the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project Phase 2 by project site.

Project Site Name Key Project Elements Anticipated Start Date

Anticipated Completion Date

Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam

Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam Removal January 2026 November 2027

Soap Creek Feeder Diversion Dam Soap Creek Feeder and Dam Removal January 2026 November 2027

South Diversion Dam and South Canal

South Diversion Dam and South Canal Removal January 2026 November 2027

Coleman Diversion Dam* Coleman Diversion Dam Removal Coleman Canal Diversion/Weir Closure September 2027 November 2028

*Construction start and end dates for work at Coleman Diversion Dam of the Restoration Project are subject to change.

Table PS-2. Implementation of mitigation measures before, during, and after Phase 2 construction.

EIP

Volume Mitigation Measure Before

Construction During

Construction After

Construction

1 Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Surveys X* 2 Worker Environmental Education Program X

3 Vegetation Protection and Exclusion Area Fencing Placement X

4.1 Vegetation Protection and Exclusion Area Fencing

Monitoring X

4.2 Construction Area Fish Management Program X*

4.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act Compliance X* X

4.4 Threatened, Endangered, and Special-Status Species

Monitoring X

5.1 Habitat Compensation Approach X

5.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (i.e., Compensatory Mitigation Plan)

X

5.3 Riparian Restoration X X X

5.4 Oak Planting Plan (i.e., Oak Tree Monitoring) X X X

Volume 0, Plan Schedule

PS-3

EIP

Volume Mitigation Measure Before

Construction During

Construction After

Construction

5.5 Upland Vegetation Conservation Easement**

5.6 Stillwater Plains Mitigation Bank Agreement**

5.7 Inskip Revegetation Plan**

6 Noxious Weed Inventory X X

Construction Contractor Mitigation Plans and Programs (including Clean Water Act, Section 402 site inspections)

X

*See Table PS-3

**Mitigation requirements have been met or are no longer needed; no Phase 2 surveys or implementation anticipated.

Volume 0, Plan Schedule

PS-4

Table PS-3. Environmental timeframes for the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project.

Project Site

Fish Birds Bats Plants

Salmon/ Steelhead‡

Migratory Bird Treaty Act†

Raptors Riparian Birds Maternal Colonies

Roosting Sites

Migrant Stopover

Sites

Hibernation Sites

Special-Status Plants

Federal and State-

Listed Plants

Cooper’s Hawk Osprey Golden

Eagle Bald Eagle

Little Willow Flycatcher

California Yellow

Warbler

Yellow- Breasted Chat

South Diversion/South Canal May 1–Nov 1 Sep 1–Feb 1* Mar–Aug Mar–Aug Feb–Jul Feb–Aug May 15–Jul 25 Apr 15–Aug 31 Apr 25–May

25 Mar–mid-May Jun–Aug mid-Aug– Oct Nov–Feb May–August Jun–July

Soap Creek Feeder Diversion Dam May 1–Nov 1 Sep 1–Feb 1* Mar–Aug Mar–Aug Feb–Jul Feb–Aug May 15–Jul

25 Apr 15–Aug 31 Apr 25–May 25 Mar–mid-May Jun–Aug mid-Aug–

Oct Nov–Feb May–August Jun–July

Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam May 1–Nov 1 Sep 1–Feb 1* Mar–Aug Mar–Aug Feb–Jul Feb–Aug May 15–Jul

25 Apr 15–Aug 31 Apr 25–May 25 Mar–mid-May Jun–Aug mid-Aug–

Oct Nov–Feb May–August Jun–July

Coleman Diversion Dam/Inskip Powerhouse May 1–Sep 1 Sep 1–Feb 1* Mar–Aug Mar–Aug Feb–Jul Feb–Aug May 15–Jul

25 Apr 15–Aug 31 Apr 25–May 25 Mar–mid-May Jun–Aug mid-Aug–

Oct Nov–Feb May–August Jun–July

‡In-stream work timeframe

†Vegetation removal timeframe

* If needed, request U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for an extension to the vegetation removal timeframe through March 15 at this project site. USFWS previously granted extension at Phase 1B at Coleman Diversion Dam/Inskip Powerhouse project site.

Volume 0, Plan Schedule

PS-5

This page left blank intentionally

Volume 0, Plan Schedule May 2025

Appendix

PS-A

Appendix PS-A

Working Draft Construction Contracts Summary Schedule for the

Volume 0, Plan Schedule

PS-A-1

Table PS-A-1. Working draft remaining construction contracts summary schedule.

Phase Construction Contract (or Activity) Key Project Element(s) Contract

Award Vegetation Clearing*

On-Site Construction

Begins

Construction Completion

(Contract Ends)

South Dam and Canal Removal (including removal of Soap Creek and Lower Ripley Creek Dams)

South Diversion Dam and South Canal Removal Soap Creek Feeder Diversion Dam Removal Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam Removal

Oct 2025 Sep 1/Oct 1– Jan 31/Feb 28 Jan 2026 Nov 2027

2 Coleman Dam Removal Coleman Diversion Dam Removal Coleman Canal Diversion Closure

As soon as Jan

Sep 1/Oct 1– Jan 31/Feb 28

As soon as Sep

As soon as Nov

* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service granted an extension to the vegetation removal timeframe at Coleman Diversion Dam/Inskip Powerhouse in Phase 1B, which allowed vegetation to be removed through March 15. This extension may be requested for Phase 2 sites if needed.

Table PS-A-2. Environmental work windows.

Environmental Work Windows Timeframes

Migratory Bird Clearing (Vegetation Removal)

Sep 1/Oct 1–Jan 31/Feb 28 (Note: If vegetation cannot be cleared prior to this timeframe, additional mitigation measures will be implemented.)

Salmon/Steelhead In-Stream Work

Beginning as early as May 1 (stream conditions permitting) until Nov 1: South Diversion/South Canal Site, Soap Creek Feeder Diversion Dam Site, Inskip Diversion Dam/South Powerhouse Site, Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam Site Beginning as early as May 1 (stream conditions permitting) until Sep 1: Coleman Diversion Dam/Inskip Powerhouse Site

Bat Gate Installation Sep 1–Oct 30 (to avoid bat maternity season and hibernation period) Northwestern Pond Turtle Upland Exclusion Fencing Before Sep 30 for hibernation habitat; before May 15 for nesting habitat

Volume 1 Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-i

CONTENTS: VOLUME 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

3.0 METHODS

3.1. Contact Landowners

3.2. Pre-construction Survey Methods

3.2.1. Vegetation Surveys

3.2.2. Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle

3.2.3. Nesting Bald Eagles and Other Raptors

3.2.4. Special-Status Nesting Riparian Birds

3.2.5. California Black Rail

3.2.6. Bats

3.2.7. Western Bumble Bee

3.2.8. Monarch Butterfly Host Plants

3.2.9. Northwestern Pond Turtle Upland Habitat Assessments for Nesting and Overwintering

3.3. Perform Clearance Surveys for Special-Status Wildlife Species

3.3.1. Aquatic Clearance Surveys for Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog and Western Pond Turtle

3.3.2. Terrestrial Clearance Surveys

4.0 SCHEDULE

5.0 REPORTING

5.1. Interim Reports

5.2. Draft and Final Summary Reports

5.3. Deliverables

6.0 PROJECT CONTACTS

7.0 REFERENCES

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-ii

TABLES

Table 1-1. Threatened, endangered, and special-status species potentially affected by Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project construction

Table 1-2. Proposed pre-construction survey schedule for special-status wildlife and plant species: Phase 2, South Fork Battle Creek

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Survey Forms for Pre-construction and Clearance Surveys

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-1

As Volume 1 of the Battle Creek Environmental Implementation Plan (EIP), this Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan has been developed to comply with environmental regulations and laws applicable to the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project (Restoration Project).

Pre-construction surveys are required under Mitigation Measure 22 through 28 found in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Plan (MMRP; CDFG 2007) and the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) findings (State Water Board 2008) that were prepared for the Restoration Project in compliance with CEQA. Pre-construction surveys are also required under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Biological Opinion (USFWS 2005a), Conference Opinion (USFWS 2025), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report (USFWS 2005b) prepared for the Restoration Project. Pre-construction surveys for biological resources is also required as an element of Condition 4 of the State Water Board Water Quality Certification for the Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project: Phase 2 No Regrets (FERC Project No. 1121) (State Water Board 2024).

Sequoia has prepared this EIP in coordination with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and USFWS with guidance from an earlier EIP (ICF 2013).

2.0 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The impact analysis conducted for the Restoration Project (Jones & Stokes 2005) identified several threatened, endangered, and special-status species (TESS) listed in Table 1-1 that may be affected by project construction. Additional species identified during a 2023 desktop review have been added to this table.

Table 1-1. Threatened, endangered, and special-status species potentially affected by Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project construction.

Species Scientific Name

Plants Red-flowered bird’s-foot trefoil Acmispon rubriflorus Upswept moonwort Botrychium ascendens Scalloped moonwort Botrychium crenulatum Western goblin Botrychium montanum Northwestern moonwort Botrychium pinnatum Rattlesnake fern Botrypus virginianus Watershield Brasenia schreberi Callahan’s mariposa-lily Calochortus syntrophus Shasta clarkia Clarkia borealis ssp. arida

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-2

Species Scientific Name

White-stemmed clarkia Clarkia gracilis ssp. albicaulis Silky cryptantha Cryptantha crinita Blushing wild buckwheat Eriogonum ursinum var. erubescens Stony Creek spurge Euphorbia ocellata ssp. rattanii Jepson’s horkelia Horkelia daucifolia var. indicta Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop* Gratiola heterosepala Finger rush Juncus digitatus Red Bluff dwarf rush Juncus leiospermus var. leiospermus Legenere Legenere limosa Broad-nerved hump moss Meesia uliginosa Baker’s navarretia Navarretia leucocephala ssp. bakeri Slender Orcutt grass* Orcuttia tenuis Rayless mountain ragwort Packera indecora Ahart’s paronychia* Paronychia ahartii Brownish beaked-rush Rhynchospora capitellata Hall’s rupertia Rupertia hallii Sanford’s arrowhead Sagittaria sanfordii Long-stiped campion Silene occidentalis ssp. longistipitata Maverick clover Trifolium piorkowskii Wildlife Northwestern pond turtle* Actinemys marmorata Foothill yellow-legged frog* Rana boylii Cooper’s hawk* Accipiter cooperii Golden eagle* Aquila chrysaetos Vaux’s swift Chaetura vauxi Little willow flycatcher* Empidonax traillii brewsteri Peregrine falcon* Falco peregrinus Bald eagle* Haliaeetus leucocephalus Yellow-breasted chat* Icteria virens California black rail* Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus Osprey* Pandion haliaetus Yellow warbler Setophaga petechia Pallid bat* Antrozous pallidus Other roosting bat species Chiroptera Townsend’s big-eared bat* Corynorhinus townsendii Spotted bat* Euderma maculatum Western red bat* Lasiurus frantzii (blossevillii) Ringtail Bassariscus astutus Western bumble bee Bombus occidentalis Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus Valley elderberry longhorn beetle* Desmocerus californicus dimorphus Fish River lamprey* Lampetra ayresii Central Valley steelhead* Oncorhynchus mykiss Central Valley fall-/late fall-run Chinook salmon* Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon* Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon* Oncorhynchus tshawytscha

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-3

*Species with an asterisk are the original species identified in 2005.

Biologists have been conducting surveys for TESS species and their habitats at the Restoration Project sites from 2000 to 2018 and again beginning in 2024. The purpose of the Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan is to identify TESS individuals occurring on-site so that measures found in the MBTA Compliance and Threatened, Endangered, and Special-Status Species Monitoring Programs (Volumes 4.3 and 4.4, respectively, of this EIP) can be implemented so that construction activities are in compliance with the USFWS Biological Opinion (USFWS 2005a; USFWS 2016) and the USFWS Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report (USFWS 2005b) prepared for the Restoration Project.

3.0 METHODS

This Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan includes the following actions:

• Performing regularly scheduled pre-construction surveys for special-status wildlife and plant species

• Conducting pre-construction clearance surveys prior to the onset of construction activities

• Preparing letter reports, including draft and final summary reports, and summarizing survey results

3.1. Contact Landowners

In Phase 1A/1B, the environmental contractor was responsible for contacting the landowners on behalf of Reclamation to inform them of upcoming pre-construction surveys and receive their permission for biologists to access their property to conduct the surveys. The environmental contactor is not required to contact the Phase 2 landowners, as all work areas are now covered under Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) easements. PG&E is making all necessary notifications.

3.2. Pre-construction Survey Methods

The following describes methods used for pre-construction surveys. These methods do not include conducting protocol-level surveys for any federally listed wildlife species that have potential to occur in the project vicinity or that are detected during pre-construction surveys; however, CDFW protocol-level surveys will be implemented for target plant species.

Surveys at the project sites will be conducted to determine the presence of the following special-status species or taxa:

• Federally and state-listed plants and special-status plants

• Foothill yellow-legged frog (FYLF; Rana boylii) and northwestern pond turtle (NWPT; Actinemys marmorata)

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-4

• Nesting bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and other raptors

• Nesting riparian birds

• Bats, including maternity colonies, bat roosts, migrant stopover sites, and hibernation sites

• Ringtail (Bassariscus astutus), focusing on potential denning sites

• Western bumble bee (Bombus occidentalis), focusing on floral resources and nests

• Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) host plants

• Noxious weeds

• Oak woodland

The survey methods for each special-status species listed above are described below.

3.2.1. Vegetation Surveys

3.2.1.1. Listed and Special-Status Plants

A qualified botanist will conduct a focused botanical survey of each project site prior to construction.

The survey will follow CDFW’s 2018 Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2018) for rare and endangered plant surveys, including two listed plants (slender Orcutt grass [Orcuttia tenuis], federally listed threatened and state listed endangered, and Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop [Gratiola heterosepala], state listed endangered) and a number of special-status plant species.

Survey efforts will be focused on suitable habitats for the target plants, and survey intensity will vary depending on species richness, habitat type and quality, and the probability of the target plants occurring in a particular habitat type. Depending on the terrain, various survey patterns will be used to survey the sites, including meandering and intuitive controlled transects in areas that contain suitable habitat for the three target plants. All plants encountered will be identified to the level necessary to determine whether they are special-status species or noxious weeds.

These field surveys will be conducted based on the blooming periods that encompass the greatest number of target plants that are evident and identifiable. The botanists may visit nearby known reference populations to verify that the target plants are evident at the time of the field survey (both listed species are known to occur at Hog Lake, approximately 12 miles southwest of the nearest project sites). Plant surveys are valid for 3 years and do not need to be repeated each year before beginning construction.

Any new populations of the target plants identified during pre-construction surveys will be mapped on topographical maps, flagged, photographed, and documented on California Natural Diversity Database online Field Survey Forms. If possible, the botanists will use GPS receivers to obtain coordinates for each population.

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-5

3.2.1.2. Baseline Noxious Weed Surveys

A baseline noxious weed survey, guided by the California Invasive Plant Council, will be performed concurrently with the rare and special-status plan surveys during the blooming periods with the highest probability of detection. For these surveys, qualified botanists will walk systematic transects through the survey areas, which consisted of the Restoration Project site contractor use areas and a 50-foot perimeter buffer, aiming to achieve 100 percent visual coverage of each area surveyed. The surveys will target areas where construction activities will potentially increase the risk of introduction and spread of noxious weeds.

These specifically include areas of potential ground disturbance, vegetation clearing, and vehicle and equipment use. All plant species observed will be identified to the level necessary to determine whether they were noxious weeds, and a list of all nonnative plant species observed in the survey area will be compiled. Locations of each noxious weed population will be mapped using GIS software to create maps, and each occurrence will be evaluated for its potential to spread as a result of project activities.

The updated noxious weed inventory will be used to better guide restoration efforts after the project’s completion.

3.2.1.3. Baseline Oak Woodland Surveys

A certified arborist will oversee and conduct baseline oak woodland surveys prior to construction at the Phase 2 Project sites. The methods for surveying oak woodland habitat follow standard professional practices and are in accordance with Assembly Bill No. 242, Oak Woodland Conservation Act. In general, these methods include:

• Identifying tree species with common name, scientific name, and tree number

• Measuring the diameter at breast height (DBH; diameter data should be collected at 4.5 feet above the ground surface and measured with a calibrated DBH tape)

• Documenting vigor

• Documenting the condition of each tree using the tree rating system described below:1 o Excellent (E): A tree in this category shows no sign of disease, decay, or mistletoe infestation; the trunk and branches are sound, with little evidence of dieback, and have good overall annual growth; and the tree has a balanced branching structure o Good (G): A tree in this category has good annual growth but may exhibit some natural dieback and self-pruning; the tree has a sound trunk and, in general, is a normal healthy tree according to its species; and the tree may be somewhat limited by overcrowding but generally is dominant within the immediate community or canopy and has developed an unhampered natural form

1 The survey methods were taken from the Placer County tree ordinance in the absence of the Tehama and Shasta County tree ordinances.

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-6 o Fair (F): A tree in this category exhibits some twig and branch dieback; decay may be present in the form of tree cavities or dead limbs but does not affect the overall strength or integrity of the tree; and the tree may be suffering from overcrowding, evidenced by sparse growth, unbalanced or asymmetrical growth, or an otherwise somewhat hampered form or reduced vigor o Poor (P): A tree in this category has extensive twig dieback; broken, dead, or decayed limbs; and cavities with significant decay that undermine the structural integrity of the tree; foliage is sparse and annual growth is limited

Noting that surveys were completed in 2012 at the Coleman Diversion Dam Project site in concert with the Inskip Powerhouse Project completed with Phase 1A, the baseline oak woodland surveys covered oak individuals with a DBH of 6 inches and greater located within the Contractor Use Areas, as indicated in the final construction drawings for Coleman Diversion Dam/Inskip Powerhouse Project sites. Baseline surveys will be conducted in 2025 at South Diversion Dam/South Canal, Soap Creek Feeder Diversion Dam, and Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Diversion Dam Project sites.

3.2.2. Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle

Elderberry shrubs (Sambucus sp.) are known habitat for the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus), a federally listed threatened species. The final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Restoration Project (Jones & Stokes 2005) disclosed the number of elderberry shrubs that occur at the project sites; however, as required by the MMRP and the State Water Board CEQA findings, pre-construction surveys will need to be completed prior to the start of construction to calculate the final number of shrubs that would be impacted and to identify those shrubs that will require vegetation protection fencing. In 2016, following the determination that the range of valley elderberry longhorn beetle is limited to below the elevation of the Restoration Project, Reclamation requested a reinitiation of formal consultation. In an October 14, 2016 memorandum, USFWS determined that the Phase 2 Restoration Project is not likely to adversely affect valley elderberry longhorn beetle and that no further conservation and mitigation measures would be needed (USFWS 2016).

However, the project will still adhere to conservation measures detailed in the MMRP, to the extent possible.

During the course of the various other pre-construction survey efforts, most likely the rare plant and western bumble bee surveys, incidental observations of any elderberry shrubs with basal stems greater than 1 inch in diameter will be counted and any changes in the status of the previously recorded plants will be updated and reported.

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-7

3.2.3. Nesting Bald Eagles and Other Raptors

In compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), California Endangered Species Act (CESA), Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, Reclamation seeks to avoid or minimize the “take” of bald eagle nests, eggs, and nestlings that may result from construction-related impacts associated with the Restoration Project. Reclamation’s objectives include avoiding the direct loss of active nests from vegetation removal and trampling as well as avoiding indirect disturbance of nesting birds from construction and helicopter noise, motion and disturbance by construction personnel and/or equipment, artificial lighting, and other activities that might cause nest abandonment by bald eagles or other raptors during the breeding season (February through late August).

The timing and methods for the pre-construction raptor surveys were derived from the Bald Eagle Breeding Survey Instructions (CDFW 2017), the Protocol for Evaluating Bald Eagle Habitat and Populations in California (Garcia and PG&E 2004), and the MMRP (2007). Two qualified biologists will conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting eagles and other raptor species (e.g., peregrine falcon [Falco peregrinus], osprey [Pandion haliaetus], Cooper’s hawk [Accipiter cooperii], red-tailed hawk [Buteo jamaicensis], red-shouldered hawk [B. lineatus]) at the Battle Creek project sites. Three separate visits will be selected to each fall within the following time segments: late February to early March, late April through May, and early June through July. Multiple potential observation stations will be determined initially using aerial and satellite photographs prior to the first survey visit. While on-site, qualified biologists will field assess each predetermined location and establish a minimum of four survey stations at locations that provide expansive views of the individual project sites. These stations will be numbered, flagged, and identified using a hand-held GPS unit.

The biologists will spend approximately 30 minutes at each survey area scanning for raptors using binoculars and spotting scopes. Data (including negative results) will be recorded at 15-minute intervals on a standardized survey form (Appendix A). Transects will be walked throughout the project sites to search all trees and other suitable nesting substrates for active raptor nests or signs of nesting activity (e.g., white-wash, plucking posts, or stick nests). Any eagles or other raptors exhibiting nesting behavior (e.g., territorial displays, pair bonding, carrying food or nesting material) will be followed to find the exact nest locations, if possible. All located nests within the construction zones or within an approximately 0.5-mile radius will be identified on maps and aerial photographs, and their coordinates will be recorded using GPS. If such behaviors are observed or an existing raptor nest is found, additional measures will be implemented to avoid take under the Federal ESA (see Volume 4.4 of this EIP).

Volume 1, Pre-construction Wildlife and Plant Survey Plan

1-8

3.2.4. Special-Status Nesting Riparian Birds

In compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Reclamation seeks to avoid or minimize the take of nests, eggs, and nestlings of special-status bird species that may result from construction-related impacts of the Restoration Project. Reclamation’s objectives include avoiding the direct loss of active nests from vegetation removal and trampling as well as minimizing indirect disturbance of nesting birds from construction and helicopter noise, motion and disturbance by construction personnel and/or equipment, artificial lighting, and other activities that might cause nest abandonment or failure during the breeding season (early March through late August) for native bird species that are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The final EIS/EIR for the Restoration Project, MMRP, and State Water Board CEQA findings describe specific monitoring and protection commitments. These include work exclusion zones for special-status bird species if nesting pairs or active nests are observed in or adjacent to the project sites (e.g., Vaux’s swift [Chaetura vauxi], little willow flycatcher [Empidonax traillii brewsteri], California yellow warbler [Dendroica petechia brewsteri], and yellow-breasted chat [Icteria virens]).

Each year that construction occurs during the avian nesting season (currently anticipated to be 2026 and 2027 for the South Diversion Dam and South Canal Removal project and 2027-2028 for the Coleman Diversion Dam Removal project), a team of qualified biologists will conduct surveys for special-status riparian birds at active project areas. Three rounds of surveys will be conducted from May 15–July 15, with at least one survey between June 20 and July 1. Surveys will be conducted in the previous year prior to construction if construction begins during or before the May 15–July 25 time period.

Sequoia anticipates the primary survey method will be an area search adapted from previous riparian studies performed in the Sacramento Valley and Sierra Nevada foothills (Ralph et al. 1993). While this survey is focused on the yellow-breasted chat and little willow flycatcher, incidental observations of other protected nesting bird species will also be recorded and reported.

Surveys will be conducted within the proposed project site and will include all riparian habitats, including a 500-foot buffer around said habitat, where safety and access allows. Surveys may include any staging areas associated with the above locations. Each area search plot will be covered in approximately 1 hour to provide comparable search time at each plot. The team of biologists will perform surveys in the morning, usually between the hours of 0530 and 1000, when avian activity is highest. The order of sites surveyed will be varied for each survey to reduce time-of-day effects.