[env-trinity] Nonprofit created to take hold of Klamath dams targeted for removal

[Tom Stokely]

http://www.times-standard.com/environment-and-nature/20160304/nonprofit-created-to-take-hold-of-klamath-dams-targeted-for-removal  
Nonprofit created to take hold of Klamath dams targeted for removal
Congressman voices opposition to fed involvement in dam removal efforts
By Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardFriday, March 4, 2016After nearly five years of defeat on Capitol Hill, proponents of the largest dam removal project in U.S. history have turned to a new vehicle to resurrect the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement — a nonprofit private corporation.The new California-based Klamath River Renewal Corporation is planning to take control of four hydroelectric dams — three in California and one in Oregon — currently owned by the Portland-based energy company PacifiCorp, and will work to decommission the dams through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission by 2020. “It turns out we don’t need Congress to remove dams,” Karuk Tribe Natural Resources Policy Adviser Craig Tucker said. “Congress has already passed the Federal Power Act and that gives us the power to remove dams without congressional approval.”PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely said that the nonprofit’s board of directors and staff is expected to be filled within the next few weeks. The board members will likely include signatories of the original 2010 agreement as well as other entities, according to Gravely.“We’re comfortable with the amendments that have been negotiated,” Gravely said. “We’re hopeful as many of the original signatories to the agreement and maybe some others will sign. We believe we have found a workable way forward to enact the agreement we’ve supported for nearly 10 years now.”Gravely said PacifiCorp would not be represented on the board.
Congressional opposition
The Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement and two other related Klamath Basin agreements — the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and Upper Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement — proposed to restore habitat quantity and quality to threatened basin fish species. The agreements also proposed to give water sharing assurances for Native American tribes as well as agriculturists and irrigators in southern Oregon following decades of water rights disputes. However, the agreements failed to pass through the House Natural Resources Committee by the end of 2015, causing the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement to expire and prompting several tribes to withdraw their support.In early February, the U.S. Department of Interior and states of California and Oregon announced a new effort to revise the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement.If implemented, the new agreement would remove the dams through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rather than through Congress, where dam removal had met stiff Republican opposition. California’s 1st District Congressman Doug LaMalfa, who sits on the House Natural Resources Committee, has been an adamant opponent of dam removal, with three of the dams — Copco 1, Copco 2, and Iron Gate — located in his district. LaMalfa questioned U.S. Deputy Secretary of the Interior Mike Connor earlier this week about the federal agency’s role in creating the nonprofit.“We’re seeing an administration that claims to be the most transparent in history engaged in closed meetings, neck-deep in a shell corporation, and requiring stakeholders to sign nondisclosure agreements just to learn how they’ll be affected,” LaMalfa said to Connor during a Tuesday hearing in Washington, D.C.“This seems like a front company in a process designed to avoid public scrutiny and avoid open government laws,” LaMalfa continued. “The administration is moving forward with its goal of dam removal while ignoring the water supply issues that impact thousands of residents.”In response, Connor said that the nonprofit is not a creation of his administration, but rather a creation of PacifiCorp and the states of California and Oregon.“The desire here is to have the federal government removed from the whole dam removal process,” Connor said.LaMalfa voiced his intention to file a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain documents related to the meeting.“It is entirely inappropriate for public employees to participate in secret meetings and force those who lives could be impacted to sign nondisclosure agreements,” LaMalfa said to Connor.Signatories of the agreement are set to hold a public meeting in Sacramento on March 16 to discuss the new draft of the agreement and hear public input.
‘We haven’t walked away’
Three local tribes including the Yurok, Karuk and Klamath Tribes of Oregon have supported the agreement since its creation, but now they may be joined by the Hoopa Valley Tribe. The Hoopa tribe had originally opposed the agreement due its tether to Congress as well as the water sharing agreements that were attached to it in the other two basin agreements.Hoopa Tribal Fisheries Director Mike Orcutt said tribal representatives have been participating in the negotiations, but said the ultimate decision to support the new draft will be decided by the tribal council.“We would have an opportunity, if it’s acceptable, to sign the new agreement,” he said.Tucker said not all the parties in the negotiations are entirely satisfied, specifically representatives of basin irrigator interests who Tucker said have been advocating for the water sharing provisions in the now expired Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and Upper Klamath Basin Agreement. As a result of this, some of the original signatories of these agreements such as the Klamath Water Users Association have grown uncertain.“We certainly have concerns, but we haven’t walked away,” Klamath Water Users Association Executive Director Scott White said. “... We signed on to a package deal. Our bargained for benefits were part of that package. For those to be severed from dam removal is concerning.”The ongoing negotiations are still addressing the idea of creating a new Klamath Basin plan that would include some of the provisions of these other two agreements.“(Irrigators) worked with us for a long time on a more comprehensive package,” Tucker said. “That kind of failed due in large part because of LaMalfa. I do just want to acknowledge at least from Karuk Tribe’s perspective, we still have to work with agriculture to solve the water piece.”Calls to the Klamath Water Users Association, which represents irrigators and was one of the original signatories of the agreement, were not returned by Friday evening.The target goal for dam removal is still 2020, Gravely said, and will be covered by the $450 million already set aside for the project and liability insurance. PacifiCorp’s ratepayers are contributing $200 million to the project with California contributing $250 million through the 2014 water bond, Proposition 1.Tucker said their hope is to have a new agreement signed by as many of the original signatories and new signatories by April when they plan to submit it to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Humboldt County had originally signed on to the agreement in 2010.Once the agreement is signed, Tucker said he expects opponents will file a lawsuit to challenge it.“I just know that some folks are going to fight us as we try to fix this river,” Tucker said.Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504.  URL: http://www.times-standard.com/environment-and-nature/20160304/nonprofit-created-to-take-hold-of-klamath-dams-targeted-for-removal© 2016 Eureka Times-Standard (http://www.times-standard.com)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20160305/1b4a4306/attachment.html>