The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSP202100008 Environmental Assessment 2021-03-15Jefferson Mill Hydroelectric Project Environmental Assessment Prepared by R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. for Natel Energy, Inc. Applicant: Let It Go, LLC November 24, 2020 CONTENTS 1 Environmental Setting.........................................................................................................................1 1.1 Vegetative Cover.......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Fish and Wildlife Resources....................................................................................................... 10 1.2.1 Aquatic Insects................................................................................................................... 15 1.2.2 Wildlife Resources.............................................................................................................. 16 1.2.3 Recreational Fishing and Hunting...................................................................................... 17 1.3 Water Quality and Quantity....................................................................................................... 18 1.3.1 Hardware River.................................................................................................................. 18 1.3.2 Hydrology...........................................................................................................................18 1.3.3 Beneficial Use Designations............................................................................................... 21 1.3.4 Water Quality..................................................................................................................... 23 1.3.4.1 Water Temperature.......................................................................................................24 1.3.4.2 Specific Conductance.....................................................................................................25 1.3.4.3 Bacteria..........................................................................................................................25 1.4 Land and Water Uses................................................................................................................. 26 1.5 Recreational Use........................................................................................................................ 27 1.5.1 Regional Recreation...........................................................................................................27 1.5.1.4 James River Water Trail................................................................................................. 27 1.5.2 Local Recreation................................................................................................................. 27 1.5.2.5 Biscuit Run State Park.................................................................................................... 27 1.5.2.6 Walnut Creek Park......................................................................................................... 28 1.5.2.7 Fulfillment Farms...........................................................................................................29 1.5.2.8 Totier Creek Park............................................................................................................ 29 1.5.2.9 Hardware River Boating................................................................................................. 29 1.6 Socio-Economic Conditions........................................................................................................ 30 1.7 Historical and Archeological Resources..................................................................................... 31 1.8 Visual Resources........................................................................................................................ 35 1.9 Endangered or Threatened Species, Critical Habitats................................................................ 35 1.9.1 Fish and Wildlife................................................................................................................. 35 1.9.1.1 James Spinymussel Mussel............................................................................................ 37 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Ei September 2020 1.9.1.2 Brook Floater Mussel..................................................................................................... 38 1.9.1.3 Atlantic Pigtoe Mussel................................................................................................... 39 1.9.1.4 Green Floater Mussel.....................................................................................................39 1.9.1.5 Yellow Lance Mussel...................................................................................................... 39 1.9.1.6 Tri-colored Bat............................................................................................................... 40 1.9.1.7 Northern Long -Eared Bat...............................................................................................40 1.9.1.8 Little Brown Bat.............................................................................................................. 40 1.9.1.9 Peregrine Falcon............................................................................................................ 41 1.9.1.10 Loggerhead Shrike...................................................................................................... 41 1.9.1.11 Spotted Turtle............................................................................................................41 1.9.1.12 Timber Rattlesnake....................................................................................................42 1.9.2 Plants................................................................................................................................. 42 2 Environmental Impacts......................................................................................................................45 2.1 Vegetative Cover........................................................................................................................ 45 2.1.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 45 2.1.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation..................................................................................45 2.2 Fish and Wildlife Resources....................................................................................................... 46 2.2.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 46 2.2.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation.................................................................................. 46 2.3 Water Quality and Quantity....................................................................................................... 48 2.3.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 48 2.3.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation.................................................................................. 48 2.4 Land and Water Uses.................................................................................................................49 2.4.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 49 2.4.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation..................................................................................49 2.5 Recreational Use........................................................................................................................ 49 2.5.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 49 2.5.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation.................................................................................. 49 2.6 Socio-Economic Conditions........................................................................................................ 50 2.6.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 50 2.6.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation.................................................................................. 50 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Eii September 2020 2.7 Historical and Archeological Resources..................................................................................... 50 2.7.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 50 2.7.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation.......... 2.8 Visual Resources ................................................ 50 611 2.8.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 51 2.8.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation..................................................................................51 2.9 Endangered or Threatened Species, Critical Habitats................................................................ 51 2.9.1 Potential Impacts of Project............................................................................................... 51 2.9.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation.................................................................................. 52 3 References......... LIST OF TABLES 53 Table E1-1. Native riparian plant species of the Virginia Piedmont Region (VDCR 2011)........................... 2 Table E1-2. Fish and mussel species in the Hardware River. Source: VaFWIS 2020................................. 13 Table E1-3. Mussel species present (or with designated critical habitat) in the Hardware River and correspondingfish hosts............................................................................................................................16 Table E1-4. Monthly exceedance flows for the Hardware River at Jefferson Mill (1939-2019)................ 20 Table E1-5. Flood frequency estimates for USGS Gage 02030000 (Austin et al. 2011)............................. 21 Table E1-6. Extreme values during continuous water quality monitoring recorded at 15-minute intervals from October 20016 — September 2008 at USGS gage 02030000 Hardware River Below Briery Creek, nearScottsville, VA.................................................................................................................................... 24 Table E1-7. Land use acreage in the Hardware River and North Fork Hardware River watersheds (VADEQ 2015).......................................................................................................................................................... 26 Table E1-8. Summary of historical resources in the vicinity of the Jefferson Mill project area identified by a Virginia Department of Historic Resources archives search on March 13, 2020. ................................... 34 Table E1-9. Federally -and -State -listed threatened and endangered animal species and animal species of conservation concern known or likely to occur within a 2-mile radius around point Jefferson Mill in Albemarle and Fluvanna Counties, VA.......................................................................................................36 Table E1-10. Plant species with federal or state legal status in the commonwealth of Virginia and those found to occur in Albemarle or Fluvanna Counties (VDCR 2020)..............................................................42 LIST OF FIGURES Figure E1-1. Wetland classifications for the Jefferson Mill powerhouse project area from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory (FWS 2020) accessed May 29, 2020 ............................. 9 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Eiii September 2020 Figure E1-2. Stream reaches as per VaFWIS, and Jefferson Mill project location ..................................... 11 Figure E1-3. Daily flows for the Hardware River at Jefferson Mill(1939-2019)......................................... 19 Figure E1-4. Daily flows for the Hardware River at Jefferson Mill in a wet (2003), average (1995), and dry (2002) year................................................................................................................................................. 19 Figure E1-5. Monthly exceedance flows for the Hardware River at Jefferson Mill (1939-2019)............... 20 Figure E1-6. Daily mean temperature during continuous water quality monitoring recorded at 15-minute intervals from October 20016 — September 2008 at USGS gage 02030000 Hardware River below Briery Creek, near Scottsville, VA....... .. 24 Figure E1-7. Daily mean specific conductance during continuous water quality monitoring recorded at 15-minute intervals from October 20016 — September 2008 at USGS gage 02030000 Hardware River below Briery Creek, near Scottsville, VA. .. 25 Figure E1-8. Local recreational resources near Jefferson Mill................................................................... 28 Figure E1-9. Map of historical resources in the vicinity of the Jefferson Mill project area identified by a Virginia Department of Historic Resources archives search on March 13, 2020....................................... 33 Figure E1-10. James Spinymussel distribution in Virginia with the Hardware River circled for reference. Figurefrom Petty 2005.............................................................................................................................. 38 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Eiv September 2020 Exnvironmental Assessment 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 1.1 Vegetative Cover The Jefferson Hydroelectric Project is surrounded by a mixture of native forest, silviculture, agriculture, and low -density residential development. Centuries of land -use practices have significantly altered the vegetation patterns in the project area. The vegetation type in the Jefferson Mill Project Area is characteristic of a piedmont region floodplain and riparian forest where human activities and flooding and flood -related environmental factors affect vegetation composition and dynamics. The forest canopy is typically a mix of mesophytic and widespread species such as tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), sweetgum (Liquidamborstyraciflua), and red maple (Acer rubrum), along with characteristic alluvial and bottomland species such as sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides), river birch (eetula nigra), boxelder (Acer negundo), sugarberry (Celtis loevigato), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxi), and cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda) (VDCR 2011; Table E1-1). Successional areas and the understory of a Piedmont riparian forest is typically dominated by the aforementioned bottomland tree species, but may contain more mesophytic species including spicebush (Lindera benzoin), yellowroot (Xanthorhiza simplicissima), bottlebrush grass (Elymus hystrix), Canada wild rye (Elymus canadensis), woodoats (Chasmanthium latifolium), and false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica). Emergent vegetation along stream margins is typically dominated by sedges, rushes, cattails, buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), hazel alder (Alnus serrulate), black willow (Salix nigra), and red maple (VDCR 2011; Table E1-1). Piedmont/low mountain alluvial plant communities are mostly in fair to poor condition due to past land use activities including extensive clearing, grazing, catastrophic flooding, and invasive exotic weeds (Fleming et al. 2001). Habitat fragmentation and hydrological alteration are the major threats to bottomland hardwood forests in the Piedmont region. Fragmentation of forest stands into smaller and smaller patches leads to disruption of natural processes such as plant succession, nutrient cycling, and litter accumulation. Loblolly pine (Pinus toedo) plantations have become an important component of the piedmont region forests of Albemarle County (ACBWG 2004). Though loblolly pine is native to Virginia, the upper Piedmont is not within the natural range of this species. In many instances, the loblolly plantations have displaced native hardwood and mixed pine -hardwood forests R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E1 September 2020 There are no specific data regarding the presence of invasive botanicals within the vicinity of the project site. However, invasive plant species are a significant concern in Albemarle and Fluvanna Counties. Exotic invasive plants including Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus), tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissim), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum), blue grass and fescues, and other species are commonly widespread in the understory (Fleming et al. 2001; VDCR 2011). The native grass communities that were present would have been mostly composed of warm season prairie species (big and little bluestem, Indian grass, and broomsedge) and much different from the introduced species common today (blue grass and fescues) in pastures, hay fields, and lawns (Plant NoVa Natives 2014). Aquatic invasive plant invasive including duckweed (Lemnoideae spp.), Hydrilla (H. verticillata), watermeal (Wolffia spp.), coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum), elodea (Elodea spp.), water milfoil (Myriophyllum spp.), are common in the region's slow -moving streams, ponds, and lakes and threaten native aquatic plants(Fleming et al. 2001; VDCR 2011). Table E1-1. Native riparian plant species of the Virginia Piedmont Region (VDCR 2011). Riparian Max Light Moisture Zone Scientific Name Common Name Duration Height S P F L M H 1 2 3 4 (ft) Fern & Fern Allies Athyrium asplenioides Southern ladyfern Perennial 3 x x x x x Botrypus virginianus rattlesnake fern Perennial 1 x x x x x Onocleasensibilis+ sensitive fern Perennial 3 x x x x x x Osmunda spectabilis royalfern Perennial 5 x x x x x Osmundastrum cinnamomeum cinnamon fern Perennial 6 x x x x x x Polystichum acrostichoides Christmas fern Perennial 2 x x x Thelypteris polustris marsh fern Perennial 2 x x x x x x x R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E2 September 2020 Scientific Name Common Name Duration Max Height (ft) Light Moisture Riparian Zone S P F L M H 1 2 3 4 Grasses, Sedges & Rushes Agrostis perennans autumn bentgrass Perennial 4 x x x x x x x x Andropogon gerardii big bluestem Perennial 6 x x x x x x Andropogon glomeratus bushy bluestem Perennial 6 x x x x x Arundinaria tecta switch cane Perennial 25 x x x x x x x x Carexcrinita long hair sedge Perennial 5 x x x x x x x Carexlurida sallow sedge Perennial 3 x x x x x x x Carexstricta tussock sedge Perennial 3 x x x x x x x Chosmanthium latifolium+ river oats, spanglegrass Perennial 5 x x x x x x x Dichanthelium clandestinum deer -tongue Perennial 2 x x x x x x x Dichanthelium commutatum variable panicgrass Perennial 5 x x x x x Dulichium orundinaceum dwarf bamboo Perennial 3 x x x x x x Elymus hystrix bottlebrush grass Perennial 4 x x x x x x Elymus virginicus Virginia wild rye Perennial 4 x x x x x x x Juncus canadensis Canada rush Perennial 3 x x x x x x x Juncus effusus soft rush Perennial 3 x x x x x x x Leersia oryzoides rice cutgrass Perennial 5 x x x x x x x Ponicum virgatum switch grass Perennial 6 x x x x x x x x Socchorum giganteum giant plumegrass Perennial 10 x x x x x x x Scirpus cyperinus woolgrass bulrush Perennial 6 x x x x x x x Sparganium americanum American bur -reed Perennial 3 x x x x Tripsocum dactyloides gama grass Perennial 10 x x x x x x x Typha latifolia broad-leaved cattail Perennial 5 x x x x R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E3 September 2020 Riparian Max Light Moisture Zone Scientific Name Common Name Duration Height S P F L M H 1 2 3 4 (ft) Herbs Amsonia tabernaemontana blue star Perennial 3 x x x x x x Arisaema triphyllum Jack-in-the-pulpit Perennial 2 x x x x Asarum canadense+ wild ginger Perennial 1 x x x Asclepias incarnata swamp milkweed Perennial 5 x x x x x Bidens cernua+ nodding beggar -ticks Annual 3 x x x x x x x Chomaecrista fasciculata+ partridge pea Annual 2 x x x x Cheloneglabra white turtlehead Perennial 3 x x x x x Chrysogonum virginianum green and gold Perennial 1 x x x Conoclinium coelestinum blue mistflower Perennial 3 x x x x x Coreopsis tripteris tall coreopsis Perennial 9 x x x x x x Delphinium tricorne dwarf larkspur Perennial 3 x x x x dutchman's Dicentra cucullaria breeches Perennial 1 x x x Doellingeria umbellata flat -top white aster Perennial 7 x x x x x Equisetum hyemale horsetail Perennial 3 x x x x x x x x Eupatorium perfoliatum common boneset Perennial 6 x x x x x x x Eutrochium fistulosum Joe-pye weed Perennial 7 x x x x x x x Helenium autumnale sneezeweed Perennial 5 x x x x x x Helianthus ten -petaled decopetalus sunflower Perennial 6 x x x x x Helianthus divaricatus woodland sunflower Perennial 5 x x x R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E4 September 2020 Scientific Name Common Name Duration Max Height (ft) Light Moisture Riparian Zone S P IFL M H 1 2 3 4 Hibiscus moscheutos Eastern rosemallow Perennial 8 x x x x Iris virginica Virginia blue flag Perennial 3 x x x x x Lilium superbum turk's cap lily Perennial 8 x x x x x x Lobelia cardinalis cardinal flower Perennial 5 x x x x x x Lobelia siphilitica great blue lobelia Perennial 3 x x x x x Maianthemum racemosum false Solomon's seal Perennial 3 x x x x x Mertensia virginica Virginia bluebells Perennial 2 x x x x x x Mimulus ringens monkeyflower Perennial 4 x x x x x Nymphoea odorata American water lily Perennial 1 x x x Oenothera fruticosa sundrops Perennial 2 x x x x Pockera ourea+ golden ragwort Perennial 4 x x x x x x Peltandra virginica arrow arum Perennial 3 x x x x x Phlox divaricata woodland phlox Perennial 2 x x x x x Phlox paniculato summer phlox Perennial 4 x x x x x Podophyllum peltatum+ mayapple Perennial 2 x x x x Polemonium reptons Jacob'sladder Perennial 2 x x x x Pontederia cordata pickerel weed Perennial 3 x x x Rhexia virginica Virginia meadow- beauty Perennial 2 x x x Rudbeckia laciniato cut -leaved coneflower Perennial 12 x x x x x sagittaria latifolia broadleaf arrowhead Perennial 3 x x x x Soururus cernuus lizard's tail Perennial 4 x x x x x solidago rugoso+ rough -stemmed goldenrod Perennial 8 x x x x x Verbena hostata blue vervain Perennial 5 x x x x x x Vernonia New York ironweed Perennial 8 x x x x x x R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E5 September 2020 Scientific Name Common Name Duration Max Height (ft) Light Moisture Riparian Zone S P F L M H 1 2 3 4 noveboracensis Viola cucullata marsh blue violet Perennial 1 tXx x x Viola pubescens yellow violet Perennial 1 x x x Large Trees Acerrubrum red maple Perennial 68 x x x x x x x Betula lenta sweet birch Perennial 60 x x x x x Betula nigra river birch Perennial 70 x x x x x Diospyros virginiana persimmon Perennial 55 x x x x x x x x Fraxinus americana white ash Perennial 120 x x x x x x Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Perennial 50 x x x x x Juglans nigra black walnut Perennial 150 x x x x x x Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Perennial 130 x x x x x x x x Liriodendron tulipifera tulip poplar Perennial 150 x x x x Nyssasylvatica black gum Perennial 95 x x x x x x Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood Perennial 70 x x x x Pinus taeda labially pine Perennial 100 x x x x x x Platanus occidentalis sycamore Perennial 100 x x x x x x x Quercus bicolor swamp white oak Perennial 100 x x x x x Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Perennial 100 x x x x x x Quercus palustris pin oak Perennial 70 x x x x x x Quercus phellos willow oak Perennial 100 x x x x x x x Medium Trees Amelanchier arborea downy serviceberry Perennial 36 x x x x lanchier rcanadensis Canada serviceberry Perennial 23 x x x x x x R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E6 September 2020 Scientific Name Common Name Duration Max Height (ft) Light Moisture Riparian Zone S P F L M H 1 2 3 4 Asimina triloba paw paw Perennial 25 x x x x x Corpus alternifolia alternate -leaf dogwood Perennial 25 x x x x x Crataegus viridis green hawthorn Perennial 30 x x x x x x Morus rubra red mulberry Perennial 70 x x x x x Ostrya virginiana Eastern hop- hornbeam Perennial 50 x x x x Rhus glabra smooth sumac Perennial 20 x x x x x salixnigra black willow Perennial 60 x x x x x x x Shrubs & Small Trees Alnusserrulato hazel alder Perennial 30 x x x x x x x Aronia arbutifolia red chokeberry Perennial 5 x x x x x x x Aronia melanocarpa black chokeberry Perennial 8 x x x x x x x x Cepholonthus occidentalis buttonbush Perennial 15 x x x x x Corpus amomum silky dogwood Perennial 10 x x x x x x Eubotrysracemosa fetterbush Perennial 7 x x x x x Hydrangea arborescens wild hydrangea Perennial 6 x x x x Ilexdecidua deciduous holly Perennial 30 x x x x x x Ilex verticillata winterberry Perennial 10 x x x x x x x Lindera benzoin spicebush Perennial 12 x x x x Rhododendron viscosum swamp azalea Perennial 12 x x x x x x Rubus allegheniensis Alleghany blackberry Perennial 6 x x x x x salixsericea silkywillow Perennial 12 x x x x x sambucus conadensis common elderberry Perennial 7 x x x x x x Vaccinium corymbosum highbush blueberry Perennial 12 x x x x x x x x x R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E7 September 2020 Jefferson Mill ICD Riparian Max Light Moisture Zone Scientific Name Common Name Duration Height S P F L M H 1 2 3 4 (ft) Viburnum Southern arrow- dentatum wood viburnum Perennial 10 x x x x Viburnumprunifolium ixx black -haw viburnumPerennial 30 x x x Vines Bignonia capreolata crossvine Perennial 50 x x x x x x x Celastrus scandens climbing bittersweet Perennial 15 x x x x x Clematis virginiana virgin's bower Perennial 15 x x x x x x Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper Perennial 40 x x x x x x Key: Light Requirements: S = Shade, P = Partial Sun, F = Full Sun Moisture Requirements: L = Low Moisture, M = Moderate Moisture, H = High Moisture Riparian Buffer Zones: 1= Emergent, 2 = Riverside Thicket, 3 = Saturated Forest, 4 = Well -drained Forest R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E8 September 2020 No specific wetland inventories have been conducted for the Jefferson Mill Project site. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory mapper (USFWS 2020a) was used to identify jurisdictional wetlands to gain a general sense of the distribution and characteristics of wetlands near the project location (Figure E1-1). The Hardware River at Jefferson Mill is mapped as riverine habitat classification R2UBH and includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats contained within the stream channel (USFWS 2020a). The designation 2 refers to the low gradient character of the reach, UB refers to unconsolidated bottom, and H refers to permanently flooded water regime and wetted throughout the year. Just upstream of the Jefferson Mill powerhouse, the inside of the river bend is mapped as freshwater forested/shrub wetland (PF01A; Figure E1-1). This area is palustrine (P), forested (FO), with broad leaf deciduous flora (1), and experiences a temporary flooded water regime (A) (USFWS 2020a). Nationaetlands Invento Wetlands l W May 29. 2020 yam aeg�M-K•us r.n.www y a mnenirou.IM Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland ■ Lake msee ..�oa..m wn c. wTrmawurammm. ww.a arece..e ee. ■ Estuarine and Marine Deepwaler . Freshwater Forested15hruh Wetland E] Other Q Estuarine and Madne Wetland Freshwater Pond E Riverine Figure E1-1. Wetland classifications for the Jefferson Mill powerhouse project area from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory (FWS 2020) accessed May 29, 2020. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E9 September 2020 Jefferson Mill ICD 1.2 Fish and Wildlife Resources For the most comprehensive assessment of fish species distribution in the Hardware River, and per the direction of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF), an online query of the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service was used as the primary source of information for this review (VaFWIS 2020). Results are shown by taxonomic family, conservation status, stream reach by hydrologic unit code (USGS 6" Order Hydrologic Unit) in which they are present, and mussel species for which they are known hosts (Table E1-2). For simplicity, the stream reaches are presented as follows below and shown on Figure E1-2. The Jefferson Mill site is located in the Upper Mainstem Hardware River, approximately 2.5 river - miles upstream of Antioch Road, which is the upstream terminus of the Lower Mainstem Hardware River (Figure E1-2). Lower Mainstem Hardware River: "JM49— Hardware River -Woodson Creek"; HUC12- 020802031204 • Upper Mainstem Hardware River: "JM48 — Hardware River -Turkey Run"; HUC12- 020802031203 • South Fork Hardware River: "JM47 - South Fork Hardware River"; HUC12- 020802031202 North Fork Hardware River: `7M46 — North Fork Hardware River"; HUC12- 020802031201 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E10 September 2020 !f North Fork - South Fork /Upper Mainstem �d *Jefferson Mill Lower Mainstem James River Figure El-2. Stream reaches as per VaFWIS, and Jefferson Mill project location. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Ell September 2020 At least fifty-three fish species belonging to eleven families were identified as potentially present in the Hardware River (Table E1-2; VaFWIS 2020). One fish species, American Eel, is listed as Tier III High Conservation Need under the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan and three species (American Shad, Blueback Herring, and Alewife) are listed as Tier IV Moderate Conservation Need (Table E1-2). Many fish species potentially present in the Hardware River are sport fishes such as Brown Trout, Rainbow Trout, Smallmouth Bass, and Largemouth Bass, Rock bass, Warmouth, Green Sunfish, Redbreast Sunfish, Redear Sunfish, Pumpkinseed, Bluegill, Channel Catfish, Flathead Catfish, American Shad, Blueback Herring, Alewife, Longnose Gar, and Chain Pickerel. American Eels are a commercially important species with fisheries for both young (glass) eels and adult eels. Spawning for most species with the potential to be present occurs during the spring and early summer, from April through June. The mainstem Hardware River up to the confluence of the North and South forks is listed as a potential anadromous fish stream (VaFWIS 2020). There are five migratory species potentially present in the lower Hardware River that express anadromous or catadromous life histories. These include Alewife, American Eel, American Shad, Blueback Herring, and Sea Lamprey (Table E1-2; VaFWIS 2020). Under most flow conditions, the Jefferson Mill Dam currently acts as an impediment to upstream migrating fishes. Some American Eel are able to ascend the Jefferson Mill Dam; however, the dam is assumed to be a complete passage barrier to shad, herring, and lamprey species (Table E1-2). In 1994, the VDGIF and the USFWS began stocking efforts for American Shad recovery in the James River at the confluence with the Hardware River. Hatchery reared American Shad fry are released annually between mid -April and mid -May at the Hardware River Wildlife Management Area in Fluvanna County, Virginia (ASMFC 2007). American Shad and Sea Lamprey passage was restored at Bosher's Dam in 1999 (James River km 182) and upstream migration occurs from April to early June (Fisher 2007). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E12 September 2020 Table El-2. Fish and mussel species in the Hardware River. Source: VaFWIS 2020. Lower Upper South North Family/Taxon Common Name Scientific Name Status* Host Mussel Mainstem Mainstem Fork Fork Anguillidae Eel, American Anguilla rostrato Ilia Elliptio complonato ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Catostomidae Chubsucker, creek Erimyzon oblongus ✓ ✓ Jumprock, black Moxostomacervinum ✓ Sucker, northern hog Hypentelium nigricons ✓ Sucker, torrent Thoburnia rhothoeca ✓ ✓ ✓ Sucker, white Catostomus commersonii ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Centrarchidae Bass, largemouth Micropterussalmoides Elliptio complanata ✓ ✓ ✓ Bass, rock Ambloplites rupestris ✓ Bass, smallmouth Micropterus dolomieu ✓ ✓ ✓ Bluegill Lepomismocrochirus Villosoconstricto ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus ✓ Sunfish, green Lepomis cyonellus Elliptio complanata ✓ ✓ Sunfish, redbreast Lepomisouritus ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Sunfish,redear Lepomismicrolophus ✓ Warmouth Lepomis gulosus ✓ Clupeidae Shad, gizzard Dorosoma cepedianum ✓ Shad, American Alososapidissima IVa Potential Potential Herring, Blueback Aloso aestivolis IVa Potential Potential Alewife Aloso pseudohorengus IVa Potential Potential Cyprinidae Chub, bluehead Nocomisleptocephalus Parvaspina collina ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Chub, bull Nocomisraneyi ✓ ✓ Chub, creek Semotilus otromaculatus ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Chub, river Nocomismicropogon ✓ Dace, blacknose Rhinichthys atratulus Parvaspina collina ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Dace, longnose Rhinichthyscotoractoe ✓ ✓ Dace, mountain redbelly Chrosomus oreas Parvaspina collina ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Dace, rosyside Clinostomus funduloides Parvaspina collina ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Fallfish Semotilus corporalis ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Shiner, comely Notropis amoenus ✓ Shiner, common Luxilus cornutus ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Shiner, golden Notemigonus crysoleucas ✓ ✓ Shiner, rosefin Lythrurus ordens Parvaspina collina ✓ ✓ Shiner, rosyface Notropis rubellus ✓ ✓ Shiner, satinfin Cyprinello onolostona Parvaspina collina ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E13 September 2020 Lower Upper South North Family/Taxon Common Name Scientific Name Status* Host Mussel Mainstem Mainstem Fork Fork Shiner, spottail Notropis hudsonius ✓ ✓ Shiner, swallowtail Notropis procne Parvaspina collina ✓ Shiner, telescope Notropis telescopus ✓ ✓ Stoneroller, central Compostomo anomalum Parvaspina collina ✓ ✓ Esocidae Pickerel, chain Esoxniger ✓ Ictaluridae Bullhead, yellow Ameiurusnatolis ✓ Catfish, channel Ictolurus punctatus ✓ Catfish, flathead Pylodictis olivoris ✓ Madtom, margined Noturusinsignis ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Lepisosteidae Gar, longnose Lepisosteus osseus ✓ Percidae Darter, fantail Etheostomajlobellare Villosaconstricta ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Darter, glassy Etheostoma vitreum ✓ ✓ Darter, johnny Etheostomanigrum ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Darter, Roanoke Percinoroonoka ✓ ✓ Darter, stripeback Percino notogromma ✓ ✓ Petromyzontidae Lamprey, sea Petromyzon morinus Potential Potential Poeciliidae Mosquitofish, eastern Gombusioholbrooki ✓ Salmonidae Trout, rainbow Solmo trutto ✓ Trout, brown Oncorhynchus mykiss ✓ Bivalves Clam, Asian Corbiculajluminea ✓ ✓ Floater, green Lasmigona subviridis ST; Ila ✓ Mussel, eastern elliptio Elliptio complonato ✓ ✓ Rainbow, Notched Villosaconstricta Ilia ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Spinymussel, James Parvaspina collina FESE; la ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ * FE=Federal Endangered; FT=Federal Threatened; SE=State Endangered; ST=State Threatened. I=VA Wildlife Action Plan -Ter I - Critical Conservation Need; Il=VA Wildlife Action Plan -Tier II - Very High Conservation Need; III=VA Wildlife Action Plan -Tier III - High Conservation Need; IV=VA Wildlife Action Plan -Tier IV - Moderate Conservation Need. Virginia Wildlife Action Plan Conservation Opportunity Ranking: a - On the ground management strategies/actions exist and can be feasibly implemented. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E14 September 2020 At least four native freshwater mussel species and one non-native bivalve have been documented in the Hardware River (Table E1-2). Native species include the James Spinymussel (Parvaspina collina), Notched Rainbow (Villosa constricta), Eastern Elliptio (Elliptio complanate), and Green Floater (Lasmigona subviridis). All four native species were reported from the lower mainstem while the James Spinymussel and the Notched Rainbow were reported from the North and South Forks (Table E1-2). The non-native species found in the watershed is the Asian Clam (Corbicula fluminea). Fish species known to be hosts during the glochidial life stage of the native freshwater mussels are included in Table E1-3. The James Spinymussel is federally and state listed as an endangered species and discussed in further detail in the Endangered or Threatened Species, Critical Habitats (Section 1.9). 1.2.1 Aquatic Insects No specific information was available for the aquatic insect community in the project vicinity. It is likely, however, that physical and chemical conditions are similar to other areas impacted by agriculture and urbanization. Under such conditions: (1) nutrient levels are often elevated due to inputs, (2) gravels and other intermediate -sized substrates are often diminished due to water retention of upstream sources (e.g. small dams, feeder canals, and water storage ponds), and (3) reduced channel and habitat complexity are a result of channelization over time. As a result of these conditions, aquatic invertebrate diversity is commonly reduced and often dominated by collectors such as blackflies and caddisflies, which thrive on the fine organic matter, and grazers (such as many mayflies), which feed on the abundant algae nourished by elevated nutrient levels (Ward and Stanford 1979). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E15 September 2020 Table E1-3. Mussel species present (or with designated critical habitat) in the Hardware River and corresponding fish hosts. Source: Freshwater Mussel Host Database (https://mollusk.inhs.illinois.edu/57-2L) . Mussel Species Fish Hosts Green Floater Losmigono subviridis Unknown, may not require fish host Eel, American* Bass, largemouth Eastern Elliptio Elliptio complonoto Sunfish, green Bluegill Bluegill Darter, fantail Stoneroller, central Notched Rainbow Villoso constricts Sunfish, redbreast Bass, smallmouth Bass, rock Chub, bluehead Dace, blacknose Dace, mountain redbelly Dace, rosyside James Spinymussel Porvaspino collina Shiner, rosefin Shiner, satinfin Stoneroller, central Shiner, swallowtail * Primary host 1.2.2 Wildlife Resources The project area includes habitat commonly used by white-tailed deer. Other large mammals that may occur in the riparian corridor include black bear, raccoons, opossum, red or eastern grey fox, and striped skunk. Bobwhite quail, Canada goose, mourning doves, and woodcocks are all common game birds in the project vicinity. Typical non -game birds include cliff swallows, kingfishers, willow flycatchers, yellow warblers, red-headed woodpeckers, cerulean warblers, yellow billed cuckoos, and a variety of ducks, hawks, and owls. Neotropical migratory birds, which are raptors, shorebirds, and songbirds that breed in North America but migrate to R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E16 September 2020 Central or South America during the winter, are likely to use a variety of areas within the project vicinity. 1.2.3 Recreational Fishing and Hunting Recreation in the Hardware River includes hunting, fishing, and camping. However, public access is limited. The Hardware River does not have any designated access points for boat launch and is navigable by boat for only a few months of the year. Located approximately 14 miles downstream of Jefferson Mill, at the confluence of the Hardware and James rivers, the 1,034-acre Hardware River Wildlife Management Area (HRWMA) provides opportunities for fishing, hunting and wildlife viewing activities. Bottomland and upland forest also provide wildlife viewing and hunting opportunities for deer, squirrels, rabbits, wild turkey, quail, woodcock, and waterfowl (VDGIF 2020a). Birding is a popular recreational activity at the HRWMA and 121 species have been reported (eBird 2020). Fishing in the HRWMA can be excellent for Largemouth Bass, Smallmouth Bass, Channel Catfish, and a variety of sunfishes. The Hardware River within the HRWMA also provides opportunity for a seasonal cold -water trout fishery. Rainbow and Brown trout are stocked by the Virginia Department of Game an Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) three times per year from October through May in the lower 3-miles reaches of the management area. This section of river is managed by the VDGIF as Delayed Harvest Waters meaning that from October through May fishing is permitted under the following restrictions: (1) only artificial lures may be used; (2) no trout may be in possession (catch -and -release only); (3) no bait may be in possession while fishing; and (4) a trout license is required from October 1 through June 15 (VDGIF 2020b). From June through September, restrictions 1 through 3 do not apply and these waters are regulated as designated stocked trout waters which includes general statewide creel limits of 6 trout per day and no fish less than 7 inches (VDGIF 2020b). The James River from Big Island Dam to the 1-95 James River Bridge and the Hardware River from its confluence with the James River up to the Route 6 Bridge are listed as fish consumption advisory reaches by the Virginia Department of Health (VDH 2O20). The contaminant identified in these river reaches is Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCBs). American Eel, Carp, Flathead Catfish, Gizzard Shad, and Quillback Carpsucker are the species listed under the advisory and the health department recommends that no more than two meals -per -month of these fishes are consumed (VDH 2O20). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E17 September 2020 1.3 Water Quality and Quantity 1.3.1 Hardware River The Jefferson Mill Hydroelectric project is on the Hardware River Virginia. The Hardware River is a 23.3-mile-long tributary that drains the Appalachian Mountains to the southeast and into the James River. The James River is Virginia's largest River, draining approximately 10,000 square miles and flowing 340 miles from the Blue Ridge Mountains to Chesapeake Bay. The Hardware River is formed by the confluence of its short north and south forks in southern Albemarle County and flows generally southeastwardly into southwestern Fluvanna County, where it joins the James River about 7 miles southeast of Scottsville, Virginia (USGS Hydrologic Unit Code 02080203, Middle James — Buffalo). The proposed project is approximately 14 miles upstream of the confluence with the James River. 1.3.2 Hydrology The closest stream gage (USGS 02030000 Hardware River below Briery Run near Scottsville, VA) is located approximately 3 miles downstream of the proposed project. The gage has been in operation since water year 1939 and monitors a drainage area of 116 mil. The project site has a drainage area of approximately 104.5 mil. Briery Creek (7.5 miz drainge area) and several other small unnamed tributaries enter the Hardware River between the project site and the gage. The period of record for hydrology at the gage is water years (WY) 1939 to 2019, although data is missing for WY 1996. During this period, the average annual flow has ranged from 17 to 249 cfs, although daily flows were highly variable. During six water years, (1944, 1949,1962, 1969, 1972, and 2003) peak flows were over 5,000 cfs (Figure E3-3). Daily flows for a wet (2003), dry (2002),and average (1995) year are presented in Figure E1-4. Although seasonal patterns areapparant, daily flows are relativly flashy, with many short -duration peaks throughout the year during all three year types. Monthly exceedance flows were estimated for the project site using a drainage area adjustment of 0.901 applied to gage data due to the difference in drainage area between the gage and the project site. Monthly flows at the project site have ranged between 7 and 498 cfs 90 percent of the time during the period of record (Figure E1-5 and Table E1-4). Typical flows have been lowest during the summer months (July -September), begin to increase in the fall (November -December), and peak in the spring (March), although peak daily flows have been highest in the late summer (August and September). Flooding is most common in the winter, but may occur in other seasons particularly in association with hurricanes, tornados, or R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E18 September 2020 microbursts from thunderstorms. The two high -flow events over 10,000 cfs were associated with the 1944 Great Atlantic hurricane and Hurricane Camille in 1969. MM 25,000 20,000 N w Y 3 � 15,000 LL T m 10,000 5,000 0 1938 1948 1958 1968 1978 1988 1998 2008 2018 Figure E1-3. Daily flows for the Hardware River at Jefferson Mill (1939-2019). 10,000 1,000 N F Y 3 3 300 LL T O 10 1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1 -- -- 2002 (Dry) —1995 (Average) —2003 (Wet) Figure E34. Daily flows for the Hardware River at Jefferson Mill in a wet (2003), average (1995), and dry (2002) year. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E19 September 2020 100000 10000 ■ 5% Exceedance to Maximum Daily Flow 1000 ■ 10% Exceed ance to 5% Exceedance ■ 25% Exceed ance to 10% Exceedance ■ 50% Exceed ance to 25% Exceedance 100 075% Exceed ance to 50%Exceedance ■ 90% Exceed ance to 75% Exceedance ■ 95% Exceed ance to 90% Exceedance 10 isMinimum Daily Flow to 95 % Exceedance 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.1 Figure E1-5. Monthly exceedance flows for the Hardware River at Jefferson Mill (1939-2019). Table E1-4. Monthly exceedance flows for the Hardware River at Jefferson Mill (1939-2019). Exc % JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 95% 27.9 40.7 45.0 47.3 36.0 18.0 10.8 7.1 7.2 10.8 19.8 23.4 90% 36.0 49.3 62.6 59.5 43.2 26.1 14.4 10.8 10.7 15.3 24.3 29.7 75% 57.7 71.2 90.1 79.3 60.4 39.6 26.1 19.1 17.8 23.4 34.2 45.0 50% 94.6 114.4 128.4 114.4 91.0 67.6 45.9 36.0 32.4 39.6 54.1 81.1 25% 148.0 178.4 199.3 175.7 140.5 100.9 71.2 63.4 57.7 73.9 96.4 128.8 10% 246.8 286.8 331.5 272.2 215.3 168.5 118.0 119.8 119.8 144.1 173.1 243.3 5% 349.7 415.7 497.5 374.9 315.4 245.0 175.7 181.1 200.9 220.7 262.2 360.3 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E20 September 2020 Flood frequency estimates for USGS gage 02030000 are provided in Table E1-5 ( Austin et al. 2011). These estimates were developed by the USGS by fitting the logarithms of annual peak flows to a Log -Pearson Type III frequency distribution to yield annual exceedance probabilities (i.e., 2, 2.33, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 year return intervals). The flood frequency for the Jefferson Mill project location will be slightly lower as the inflow from Briery Creek, with a drainage area of 7.5 square miles, and several other small unnamed tributaries enter the Hardware River between the project site and the USGS gage. Table El-5. Flood frequency estimates for USGS Gage 02030000 (Austin et al. 2011). Return Interval (years) USGS Gage 02030000 (cfs) 2 2,975 2.33 3,460 5 6,327 10 9,809 25 16,200 50 22,850 100 31,530 200 42,810 500 62,910 1.3.3 Beneficial Use Designations Water quality standards in Virginia are based on whether water bodies support the designated beneficial uses. All Virginia waters are designated for the following uses: 1) recreational uses, e.g., swimming and boating; 2) the propagation and growth of a balanced, indigenous population of aquatic life, including game fish, which might reasonably be expected to inhabit them; 3) wildlife; and 4) the production of edible and marketable natural resources, e.g., fish and shellfish. Table E1-5 briefly describes the primary designated uses, the parameters used to demonstrate their attainment, and the status of these uses in the Hardware River (VDEQ 2020). For the purpose of assessment, the Hardware River is divided into two segments, one from the headwaters downstream to the USGS gaging station, and a second segment from the gaging station downstream to the confluence with the James River. The proposed project is located in the headwater segment that is fully supporting the aquatic life use due to more than 10.5 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E21 September 2020 percent of values exceeding the screening value in the 2006 cycle. Similarly, the wildlife use is fully supported. This assessment unit is not supporting the recreational use due to exceedances of E.-coli and fecal coliform water quality standards. This impairment has been reviewed in the Hardware River TMDL for bacteria which was initially completed in 2007 and revised in October 2015. This segment was first listed for exceedances of fecal coliform standards in 2002 and first listed for exceedances of E. coli standards in 2008. A TMDL implementation plan was completed in November 2015, and the implementation project started in September 2016. The Hardware River TMDL implementation project is administered by the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District (TJSWCD). TJSWCD's grant award is directed at agricultural and residential septic best management practices (BMP) implementation. The Fish Consumption use is not supported in the reach from the mouth of the Hardware River upstream to the Route 6 Bridge as evidenced by a VDH Fish Consumption Advisory due to elevated PCBs in fish tissue. No more than two meals per month of gizzard shad, carp, American eel, flathead catfish, and quillback carpsucker are recommended. This segment was first listed in the 2008 cycle based on the results of DEQ's fish tissue monitoring program. Contaminated sediments, wildlife other than waterfowl, non -point source pollution, and agriculture have been identified as sources of impairment. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E22 September 2020 Table E1-5 Designated use descriptions and indicators and Hardware River status. DESIGNATED STATUS USE DESCRIPTION/INDICATORS USE Description: The propagation, growth, and protection of a balanced indigenous population of aquatic life that may Aquatic Life Use, be expected to inhabit a waterbody Fully Chesapeake Bay Supporting Indicators: Dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, sub -uses chlorophyll a, nutrients, water column and sediment toxics, toxicity tests, benthics, submerged aquatic vegetation Description: Game and marketable fish species that are Fish Not safe for human health Consumption Use Supporting Indicators: VDH notices, fish tissue toxics, water column toxics Description: Marketable shellfish (clams, oysters, mussels) Shellfishing Use Not that are safe for human health Applicable Indicators: VDH notices Description: Swimming, boating, and other recreational Recreation Not activities (Swimming) Use Supporting Indicators: VDH notices, bacteria Public Water Not Description: Drinking water safe for human health Indicators: VDH notices, water column toxics Supply Use Applicable Description: The propagation, growth, and protection of Wildlife Use Fully associated wildlife Supporting Indicators: Water column toxics 1.3.4 Water Quality Limited water quality data is available in the project area. The USGS gage reports water quality measurements collected between October 2006 and September 2008 by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality- Water Division (USGS 2008). Reporting includes daily minimum, mean and maximum values for continuous monitoring of temperature and specific conductance over the two water years (Figures E1-6 and E1-7, Table —E1-6) and discrete water quality samples. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E23 September 2020 1.3.4.1 Water Temperature Water temperatures during water years 2007 and 2008 ranged between 0 and nearly 30 degrees (Table E1-6) with seasonal patterns. Daily mean temperatures above 20 degrees were observed May through October, and temperatures below 5 degrees were observed December through March (Figure E1-6). Freezing temperatures were recorded during both water years. Table E1-6. Extreme values during continuous water quality monitoring recorded at 15-minute intervals from October 20016 — September 2008 at USGS gage 02030000 Hardware River Below Briery Creek, near Scottsville, VA. Water Temperature Specific Conductance Water Year Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum °C Date °C Date PS/cm Date PS/cm Date 2007 -0.1 2/6/07 29.7 8/9/07 21 10/7/06 99 8/11/07 2008 0.0 1/24/08 29.7 6/10/08 29 5/9/08 90 8/25/08 30 u 25 A AA O O O Z O u 0 O C O i O i O ¢ O > O C O - O 00 ¢ O O_ to O O O > Z O u O C 00 O 00 O i 00 O OD O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 O Figure E3-6. Daily mean temperature during continuous water quality monitoring recorded at 15- minute intervals from October 20016 — September 2008 at USGS gage 02030000 Hardware River below Briery Creek, near Scottsville, VA. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E24 September 2020 1.3.4.2 Specific Conductance Specific conductance values showed less seasonal variation and typically ranged between 40 and 80 µS/cm, although extreme values ranged from 21 to 99 µS/cm (Table E1-6, Figure E1-7). High specific conductance values often indicate pollution from road salt, septic systems, wastewater treatment plants, or urban/agricultural runoff. In general, levels under 100 are considered normal and values at this site are consistent with typical values in the Piedmont ecoregion (Griffith 2014). 120 u 100 u 80 u E w u N 60 a Y T 40 ❑ C � 20 t 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O fl. > u C -6 T C - Op a O Z❑ i g Q Q O Z❑ Figure E3-7. Daily mean specific conductance during continuous water quality monitoring recorded at 15-minute intervals from October 20016 — September 2008 at USGS gage 02030000 Hardware River below Briery Creek, near Scottsville, VA. 1.3.4.3 Bacteria Water quality data collected by DEQ has documented exceedances of fecal coliform and E. coli standards over the past 20 years. Data collected during the period of 2010 through 2019 were analyzed to determine the impact of BMPs implemented in the project area on E. coli violation rates and associated long-term trends, if any, in water quality improvements (VDEQ 2019). Measures have included riparian exclusion fencing, riparian buffers, and septic tank pump -outs and repairs. The percent violation rate for samples collected annually at monitoring station 2- HRD011.57 located at the USGS gauging station at the Route 637 Bridge, that did not meet the water quality standard of 235 cfu/100 mL ranged from 0 percent in 2016 to approximately 67 percent in 2014. In 2019 approximately 14 percent of 21 samples violated the state standard (VDEQ 2019). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E25 September 2020 1.4 Land and Water Uses The James River watershed encompasses approximately 10,000 square miles, which makes up almost 25 percent of the state. It is home to one-third of all Virginians who live in its 39 counties and 19 cities and towns. The James provides drinking water, supports commerce and outdoor recreation. The watershed is comprised of three sections. The Upper James Watershed begins in Alleghany County and travels through the Allegheny and Blue Ridge Mountains until Lynchburg. The Middle James runs from Lynchburg to the Fall Line in Richmond, while the Lower James stretches from the fall line in Richmond to the Chesapeake Bay. The Hardware River and its tributaries are part of the Middle James River Basin and are located primarily in Albemarle and Fluvanna Counties. The basin ranges from a maximum elevation of 2,387 feet to a minimum elevation of 308 ft. The average annual precipitation is 46.7 inches (USGS 2016). The Hardware River watershed totals approximately 88,089 acres (137 mil), with forest and pasture as the predominant land uses (Table E1-7). Farms in the counties include a small portion of cropland and more extensive pastures (Table E1-7). Pasture land is primarily planted in fescue or bluegrass with occasional outcroppings of invasive grasses such as Johnson Grass or Broom Straw. Virginia Cedar trees and Canadian Thistles are also commonly found in abandoned or un-maintained fields. According to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, the average farm in Albemarle County is 200 acres, while in Fluvanna County it is 163 acres. The average net cash income for a farm in Albemarle County was estimated at-$8,665, and in Fluvanna County is was-$1,943 (USDA 2017). With the average age of a farmer in the two counties between 60- 62, this information suggests that it is challenging to make a living farming, and that there are a large number of "retirement' or "hobby" farms in the region (VADEQ 2015). Table El-7. Land use acreage in the Hardware River and North Fork Hardware River watersheds (VADEQ 2015). Landuse Hardware River NF Hardware River Total Acres % Acres % Acres % Cropland 1,012 1.5 21 0.1 1,033 1.2 Forest 50,383 76.8 15,578 69.4 65,961 74.9 High Density Residential 63 0.1 137 0.6 200 0.2 Low Density Residential 1,481 2.3 862 3.8 2,343 2.7 Pasture 12,693 19.3 5,859 26.1 18,552 21.1 Total 65,632 100 22,457 100 88,089 100 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E26 September 2020 1.5 Recreational Use 1.5.1 Regional Recreation Regional recreational resources include Shenandoah National Park on the eastern border of Albemarle County and the George Washington and Thomas Jefferson National Forests in the headwaters of the James River in the Appalachian Mountains of Virginia. Hiking, mountain biking, camping, hunting and fishing are the most popular activities; but the National Forests also provide opportunities for bird watching, horseback riding, photography, orienteering, and cross-country skiing. More than 325 miles of the Appalachian Trail traverse portions of the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests. 1.5.1.4 James River Water Trail The James River Water Trail provides boating access to the James River along the 340 miles from its headwaters at the confluence of the Cowpasture and Jackson Rivers in Botetourt County to the Chesapeake Bay (VDCR 2020a). The water trail is 70 percent mapped with 240 miles of the paddling route mapped and 26 miles of the paddling route under development in Botetourt County. The Middle James River includes public access to the river at the Scottsville Boat Landing and the Hardware River Wildlife Management Area Boat Landing (Figure E1-8). The water trail is just one component of the proposed James River Heritage Trail, a braided trail system including river roads and off -road trails on the banks of the river that together provide recreational and educational opportunities along the river including ruins of old canals and mills, the remnants of Native American fishing camps, historic plantations, forts and battlefields, and wildlife areas and parks. 1.5.2 Local Recreation Local recreation areas include county parks, a state wildlife management area and Fulfillment Farms, a privately owned reserve managed for public access to outdoor recreation opportunities (Figure E1-8). Recreation in the 1,034-acre Hardware River Wildlife Management Area is described in the Recreational Hunting and Fishing Section (Section 1.2.3). 1.5.2.5 Biscuit Run State Park Biscuit Run Park is located in Albemarle County just south of the City of Charlottesville along Biscuit Run (Figure E1-8). The park consists of approximately 1,190 acres with frontage on Routes 20 and 631. Biscuit Run Park has not yet opened to the public. The Commonwealth acquired the land in December 2009. A master plan completed in 2017 includes proposed development of day -use, overnight camping and trail facilities (VDCR 2017). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E27 September 2020 'Bu u' t Run State Park Legend North Fork 708 ® Waterway Access © Recreation Area Co Rd 631Walnut Creek Park © Rt20 Jefferson Mill South Fork ® y o- Upper y ainstem "co 01 Fulfillment Farms Jefferson Mill Lower Mainstem Scottsville ® Temperance Wayside Totier Creek Park James River Hardware River WMA ©Hardware Rd i Miles Figure E3-8. Local recreational resources near Jefferson Mill. 1.5.2.6 Walnut Creek Park New Canton Walnut Creek Park is approximately 15 miles northeast of Jefferson Mill, on Walnut Creek, a tributary to the South Fork Hardware River (Figure E1-8). The primary attraction at Walnut Creek Park is the 45-acre Walnut Creek Lake, which was impounded in 1990 and is surrounded by mixed deciduous forest. The lake provides fishing opportunities for largemouth bass, bluegill, crappie, redear sunfish, and channel catfish as well as seasonal swimming, kayaking and canoeing. The 525-acre park also provides picnicking facilities, 2 acres of beaches, 13 miles of trails for hiking and mountain biking, and a disc golf course (Albemarle County Parks & Recreation 2020). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E28 September 2020 1.5.2.7 Fulfillment Farms Fulfillment Farms is private land managed by the Wildlife Foundation of Virginia to provide outdoor recreational opportunities to the public in Esmont, Virginia, approximately 6 miles west of the town of Scottsville (Wildlife Foundation of Virginia 2020). The nearly 2,000 acres are widely used for hunting, bird -watching, and hiking. The terrain varies from open fields to steep wooded slopes. An approximate 200-acre area lies north of Route 6 in Esmont, and includes an old slate quarry, as well as a beaver pond complex. 1.5.2.8 Totier Creek Park Totier Creek Park is approximately 2 mile east of Scottsville and is centered around the 69-acre Totier Creek Reservoir. Totier Creek is a tributary to the James River approximately 7 miles upstream of the Hardware River, and is the water supply for the Scottsvile area. A boat ramp provides access to fishing for largemouth bass, bluegill, redear sunfish, and stocked channel catfish. The 209-acre park has picnic facilities as well as 3 miles of trails for hiking and birdwatching through mixed deciduous forest (Albemarle County Parks & Recreation 2020). 1.5.2.9 Hardware River Boating According to the Virginia Outdoors Demand Survey in 2017, 35 percent of households in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District participate in canoeing or kayaking activities (VCDR 2020b). There are four boating reaches in the Hardware River watershed: the North Fork, the South Fork, and two reaches in the Hardware River below the confluence of the two forks (Figure E1- 8). The river is relatively shallow and best suited to canoeing and kayaking. The 6-mile reach of the North Fork Hardware River between Route 708 and Route 20 is rated between Class II and Class V (Riverfacts 2020). The 7.5-mile reach of the South Fork Hardware River between Route 631 and the Hardware River is rated between Class II and Class IV. Typically, canoeists divide the mainstem Hardware River into two sections, the upstream section is approximately 15 miles from Route 20 at Carter Bridge to the Temperance Wayside at Route 6, and the downstream section is approximately 7 miles from the Temperance Wayside at Route 6 to the James River at the take-out bridge (CACVB 2020). The Jefferson Mill project is located near the midpoint of the upper boating section of the mainstem Hardware River. Boating access to the Hardware River is at select highway crossings. Carter Bridge on Route 20 has parking, a short carry and a convenient sand bar. A 14-foot dam blocks the river about a mile downstream, with portage on either side. The dam for the historic Jefferson Mill, along the right bank about 8 miles downstream of Carter Bridge on Route 20 requires a portage. Waysides are picnicking areas along thoroughfares that served as early versions of rest areas in the pre -interstate period of Virginia. The Temperance wayside at Route 6 provides river access R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E29 September 2020 to boaters. After a 2015 bridge upgrade, the old road provides a pull out and trail access to the river. The 7 mile reach of the Hardware River between the Temperance Wayside and the James River been determined by American Whitewater to be a class 1-11 section. The confluence of the Hardware River and the James River is within the Hardware River State Wildlife Management Area. 1.6 Socio-Economic Conditions A general description of socioeconomic conditions within the vicinity of the proposed project is based on the census information for Albemarle County, Virginia (USCB 2020). Albemarle County is 721 square miles and is part of the Charlottesville Metropolitan Statistical Area. Located in Central Virginia, Albemarle County is known for its natural beauty, historic sites, and the University of Virginia. As of the 2010 census, the population was 98,970 in 40,612 households. During the period 2014-2018, 80.1 percent of the population was living in the same house that they occupied 1 year ago. Of the 46,076 housing units counted in 2018, approximately 62.5 percent were owner -occupied. In 2017, the median property value in Albemarle County, VA grew to $329,600 from the previous year's value of $317,300. Of the population 25 years and over, 91.4 percent had graduated from high school, while 53.5 percent had received a bachelor's degree or higher. The largest university in Albemarle County is the University of Virginia, which awarded 7,010 degrees in 2019 (UVA 2020). For the employed population 16 years and older, the leading industries in Albemarle County in 2017 were educational services (18.4 %); health care and social services (17.3%); and retail trade (9%). The median household income for 2014-2018 was 75,394 dollars, with 8.7 percent of people living in poverty (Data USA 2020). Scottsville, population 594, is located at the southern end of Virginia's Albemarle County and is the nearest town to the project area. As of 2019, there were 73 licensed businesses in town, in sectors ranging from retail, restaurants, banking, and skilled trades. In 2015, there were 244 people working in town, with restaurants as the largest sector (Scottsville 2020). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E30 September 2020 1.7 Historical and Archeological Resources The Applicant is in the process of establishing an area of potential effect (APE) for the proposed hydroelectric project at Jefferson Mill with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, which serves as the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in Virginia. Upon establishment of an agreed upon APE, an onsite comprehensive cultural resource assessment survey will be completed by a local consulting archaeologist. Historical Resources are described based on an archives search through the Virginia Department of Historic Resources on March 13, 2020. Four individual historic district properties and three architecture resources were identified within a 1/2 —mile buffer of the project area (Figure E1-9; Table E1-8). The project area includes Jefferson Mill, which was constructed circa 1800, within the period of significance for the Southern Albemarle Rural Historic District and therefore is contributing to the district and listed on the National Register of Historic Places (002-0089). It is a representative example of an early 19th century mill building in Albemarle County. It was constructed by Peter Field Jefferson, the grandnephew of Thomas Jefferson. Both the mill building and dam are listed as individual resources. The Southern Albemarle Rural Historic District includes approximately 84,000 acres in Virginia's northern Piedmont region and was listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of Historic Places in 2007 (002-5045). The rural district encompasses a rolling landscape of agricultural fields and woods within the Piedmont and continues to maintain its historic setting and feeling. The district is nationally significant under all four criteria (A,B, C, and D) established by the National Park Service, including broad patterns of history, significant persons, architecture, and archaeology (which has been principally demonstrated through ongoing excavations at Monticello and Shadwell). This intact historic rural region has a Period of Significance (POS) of 1750-1950 and strong ties to several of the state and nation's early intellectual and political leaders, including Thomas Jefferson, John Carter, John Coles, Joshua Fry, James Monroe, Andrew Stevenson, and Theodore Roosevelt who maintained social, family, or business associations in the district. (NPS 2007). The Southern Albemarle Rural Historic District nearly links the Madison -Barbour Rural Historic District, the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District, and the Scottsville Historic District, providing an almost uninterrupted 147,000- acre corridor of historic resources comprising a significant cultural landscape. This collection of rural and community historic districts reveals the rich heritage of Albemarle County and the surrounding Virginia Piedmont. Despite a close proximity to the City of Charlottesville, modern intrusions are limited and unobtrusive, often located along the roads on small plots broken off of larger tracts. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E31 September 2020 During the mid- to late -eighteenth century Albemarle County began a transition from a monoculture of tobacco to wheat as its primary agricultural crop. With several large rivers and tributaries running throughout the district, grist mills and merchant mills quickly took root. Water power was the mainstay for manufacturing during the eighteenth century and throughout much of the nineteenth century. The production of flour from grains became one of the county's leading economic industries. Throughout the first half of the nineteenth century Albemarle County saw the construction of a large number of merchant mills. Grist milling began to decline rapidly during the late nineteenth century when much of the area's grains were shipped via railroad primarily to the Midwest. Forty-eight mills, including thirteen nineteenth-century mills are noted on the Massie Map of 1907. The Peter Field Jefferson mill has also been called Albemarle Mill, Lewis Mill, and Dolls Mill under subsequent owners. Jefferson Mills was a working mill until 1945 when the last miller, William Williams, retired. Nearly all of the documented merchant mills in the district have been destroyed or demolished; however, Jefferson Mill is one of two that have been adapted to private residential uses. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E32 September 2020 Jefferson Mill Hydroelectric Project 1°9Y°° Cuad. Scottsville IO PiOjptlArpa • Location: 711 8 724 Jefferson Mill Road i 3 Scottsville, VA 24590 ®Mnllem,n IM,NLY Itl510M OIi1M WOpYtlM March 13, 2020 ® NG,�plw,Ul ae.o��s 1 inch = 738 feet ,A '� Li,' DHR A. Cox wa E.e.e,. Figure E3-9. Map of historical resources in the vicinity of the Jefferson Mill project area identified by a Virginia Department of Historic Resources archives search on March 13, 2020. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E33 September 2020 Table El-8. Summary of historical resources in the vicinity of the Jefferson Mill project area identified by a Virginia Department of Historic Resources archives search on March 13, 2020. Historic District Evaluation DHR ID Jurisdictions Property Names Property Addresses Name Status Architectural Resources 002-0089 Albemarle (County) Albemarle Mills (Historic), House, 570 Jefferson Mill Lane, 724 Southern Albemarle NA 570 Jefferson Mill Lane (Historic), Jefferson Mill Lane, Route Rural Historic District Jefferson Mill (Historic/Current), 618, North of Jefferson Mill, 724 Jefferson Mill Lane (Function/Location), Lewis Mill (Historic), Peter Field Jefferson Mill (Historic), Polls Mill (Missing) 002-5001 Albemarle (County) Mount Ida (Historic/Current) 6909 Blenheim Road - Alt Southern Albemarle NRHP Listing, Route 795, Route 795 Rural Historic District VLR Listing 002-5045 Albemarle (County), Jefferson -Carter Rural Historic Blenheim Road, James <Null> NRHP Listing, Buckingham (County), District (Historic), Southern Monroe Parkway - Alt Route VLR Listing Charlottesville (Ind. Albemarle Rural Historic District 20, Jefferson Mill Road, City), Nelson (County) (NRHP Listing) Milton Road, Rolling Road Individual Historic District Properties 002-5045- Albemarle (County) Cemetery, Jefferson Mill Road 6767 Jefferson Mill Road -Alt Southern Albemarle NA 1150 (Function/Location) Route 618 Rural Historic District 002-5045- Albemarle (County) House, 724 Jefferson Mill Lane 724 Jefferson Mill Lane Southern Albemarle NA 1151 (Function/Location) Rural Historic District 002-5045- Albemarle (County) House, 6975 Jefferson Mill Road 6975 Jefferson Mill Road -Alt Southern Albemarle NA 1152 (Function/Location) Route 618 Rural Historic District 002-5045- Albemarle (County) House, 576 Jefferson Mill Lane 576 Jefferson Mill Lane Southern Albemarle NA 1153 (Function/Location), Last Resort Rural Historic District Farm (Current) R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E34 September 2020 1.8 Visual Resources The Hardware River from Route 708 to the confluence with James River, including the reach in the project area, has been identified as a potential State Scenic River by the Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation (VDCR 2020c). Virginia Scenic Rivers Program's intent is to identify, designate and help protect rivers and streams that possess outstanding scenic, recreational, historic and natural characteristics of statewide significance. Rivers designated as potential scenic rivers have been identified as worthy of future study to evaluate future designation. 1.9 Endangered or Threatened Species, Critical Habitats 1.9.1 Fish and Wildlife The Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VaFWIS) lists 13 species of aquatic animals and terrestrial wildlife as either endangered, threated or species of concern that are known or likely occur within a two-mile radius of project area (VaFWIS 2020) The list includes five freshwater mussels, three bats, three birds, one turtle, and one snake (Table E1-9). Of the thirteen species, the James Spinymussel , a federal Endangered/state Endangered (FESE) species, is known to occur in the Hardware River near the project. The Hardware River is a designated Threatened and Endangered (T&E) Species waters for the James Spinymussel by the state of Virginia. Brief descriptions follow for sensitive species that have the potential to occur within the project vicinity or be affected by project activities. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E35 September 2020 Table El-9. Federally -and -State -listed threatened and endangered animal species and animal species of conservation concern known or likely to occur within a 2-mile radius around point Jefferson Mill in Albemarle and Fluvanna Counties, VA. Records compiled from the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service Initial Project Assessment Report on 3/27/2020. Status* Tier** Common Name Scientific Name Con- firmed Database(s) FESE la Spinymussel, James Parvaspina collina Yes BOVA,TEWaters, Habitat,SppObs, DCRNH FTST la Bat, northern long-eared Myotis septentrionalis BOVA FTST Ila Lance, yellow Elliptio lanceolota BOVA SE la Bat, little brown Myotis lucifugus BOVA SE la Bat, tri-colored Perimyotis subflavus BOVA SE lb Floater, brook Alosmidonta varicosa BOVA ST la Falcon, peregrine Falco peregrinus BOVA ST la Shrike, loggerhead Lanius ludovicianus BOVA FPST la Pigtoe, Atlantic Fusconaia masoni BOVA ST Ila Floater, green Lasmigona subviridis BOVA ST Shrike, migrant loggerhead Lanius ludovicianus migrans BOVA CC Illa Turtle, spotted Clemmys guttata BOVA CC IVa Rattlesnake, timber Crotalus horridus BOVA *FE=Federal Endangered; FT=Federal Threatened; SE=State Endangered; ST=State Threatened; FP=Federal Proposed; CC=Collection Concern **I=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier I - Critical Conservation Need; II=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier II - Very High Conservation Need; III=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier III - High Conservation Need; IV=VA Wildlife Action Plan - Tier IV - Moderate Conservation Need Virginia Wildlife Action Plan Conservation Opportunity Ranking: a - On the ground management strategies/actions exist and can be feasibly implemented.; b - On the ground actions or research needs have been identified but cannot feasibly be implemented at this time.; c - No on the ground actions or research needs have been identified or all identified conservation opportunities have been exhausted. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E36 September 2020 1.9.1.1 James Spinymussel Mussel The James Spinymussel is a federally and state listed endangered species (Table E1-9) originally listed by the USFWS under the endangered species act in 1988 (53 FIR 27693). The historic range of the James Spinymussel included the James River drainage (mainstem and tributaries including the Rivanna and North) and the Dan/Mayo River systems within the Roanoke River drainage in Virginia, North Carolina, and West Virginia (USFWS 1990). The species extant range is now limited to the Dan/Mayo River and in small, headwater tributaries of the upper James River basin including the upper reaches of the Hardware River (Figure E1-10; Petty 2005; VFFWIS 2020). Major threats to the James Spinymussel include the invasive Asian Clam (Corbicula fluminea), degradation of water quality, habitat loss, and modification as the species requires free -flowing streams and substrates that are free from silt. The James Spinymussel is a tachytictic (short- term) brooder; its eggs are fertilized in the spring and glochidia are released from May through July (Hove 1990). Known fish hosts during the glochidial life stage of the James Spinymussel include the Bluehead Chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), Rosyside Dace (Clinostomus funduloides), Blacknose Dace (Rhinichthys atratulus), Mountain Redbelly Dace (Chrosomus oreas), Rosefin Shiner (Lythrurus ardens), Satinfin Shiner (Cyprinella onalostana), Central Stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum), and Swallowtail Shiner (Notropis procne) (Table E1-3; Hove 1990; Hove and Neves 1994). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E37 September 2020 Mies Cm*W by B T. Wetaon & BL. H~ Dx 210 Figure E3-10. James Spinymussel distribution in Virginia with the Hardware River circled for reference. Figure from Petty 2005. 1.9.1.2 Brook Floater Mussel The historic range of the brook floater is along the east coast from eastern Canada to the Savannah River basin in South Carolina/Georgia (USFWS 2019). The species has disappeared from 60-80 sites range -wide and its current global status is vulnerable (G3) and state status in Virginia is endangered (Table E1-9). The brook floater is particularly sensitive to habitat degradation including impacts from silt; nutrient and sewage loads; and pollution and require streams with good water quality and stable streambanks. The preferred habitat of the brook floater is found in high relief streams among boulders in sand (USFWS 2019).). Known fish hosts during the glochidial life stage of the Brook Floater include Blacknose Dace, Golden Shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas), Longnose Dace (Rhinichthys catoractae), Margined Madtom (Noturus insignis), Pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus ), Slimy Sculpin (Cottus cognatus), and Yellow Perch (Perca flavescens), R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E38 September 2020 1.9.1.3 Atlantic Pigtoe Mussel The Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia mosoni) is listed as state threatened and was proposed for federal listing as threatened under the Endangered Species Act on October 11, 2018 (Table E1- 9; USFWS 2020b). The historic range of the Atlantic Pigtoe includes the James and Chowan River basins in Virginia, the Roanoke, Tar, Neuse, Cape Fear, Pee Dee, and Catawba River basins in North Carolina, the Edisto River Basin in South Carolina, and the Savannah, Ogeechee, and Altamaha River basins in Georgia. The current distribution in the James River basin includes the Mill Creek Management Unit, the Rivanna River Management Unit, and the Middle James Management Unit which includes tributaries to the south of the James River (USFWS 2020b). The preferred habitat of the Atlantic pigtoe is coarse sand and gravel free of silt in small creeks to larger rivers with excellent water quality. Host fish species for the Atlantic pigtoe include the Rosefin Shiner, Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), Longnose Dace, White Shiner (Luxilus albeolus), Satinfin Shiner, Bluehead Chub, Rosyside Dace, Pinewoods Shiner (Lythrurus matutinus), Swallowtail Shiner, and Mountain Redbelly Dace. 1.9.1.4 Green Floater Mussel The green floater (Lasmigona subviridis) is listed as a state threatened species. The historic range of the floater included Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia (USFWS 2020b). The green floater is found in small creeks to large rivers is intolerant of strong currents and prefers pools and other calm water habitats. The preferred substrate is gravel and sand in water depths of one to four feet. Host fish species are unknown and it is suggested that the species may not require fish host. 1.9.1.5 Yellow Lance Mussel The yellow lance is listed as a both a state and federal threatened species; the federal listing occurred April 2, 2018 (USFWS 2020b). The historic range of the yellow lance ranged from the Patuxent River Basin in Maryland, to the Potomac River Basin in Maryland/Virginia, the Rappahannock, York, James, and Chowan River basins in Virginia, and the Tar and Neuse River basins in North Carolina. The yellow lance is found in medium-sized rivers to smaller streams and prefers sand substrate, often it is buried deep in clean, coarse to medium sand. Confirmed host fish for the yellow lance include the White Shiner and Pinewoods Shiner (USFWS 2020b). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E39 September 2020 1.9.1.6 Tri-colored Bat The tri-colored bat, (Pipistrellus subflavus), was historically common throughout the forests of the eastern United States it is listed as state endangered (Table E1-9). In Virginia, this species has recently been affected by white -nose syndrome (WNS), a disease that is killing hibernating bats in eastern North America, and populations are in decline (USFWS 2019). Disturbance of natural and artificial roost structures also pose threats, especially to hibernacula and maternity roosts. Tri-colored bats are associated with forested habitats, open woods, and adjacent to water edges (USFWS 2019). 1.9.1.7 Northern Long -Eared Bat The northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), is listed as a threatened species in Virginia and federally under the Endangered Species Act (Table E1-9). The historic range of the northern long-eared bat includes much of the eastern and north central United States. In Virginia, this species has recently been affected by white -nose syndrome (WNS), a disease that is killing hibernating bats in eastern North America, and populations are in decline (USFWS 2019). Since symptoms were first observed in New York in 2006, WNS has spread rapidly to the Midwest and Southeast; an area that includes the core of the northern long-eared bat's range where it was most common before the outbreak. The preferred habitat of the northern long-eared bat varies seasonally. In winter, the northern long-eared bat hibernates in caves and mines, and in summer bats roost underneath bark or in tree cavities and use the understory of forested areas while foraging on insects (USFWS 2019). 1.9.1.8 Little Brown Bat The little brown bat, (Myotis lucifugus), listed as state endangered (Table E1-9), were historically widely distributed from central Alaska and southern Canada into the southeastern and southwestern United States. Like other bat species, in Virginia, the little brown bat has recently been affected by white -nose syndrome (WNS), a disease that is killing hibernating bats in eastern North America, and populations are in decline (USFWS 2019). During the summer, little brown bats are found primarily in the Blue Ridge mountains, though there have also been a few confirmed reports in the Piedmont, Sandhills and lower Coastal Plain regions. Little brown bats are habitat generalists, using a variety of ecosystems and cover types; however, much of their foraging activity is associated with aquatic habitats (USFWS 2019). R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E40 September 2020 1.9.1.9 Peregrine Falcon The peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), listed as state endangered in Virginia (Table E1-9), were historically found throughout North America and most common in parts of the Appalachian Mountains and nearby valleys from New England south to Georgia (USFWS 2019). In 1970, the peregrine falcon was listed under the Endangered Species Act; however, following the nationwide ban of DDT in 1973 and reintroduction efforts, the species recovered across much of its range and in 1999 was removed from federal listing. The primary food source of the peregrine falcon is birds, including songbirds, shorebirds, ducks, starlings and pigeons. The peregrine falcon can utilize a wide variety of landscapes including mountain ranges, river valleys, coastlines, wetlands and open areas, and urban areas (USFWS 2019). In Virginia, both resident and seasonal migrant forms of the peregrine falcon can be present. 1.9.1.10 Loggerhead Shrike The loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) is listed as threatened in the state of Virginia, but has no federal designation at this time. They are similar in size to the American robin and distinguishable by their black eye mask, gray head, gray body, and black wings and tail. In Virginia, their preferred habitat includes pastureland, prairies, and open woodlands with a mixture of shrub or hedgerow features (Bartgis 1992). Habitat loss and resulting reductions in prey base have aided in the decline of this species across its range (Bartgis 1992). 1.9.1.10.1 Migrant Loggerhead Shrike Many subspecies of loggerhead shrike are recognized by ornithologists. The migrant loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus migrans), a northeastern and northcentral U.S. subspecies, is similarly listed as threatened in the state of Virginia. The migratory range includes Canada and south to eastern Texas, Louisiana, North Carolina, and Virginia This subspecies is migratory, and overwinters in the southern half of its breeding range, including Virginia. The preferred habitat of migrant loggerhead shrike consists of grasslands and open, agricultural areas characterized by short vegetation and scattered trees, shrubs or hedgerows for nesting cover and foraging (USFWS 2019). 1.9.1.11 Spotted Turtle The spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata), listed a species of concern in Virginia (Table E3-9), is a small freshwater turtle reaching a maximum carapace length 5.0 inches. The historic range of spotted turtles includes from southern Maine south along the Atlantic coast to Florida. Spotted turtles use a variety of habitats including freshwater ponds, wetlands, and upland habitats, and because of life history characteristics (e.g., late age of maturity and low fecundity) are R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E41 September 2020 extremely sensitive to small increases in mortality (VaHS 2020). Female spotted turtles lay eggs in open canopied uplands, generally between late May and early July. The preferred habitat often overlaps with the human development where they are particularly vulnerable to increased mortality where road density and traffic volume is high (VaHS 2020). 1.9.1.12 Timber Rattlesnake The timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus), listed a species of concern in Virginia (Table E1-9), is a large, venomous snake reaching a maximum total length around 65 inches. In western Virginia, the preferred habitat includes upland hardwood and mixed oak -pine forests in areas with ledges or talus slopes; while in southeastern occupies hardwood and mixed hardwood - pine forests, cane fields, and ridges. 1.9.2 Plants The Commonwealth of Virginia has over 70 species of non -vascular and vascular plants that are threatened, endangered, or species of concern (Table E1-10). The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation's Division of Natural Heritage (VDCR) has records for Sullivant's leafy liverwort and Sword -leaf phlox from the Rivanna and South Fork Shenandoah watersheds in Albemarle County. No records of special status plant species were found for the Middle James -Buffalo watershed including the Hardware River sub -watersheds, or within a two-mile radius of the project area (VDCR 2020; VFFWIS 2020). Table E1-10. Plant species with federal or state legal status in the commonwealth of Virginia and those found to occur in Albemarle or Fluvanna Counties (VDCR 2020) Common Name/Natural Community Scientific Name State Conservation Status Rank Federal Legal Status State Legal Status NON -VASCULAR PLANTS A liverwort Bazzania nudicaulis S1 SOC None A moss Campylopus carolinae S1 SOC None Rock gnome lichen Cetradonia linearis S1 LE None Appalachian threadwort Drepanolejeunea appalachiana S1 SOC None Appalachian fringe lichen Heterodermia appalachensis S1 SOC None Afringe lichen Heterodermia erecta S1 SOC None A loop lichen Hypotrachyna virginica SH SOC None Blomquist's leafy liverwort Lejeunea blomquistii S1 SOC None Keever's Bristle -moss Orthotrichum keeverae S1 SOC None Sullivant's leafy liverwort' Plagiochila sullivandi SH SOC None Horsehair threadwort Sphenolobopsispearsonii S1 SOC None R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E42 September 2020 Common Name/Natural Community Scientific Name State Conservation Status Rank Federal Legal Status State Legal Status VASCULAR PLANTS Fraser Fir Abies fraseri S1 SOC None Sensitive Joint -vetch Aeschynomene virginica S2 LT LT Sea -beach amaranth Amaranthus pumilus S1 LT LT Virginia Roundleaf birch Betula lenta var. uber S1 LT LE Shale barren rock cress Boechera serotina S2 LE LT Valley doll's -daisy Boltonia montana S1 SOC LE Small-anthered Bittercress Cardamine micranthera S2 LE LE Juniper sedge Carexjuniperorum S1 None LE Roan Mountain Sedge Carex roonensis S2 SOC None ASedge Carexsp. 2 S1 SOC None Fogg's goosefoot Chenopodium foggii Si? SOC None Addison's Leatherflower Clematis addisonii Si? SOC None Millboro Leatherflower Clematis viticaulis S1S2 SOC LT Bentley's coralroot Corallorhiza bentleyi S2 SOC LE Cream -flowered tick -trefoil Desmodium ochroleucum S1 SOC None Blue Witch Grass Dichanthelium caerulescens S1 SOC None Smooth Coneflower Echinaceo laevigato S2 LE LT A Eupatorium Eupatorium maritimum S1 SOC None Harper's fimbry Fimbristylis perpusilla S1 SOC LE Harperella Harperellanodosa S1 LE LE Virginia Sneezeweed Helenium virginicum S2 LT LE Swamp -pink Helonias bullata S2S3 LT LE WhiteAlumroot Heucheraalba S1 SOC None Roan mountain bluet Houstonio montana S1 LE None Long -stalked Holly Hex collina S1 None LE Peters Mountain mallow Iliamna corei S1 LE LE Kankakee mallow Iliamna remoto S1 SOC None Winter Quillwort Isoetes hyemalis S2 SOC None Virginia Quillwort Isoetes virginica S1 SOC LE Small Whorled Pogonia Isotria medeoloides S2 LT LE New Jersey Rush Juncus caesariensis S2 SOC LT Gray's Lily Lilium grayi S2 SOC None sandhills bog lily Lilium pyrophilum S1 SOC None Long Beach Seedbox Ludwigia brevipes S2 SOC None Raven's Seedbox Ludwigia ravenii S1 SOC None Tall Barbara's -buttons Morshallia legrandii S1 SOC None Narrow -leaved Spatterdock Nupharsagittifolia S1 SOC LT Riverbank evening -primrose Oenothera riparia S1S2 SOC None Yellow Nailwort Paronychia virginica var. virginica S1 SOC None Canby's Mountain -lover Paxistima canbyi S2 SOC None Piedmont fameflower Phemeranthus piedmontanus S1 SOC None Sword -leaf phlox' Phlox buckleyi S2 SOC None R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E43 September 2020 Common Name/Natural Community Scientific Name State Conservation Status Rank Federal Legal Status State Legal Status Prairie fringed orchid Platanthera leucophoea S1 LT LT Shriver's frilly orchid Platanthera shriveri S1 SOC None Tennessee Pondweed Potamogeton tennesseensis S1 SOC None Basil Mountain -mint Pycnanthemum clinopodioides S1 SOC None Torrey's Mountain -mint Pycnanthemum torreyi S2 SOC None Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii S1 LE LT Sun -facing Coneflower Rudbeckia heliopsidis S1 SOC None Chaffseed Schwalbea americana SH LE None Northeastern Bulrush Scirpusancistrochaetus S2 LE LE Reclining Bulrush Scirpusflaccidtfolius S1S2 SOC LT Broad -leaf Goldenrod Solidago lancifolia S1 SOC None Virginia Spiraea Spiraea virginiana S1 LT LE Appalachian Hedge -nettle Stachys appalachiana S1 SOC None Epling's Hedge -nettle Stachys eplingii S1 SOC None Yadkin hedge -nettle Stachys matthewsii S1 SOC None Running Glade Clover Trifolium calcaricum S1 SOC LE Virginia Least Trillium Trillium pusillum var. virginianum S2 SOC None A violet I Viola sp. 1 S1 SOC None 1: Species listed a potentially occurring Albemarle County State Conservation Status Rank S3 - Critically imperiled in the state because of extreme rarity or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state. Typically, 5 or fewer populations or occurrences; or very few remaining individuals (<1000). S2 - Imperiled in the state because of rarity or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the state. Typically, 6 to 20 populations or occurrences or few remaining individuals (1,000 to 3,000). S3 - Vulnerable in the state either because rare and uncommon, or found only in a restricted range (even if abundant at some locations), or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation. Typically, 21 to 100 populations or occurrences (1,000 to 3,000). S#7 - Inexact or uncertain numeric rank. S#S#- Range rank; A numeric range rank, (e.g. S2S3) is used to indicate the range of uncertainty about the exact status of the element. Ranges cannot skip more than one rank. Federal Legal Status LE - Listed Endangered LT - Listed Threatened PE - Proposed Endangered PT - Proposed Threatened C - Candidate SOC - Species of Concern State Legal Status LE - Listed Endangered LT - Listed Threatened PE - Proposed Endangered PT - Proposed Threatened C - Candidate SC - Special Concern R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E44 September 2020 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Environmental impacts of the proposed hydroelectric project include both temporary impacts associated with construction activities and permanent impacts associated with project operation. The applicant has consulted with state and federal resource agencies to gather information about resources in the project area and understand management priorities (Appendix 2). Potential impacts and proposed protective and mitigative and enhancement measures for each resource area are summarized in the following sections. 2.1 Vegetative Cover 2.1.1 Potential Impacts of Project The applicant's objectives are to: 1) maintain existing plant communities, 2) protect species with conservation priority, and 3) prevent the spread of noxious weeds. Modification of Jefferson Mill and dam to accommodate the hydropower project is unlikely to affect the botanical resources in the project area. Temporary impacts to botanical resources may occur during construction activities. Staging of equipment will occur on existing gravel pad parking or manicured lawn area to the extent practical. The turbine and powerhouse will be constructed within the Hardware River and are not expected to affect vegetation. The project proposes to connect to the existing electrical interconnection along an existing right-of-way, minimizing both the amount of ground disturbance necessary, the potential for powerline collisions with bats and birds, and visual resource impacts. It is anticipated that any alterations to local wetland, riparian or littoral habitat will be minimal and temporary and no terrestrial habitat will be permanently displaced. Permanent impacts during operation will be minimal as the project footprint is primarily within existing features. The proposed access road is through landscaped area around the existing mill building and will not disturb native vegetation. The proposed portage path is approximately 300 feet long and 2 feet wide and may disturb understory plants but will not require removal of large trees or shrubs. 2.1.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation Construction -related disturbance, no matter how small, has the potential to further encourage the spread of noxious weeds into the project area. Construction activities will be planned to avoid disturbance to existing communities and prevent the spread of noxious weeds; all disturbed areas will be actively managed to facilitate return to their original vegetation condition or with native vegetation. Project construction will minimize removal of vegetation R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E45 September 2020 and protect emergent vegetation adjacent to the Hardware River by restricting work areas. Pre - construction management will prevent the introduction of weeds into the project area and limit the spread of existing infestations by identifying, marking and treating any weed infestations. During construction, weed management will include using certified weed -free materials for erosion control and fill and washing and inspecting any vehicles or equipment entering the work site. Reclamation and reseeding measures are intended to protect the project area from future infestations and prevent noxious weeds from becoming established on disturbed soils. Once operational, project facilities will be run in a manner that minimizes disturbance to plant communities. 2.2 Fish and Wildlife Resources 2.2.1 Potential Impacts of Project Potential temporary impacts of project construction on fish and wildlife resources include: Fish stranding in work areas behind cofferdams Fish habitat degradation due to water quality impacts Wildlife habitat degradation due to: o Noise during construction activities o Introduction or spread of noxious weeds Potential impacts of project operation on fish and wildlife resources include: Fish injury caused by impingement on the debris rack Fish injury or mortality during turbine entrainment Loss of aquatic habitat in the footprint of the proposed powerhouse and localized changes to aquatic habitat in forebay and tailrace Improved upstream fish passage for American Eel and Sea Lamprey 2.2.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation The applicant's objectives are to: 1) minimize disturbance to both aquatic and terrestrial habitats and wildlife and; 2) protect sensitive species and species of conservation priority in the project area 3) maintain existing plant communities; and 4) prevent the spread of noxious weeds. Construction timing and methods will be planned in accordance with these goals. The applicant will work closely with state and federal resource agencies to develop project -specific measures to ensure that construction and operation of the facility aligns with these objectives. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E46 September 2020 The applicant plans to implement the following mitigation measures for fish, wildlife, and botanical resources: • Time -of -year restriction for instream work from March 15 through June 30 for protection of anadromous waters and from May 15 through July 31 for protection of James Spinymussel during the spawning season, • Conduct any in -stream work activities during low or no -flow conditions, using non - erodible cofferdams or turbidity curtains to isolate the construction area, blocking no more than 50% of the streamflow at any given time, stockpiling excavated material in a manner that prevents reentry into the stream, restoring original streambed and streambank contours, revegetating barren areas with native vegetation, and implementing strict erosion and sediment control measures. • Protect water quality of fish habitat as described in Section 2.3.2 • Automated debris alert to minimize risk of impingement on debris rack • Fish -friendly Natel D-058 Restoration Hydro Turbine to minimize the potential for turbine injury and mortality for downstream -passing fishes, • Improve upstream fish passage to benefit migratory fish species with the addition of a eel ramp with substrates for both American Eel and Sea Lamprey • Avoid the potential for birds and bats to collide with power lines by using existing buried electrical conduit. Where feasible, the applicant plans adhere to the following best management practices for fish, wildlife, and botanical resources: • Pre -construction surveys following VDGIF protocols, within 60 days of the start of construction, to identify the presence of any aquatic mussels in proposed work areas • Conduct fish and mussel salvage to protect animals in dewatered work areas from temporary impacts of construction activities. • Avoid and minimize impacts to undisturbed forest, wetlands and streams to the fullest extent practicable, • Construction activities will be planned to avoid disturbance to existing communities and prevent the spread of noxious weeds; all temporarily disturbed areas will be actively managed to facilitate return to their original vegetation condition. Once operational, project facilities will be run in a manner that minimizes disturbance to plant communities. • Maintain naturally vegetated buffers of at least 100 feet in width around all on -site wetlands and on both sides of all perennial and intermittent streams, where practicable, R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E47 September 2020 • Conduct any significant tree removal and ground clearing activities outside of the primary songbird nesting season of March 15 through August 15. 2.3 Water Quality and Quantity 2.3.1 Potential Impacts of Project The project will be operated in a run -of -river manner and will not have an impact on the volume of water flowing past the dam and into the Hardware River. Maintaining the current flow regime should limit project operation impacts on water resources. However, there are some potential impacts that are associated with the construction or operation of the proposed project. Potential temporary impacts of project construction to water quality include: Increased erosion and or sedimentation Newly poured concrete can be toxic to aquatic life unless properly cured prior to coming into contact with surface water. Installation of project features may require concrete work which may have a detrimental impact on water quality by increasing pH. Hazardous substance spills The applicant does not anticipate that project operation would have effects on water -quality parameters as the timing and volume of water passing through the dam will not change. The dam is short enough that the reservoir has a very low residence time and stratification does not develop. Water routed through the powerhouse, fishway and dam crest is not expected to differ in water quality. Similarly, operation of the project is not expected to increase any sedimentation or erosion; no new impervious surfaces are proposed and existing vegetation will be restored and maintained. 2.3.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation Protection measures during project construction include: Protection of water quality during construction and site restoration activities will be guided by an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan in accordance with the most recent edition of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and applicable ordinances. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E48 September 2020 Isolating construction behind cofferdams to limit the potential to introduce and sediment or contaminants to the Hardware River. Isolation of work areas will allow all concrete to harden and cure prior to contact with open water 2.4 Land and Water Uses 2.4.1 Potential Impacts of Project The project will use an existing dam and mill that were built over 200 years ago to capture water power and will not change land use in the project area. The project will be operated in a run -of -river manner, with no change to storage volume or flows in the river for the purpose of power generation; no impacts are anticipated. 2.4.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation The project has been designed to avoid impacts to land and water uses; no protective measures are proposed. 2.5 Recreational Use 2.5.1 Potential Impacts of Project The proposed project will not reduce the abundance or quality of recreational opportunities available in the project vicinity. The proposed project is located on private land without public access for recreation. Distant public road crossings do provide access for low levels of canoeing and kayaking in Hardware River through the project area. Construction of the proposed project will not interfere with recreational boating as river flow will be routed around the construction area and preserve access to the portage on the eastern bank of the Hardware River. Run -of - river operation will preserve all recreation downstream of the proposed project including boating and fishing in the Hardware River Wildlife Management Area. 2.5.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation The applicant proposes to provide a new portage trail around the existing dam on the eastern bank of the Hardware River for recreational boaters (Exhibit 3E). The proposed unpaved portage trail is approximately 300 feet long and 2 feet wide. The proposed trail would allow upstream or downstream portage around the dam for non -motorized boats including canoes and kayaks. The path location would preserve boater safety by directing boaters away from the proposed hydroelectric project intake, outlet and fish passage facilities. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E49 September 2020 2.6 Socio-Economic Conditions 2.6.1 Potential Impacts of Project The proposed hydropower project will have a positive impact on socioeconomic resources within the region. The power generated will offset negative impacts often associated with non- renewable energy sources such as:1) burning fossil fuel; 2) the generation of solid waste; 3) the discharge of wastewater; and, 4) the discharge of polluted air emissions. In the event of a regional power outage, this proposed project could provide some measure of emergency power. This project will also help reduce dependence on fossil fuels. The proposed project is expected to bring in temporary construction jobs and permanent operating and maintenance needs. The economic benefits from wages paid by subcontractors, sales tax on materials, direct commerce with local vendors, and local property taxes generated by the project will augment the local economy. It is expected that the electrical power generated will be used onsite; the majority of the economic benefits will remain local. 2.6.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation Construction of the proposed project will provide a modest positive impact to the region and, as such, will be a small net gain for the local economy. 2.7 Historical and Archeological Resources 2.7.1 Potential Impacts of Project Upon establishment of an agreed upon APE, an onsite comprehensive cultural resource assessment survey will be completed by a local consulting archaeologist. The survey effort and subsequent reporting will evaluate the potential for any negative impacts of the hydroelectric project. 2.7.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation Modification of the Jefferson Mill to accommodate hydropower may disturb local archaeological sites or traditional cultural properties. The applicant has made an effort to minimize these impacts by minimizing the need for new structures or facilities. Existing roads will be used during construction, and other modifications involve features on the dam itself. In addition, the project will operate in a run -of -river mode adopting current flow regimes and tie into an existing electrical infrastructure. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E50 September 2020 2.8 Visual Resources 2.8.1 Potential Impacts of Project The proposed project is designed to preserve the visual character of Jefferson Mill and dam. Recreational, historic and natural characteristics of the project area have been considered in the design which maximizes use of existing structures and proposes new structures in keeping with the character of the site. Scenic and aesthetic values will be maintained or enhanced. 2.8.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation Project facilities have been designed, located, and will be operated to substantially avoid visible or audible intrusion on the natural setting integral to the existing visual and recreational activities or opportunities. New project features propose using materials that are compatible with the historic character of the mill and dam. 2.9 Endangered or Threatened Species, Critical Habitats 2.9.1 Potential Impacts of Project Potential Impacts of project construction and operations to sensitive aquatic resources and potential mitigation measures include: Potential sedimentation Localized changes to forebay and tailwater aquatic habitat Disturbance of mussels during project construction and isolation of work areas Potential Impacts of project construction and operations to sensitive wildlife resources include: Noise during construction activities may disturb or temporally displace sensitive wildlife. The appropriate timing of portions of project construction may be necessary to avoid disrupting certain sensitive wildlife. Potential Impacts of project construction and operations to sensitive botanical resources include: The proposed project has the potential to displace sensitive plant species that occur within the project footprint. The applicant's objectives are to: 1) maintain existing plant communities, 2) protect species with conservation priority, and 3) prevent the spread of noxious weeds. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E51 September 2020 2.9.2 Resource Protection and Mitigation Potential mitigative measures for sensitive aquatic resources include: Time -of -year restriction for instream work from May 15 through July 31 for protection of James Spinymussel during the spawning season. Mussel survey and relocation be performed from 100 meters upstream through 400 meters downstream of impact areas in such waters by a qualified, permitted biologist, preferably no more than six months prior to the start of construction. All survey and relocation activities will be coordinated with regional VDGIF and USFWS biologists. Potential mitigative measures for sensitive wildlife resources include: Appropriate timing of portions of project construction may be necessary to avoid disrupting sensitive wildlife. Potential mitigative measures for sensitive botanical resources include: Prior to construction, the applicant will identify any sensitive plants within areas to be disturbed and either prevent or mitigate potential impacts to these species. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E52 September 2020 3 REFERENCES Albemarle County Biodiversity Work Group (ACBWG). 2004. Albemarle County Biodiversity: A report on its history, current conditions, and threats, with strategies for future protection. 91pp. Albemarle County Parks & Recreation. 2020. Parks. Accessed online May 30, 2020 at: https://www.albemarle.org/government/parks-recreation/parks Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC). 2007. American shad stock assessment report for peer review Vol. 1. Stock Assessment Report No. 07-01(Supplement). 224p. Accessed online (May 20220): http://www.asmfc.org/uploads/file/2007ShadStockAssmtReportVol u mel. pdf Austin, S.H., Krstolic, J.L. and Wiegand, U. 2011. Peak -flow characteristics of Virginia streams. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey. Bartgis R. 1992. Loggerhead shrike, Lanius Ludovicianus. Pages 281-297 in K. J. Schneider and D. M. Pence, editors. Migratory nongame birds of management concern in the Northeast. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, Massachusetts. 400 pp. Charlottesville Albemarle Convention & Visitors Bureau (CACVB). 2020. Hardware River Wildlife Management Area. Accessed online June 7, 2020 at: www.visitcha rlottesvi I le.org/l isti ng/ha rdwa re-river-wi I d I ife-management-area/672/ Data USA. 2020. Albemarle County, VA Economy. Accessed online April 17 at: data usa. io/profi le/geo/a I be ma rle-cou my-va#economy eBird. 2020. Cornell Lab of Ornithology eBird website. Accessed online May 19, 2020 at: https://www.birds.cornell.edu/ Fisher, Matthew T. 2007. Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Anadromous Fish Passage at Boshers Dam Vertical Slot Fishway on the James River, Virginia. Thesis. Virginia Commonwealth University. 64pp. Fleming, Gary P., Philip P. Coulling, Dean P. Walton, Kathleen M. McCoy, and Michelle R. Parrish. 2001. The Natural Communities of Virginia: Classification of Ecological Community Groups, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Natural Heritage Natural Heritage Technical Report 01-1. Freshwater Mussel Host Database. 2017. The freshwater mussel host database, Illinois Natural History Survey & Ohio State University Museum of Biological Diversity, 2017. Accessed R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E53 September 2020 online at: http://wwx.inhs.illinois.edu/collections/mollusk/data/freshwater-mussel-host- database. Griffith, M.B. 2014. Natural variation and current reference for specific conductivity and major ions in wadeable streams of the conterminous USA. Freshwater Science, 33(1), pp.1-17. Hove, M. 1990. Distribution and life history of the endangered James spinymussel, Pleurobema collina (Bivalvia: Unionidae). M.S. Thesis. Virg. Polytech. Inst. And State Univ., Blacksburg, Virginia. 113 pp. Hove, M.C. and R.J. Neves. 1994. Life history of the endangered James spinymussel Pleurobema collina (Conrad, 1837) (Mollusca: Unionidae). American Malacological Bulletin, 11(1): 29- 40. National Park Service (NIPS). 2007. National Register of Historic Places Nomination for the Southern Albemarle Rural Historic District. Albermarle County, Virginia, National Register #002-5045. Petty, Melissa. 2005. Distribution, Genetic Characterization, and Life History of the James spinymussel, Pleurobema collina (Bivalvia: Unionidae), in Virginia and North Carolina. Masters Thesis Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, VA. 142pp. Plant NoVa Natives. 2014. Native Plants for Northern Virginia. Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program. Edition 1. 52pp. Riverfacts. 2020. Virginia Whitewater, Hardware River. Accessed June 9, 2020 at: www.riverfacts.com/rivers/13468.htmI Scottsville. 2020.Scottsville by the Numbers. Accessed online April 18, 2020 at: www.scottsvil le.org/a bout-scottsvi I le -virgin is/scottsvi I le -by -the -numbers/ U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). 2020. Quick Facts. Accessed online April 18, 2020 at: Retrieved from www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/albemarlecountyvirginia/PST045219: . USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2017. 2017 Census of Agriculture. Complete data available at www.nass.usda.gov/AgCensus. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).1990. James Spinymussel (Plerobema collina) Recovery Plan. Newton Corner, Massachusetts. 38 pp. USFWS. 2019. Conserving South Carolina's At -Risk Species. www.fws.gov/southeast/endangered-species-act/at-risk-species R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E54 September 2020 USFWS. 2020a. The National Wetlands Inventory Mapper. Version May 11, 2020. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/ USFWS. 2020b. Southeastern mussels. Accessed May 20, 2020 at: https://www.fws.gov/southeast/wildlife/mussels U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2008, Water Data Report 2008 02030000 Hardware River Below Briery Creek, Near Scottsville, VA. 17 pp Online at: https:Hwdr.water.usgs.gov/wy2008/pdfs/02030000.2008.pdf USGS 2016, The StreamStats program for Virginia, accessed May 18, 2020, at URL http://streamstats.usgs.gov. University of Virginia (UVA). 2020. Institutional Research and Analytics: Degrees Awarded. Accessed online August 21, 2020 at: ira.virginia.edu/university-stats-facts/degrees- awarded Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (VDCR). 2011. Native Plants for Conservation, Restoration & Landscaping. Riparian Plant Species of the Virginia Piedmont Region. VDCR. 2017. Biscuit Run State Park Master Plan Executive Summary. November 2017. VDCR. 2020a. James River Heritage Trail. Accessed online May 30, 2020 at: https://www.dcr.virginia.gov/recreational-planning/trailerh. VDCR. 2020b. Outdoor Recreation Participation Rates. Data from 2017 Virginia Outdoors Demand Survey conducted by the University of Virginia's Center for Survey Research. Accessed online May 28, 2020 at: https://www.dcr.virginia.gov/recreational- planning/vop-participation-activities VDCR. 2020c. Scenic Rivers Program. Accessed online April 25, 2020 at: www.dcr.virginia.gov/recreational-planning/srmain VDCR Division of Natural Heritage. 2020. Virginia Natural Heritage Database Search. Accessed online May 20, 2020 at: https:Hvanhde.org/species-search. Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ). 2015. Water Quality Improvement Plan for the Hardware and North Fork Hardware River: A plan to reduce bacteria in the water. November 18, 2015. VADEQ. 2019. 319H TMDL Implementation Project Report Hardware River Watershed. Virginia Nonpoint Source Management Program. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E55 September 2020 https://www.deg.virginia.gov/Portals/0/DEQ/Water/NonpointSource/Implementation Pro jects/2019 Progress HardwareRiver.pdf VADEQ. 2020. Draft 2020 305(b)/303(d) Water Quality Assessment Integrated Report. June 8,2020. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). 2020a. Hardware River WMA. Access online at: https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wma/hardware-river/ VDGIF. 2020b. Freshwater Fish and Boating in Virginia. Accessed online May 19, 2020 at: https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/2020-fish ing-regulations.pdf Virginia Department of Health. 2020. Fish Consumption Advisory for the James River and Tributaries. Accessed online May 19, 2020 at: https://www.vd h.vi rgi nia.gov/envi ron menta I-hea lth/public-hea lth-toxicology/fish- consu m ption-advisory/ Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR). 2020. Jefferson Mill Architectural Survey Form DHR ID:002-0089. Richmond, VA. Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VaFWIS). 2020. Initial Project Assessment Report for the Jefferson Mill Project. Submitted to the Applicant on 3/27/2020 VaFWIS. 2020. Data queries for Fish and Mussel Speces in the Hardware River. Accessed online April 10, 2020 at: https://vafwis.dgif.virginia.gov/fwis/ Virginia Herpetological Society (VaHS). 2020. Accessed online on May 21, 2020 at: https://virginiaherpetologicalsociety.com Virginia Tech Department of Biological Systems Engineering (VT-BSE). 2015. Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Load Development for North Fork Hardware River and Hardware River. VT-BSE Document No. 2015-0005. October 2015. Submitted by Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. Ward JV, Stanford JA (eds.). 1979. The Ecology of Regulated Streams. Plenum Press. Plenum, NY. 398 pp. Wildlife Foundation of Virginia. 2020. Recent Projects. Accessed online May 28, 2020 at: https://www.vawildlife.org/projects R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. E56 September 2020