11/12/2015

i

Dams:(Finally getting ready to start.)TVA releases key Boone Dam repair studyBy News Channel 11 Staff, October 28, 2015, wjhl.com

JOHNSON CITY, TN (WJHL) – TheTennessee Valley Authority released a draftversion of its environmental assessment onthe Boone Dam Repair Project Wednesdayafternoon. The assessment is required byfederal law, and it’s one of the final tasks forTVA as it moves toward approval of its plan torepair the dam starting early next year. TVAplans to spend 5 to 7 years and as much as$300 million to stop the flow of water underand through the earth portion of Boone Dam, aproblem first detected in October 2014 when asinkhole appeared at the base of the dam.A draft of that assessment was released around 4 p.m. Wednesday.

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu

Some Dam – Hydro News TM

And Other Stuff

1

Quote of Note: “For every acton, tere is an equal and opposit government program.” - - Bob Wels

Some Dam - Hydro News Newsletter Archive for Back Issues and Search http://npdp.stanford.edu/Click on Link (Some Dam - Hydro News) Bottom Right - Under Perspectives

“Good wine is a necessity of life.” - -Thomas JeffersonRon’s wine pick of the week: 2013 Bogle Zinfandel "Old Vine"“ No nation was ever drunk when wine was cheap. ” - - Thomas Jefferson

• CLICK HERE TO READ: TVA Boone Dam Draft Environmental Assessment https://mgtvwjhl.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/tva-boone-dam-draft-environmental-assessment.pdf

The draft examines a wide-range of environmental impacts of either pursuing no action or pursuing the TVA’s planned 5 year repair that will require Boone Reservoir to remain at below-normal levels. TVA will hold a public hearing on the draft assessment on Thursday, November 5th, from 5:30 to 7:30 pm at Daniel Boone High School. TVA’s board may vote on the final plan in February 2016. If approved, the repair world would begin in March,

(Who’s right, who knows? 200 boats isn’t many people. What about selling the excess to CA?)What it will take to put dam breaching back on the table Despite protests, dam removal remains stalledWarming killed thousands of salmon this summerPacific blob of warm water is ominous signLetters from the West, OCTOBER 29, 2015, idahostatesman.com

The science and economicssupporting breaching the four lowerSnake River dams has only gottenstronger. But anyone who says thepolitics has changed are wishing andhoping, not accurately reading thetea leaves. A recent story byNicholas Geranios of TheAssociated Press said that “the ideahas gained new momentum,” after200 boats did a floating protest onthe Snake River October 3. “Thegroundswell that is occurring rightnow to remove the four dams is likenothing I’ve seen since 1998,” said Sam Mace, director of Save Our Wild Salmon.I’m sorry, but I’m not convinced. The evidence that breaching dams would help salmon is more persuasive now than it was in 1998, when the biologists and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game concluded that eliminating the obstacles would be the best way to recover Idaho’s salmon and steelhead runs.

And the economic case for breaching grows every year, as barge shipping on the Snake River drops and improving energy efficiency keeps the Northwest’s power supply at a 16 percent surplus. But the dams still produce low-carbon power and, after all the gold-plating the federal government has done over the past 20 years to upgrade turbines and add fish-passage devices , the federal agencies would be stuck with billions in stranded costs that would be expensive to recoup if the dams were breached. The reason there is no great political groundswell? Sport anglers and tribal fishermen are still catching fish in great numbers. More than 1 million fall chinook are expected to return to the Columbia Basin this year — 58,200 of them back to Idaho after passing over Lower Granite Dam. The main reason for that is recent favorable Pacific Oceanconditions, providing Idaho’s salmon ample feed and fewer predators. Until that changes, I can’t see many salmon lovers, anglers, Indians, sporting businesses or others storming the gates of theNorthwest states or Washington, D.C., for action.

If (Washington) Gov. (Jay) Inslee, Oregon Gov. Kate Brown and Montana Gov. Steve Bullock asked for honest, science-based, inclusive climate planning for salmon, people, and for the waters in the Columbia and Snake Rivers, and promised to participate, it would happen and be good for the Northwest. Pat Ford of Boise in the Seattle Times But here’s my warning, dam-loversand salmon-kissers. Don’t get comfortable. Disturbing developments could turn things around quickly.

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu2

First, the Columbia and Snake rivers both got so hot so early this summer that Idaho’s steelhead run all but disappeared, despite the more than 250,000 juveniles that went out since 2012. Just 46 returned to the Sawtooth Basin; another 52 were caught at Lower Granite and trucked to Idaho. It won’t take many back-to-back hot summers like that to threaten the progress the Snake River sockeye program has seen since the bleak days when Lonesome Larry was the single sockeye to return to Redfish Lake. NOAA climate scientist Liza Crozier in Seattle has been watching the effects of global warming and climate change on salmon and she says this year’s sockeye demise underscores how fast inland conditions can change. This has been a very tough year, but we cannot predict the long-term effects of climate change based on one year alone. We must consistently look for ways to better protect salmon as science helps us understand how our climate is changing and how the ecology of the system responds to those changes. Will Stelle, regional administrator, NOAA Fisheries in Seattle Times The Snake River sockeye were hit far harder than those that swim up the Columbia River into the Okanagan River. Crozier thinks this may be due to the fact that the Columbia sockeye have adjusted their migration time earlier, whilethe Snake River fish have stayed the same. Why? It may be because Snake River sockeye have had such low numbers for such a long time, and then were pulled out of the system into the captive-breeding program, that they have not had the same ability to experience in-river conditions and adjust. Fall chinook have changed their migration pattern in the Snake over the past 25 years, many waiting to migrate out until the following spring when conditions are better. Both of these evolutionary changes give us hope that these remarkable fish can find a way to survive as the rivers warm. But there is the separate issue of the warming Pacific Ocean conditions, including what scientists are calling a massive warm-water “blob,” which I have reported on since last year. Biologists say fewer salmon survived the trip out from the spawning grounds this year. We will soon see how changing ocean conditions affect next year’s adult returns. If Pacific Ocean productivity turns as poor as it was 20 years ago, salmon and steelhead returns could dive. That will be the moment when dam-breaching gains new momentum. It could come soon. You will recognize it when the Democratic governors downstream join the grassroot flotillas protesting below the Snake River dams and when budget hawks start agitating to stop spending so much to subsidize a failing system. By Rocky Barker: 208-377-6484, rbarker@idahostatesman.com, @RockyBarker

(It only takes the will and money.)Risky dams face long inspection gapsBy Rick Brundrett, Staff writer, October 30, 2015, greenvilleonline.com

Of the 75 South Carolina dams underemergency repair orders issued in the wake ofrecent historic flooding and rainfall, at least adozen hadn’t been previously inspected by stateregulators for five years or longer, TheGreenville News found in a review of inspectionreports. Since 2010, the S.C. Department ofHealth and Environmental Control (DHEC),which manages the state’s dam-safety program,previously has issued such orders only threetimes, including one each in Greenville andAnderson counties, according to recordsobtained by The News under the Freedom ofInformation Act.There are 6.75 employee positions to overseethe state’s approximately 2,400 regulated dams – 32 of which, plus another four unregulated dams, failed during October’s rainfall and flooding. And that’s been the highest staffing level in thesafety program in recent years, based on requested information provided by DHEC. In fiscal 2005, for example, there were only 1.5 full-time positions in the program. The corresponding program budgets also have been relatively small, taking only $469,035 this fiscal year from the agency’s total current budget of $596 million.

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu3

Within several weeks of what was publicly described as a “1,000-year flooding event,” DHEC saidit had assessed all 652 "Class One” and “Class Two” dams statewide, issuing emergency orders for 75 dams, including one each in Spartanburg and Anderson counties, two in Laurens County, three in Chester County, and three in Greenwood County.

A Class One Dam is defined by DHEC as a potentially high-hazard dam whose failure “may cause loss of life or serious damage to infrastructure.” Failure of a potentially significant-hazard, or Class Two dam, “will not likely cause loss of life but may damage infrastructure,” while failure ofa “Class Three,” or low-hazard dam, “may cause limited property damage.” DHEC’s tiny dam-safety staff had a lot of help in completing the hundreds of inspections in a relatively short time span. In a written response to The Greenville News, agency spokesman Robert Yanity noted DHEC “mobilized more than 125 staff dedicated to dam response for this disaster event,” adding the agency “partnered with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Homeland Security, SCE&G and HDR Engineering as part of our response to the 1,000-year flood.” As for prior dam inspections, Yanity acknowledged that “due to resource and budget limitations, the time between inspections for some dams was longer.” “DHEC has partnered with HDR Engineering to conduct a comprehensive review of the department’s dam safety program, including staffing resource needsand frequency of inspections,” he said. “We will be working with policy makers to review these recommendations and implement any needed program improvements in the future.” Asked whether Gov. Nikki Haley will include more money for the dam safety program in her upcoming executive budget for fiscal 2016-17, Haley spokeswoman Chaney Adams replied in an email response, “DHEC is working on a request for additional resources and we intend to address dam safety in the executive budget and in the next legislative session, but the process for producing the budget and legislation is still underway. “It’s clear from this extraordinary event that we need to re-think the way we regulate dams in South Carolina and Director (Catherine) Heigel is looking at her operations, regulations, and the law to determine what that looks like going forward.”

Years between inspectionsThe Greenville News reviewed hundreds of pages of inspection reports posted on DHEC’s website or provided separately to the newspaper by the agency. Of the 75 dams covered by the emergency repair orders, at least 12 had years-long gaps in the last-listed prior inspections, ranging from five years to more than 14 years. Two of those dams are located in Chester and Fairfield counties; the rest are in Richland County, which also recorded the largest number of failed dams. All 12 dams in question are classified as Class One or Class Two dams. In addition, last-recorded inspections were done in 2000 for three Class Three dams in Richland County that failed and were the subject of emergency repair orders, and there were no past inspection records for three Class Three dams that failed in Aiken County. Yanity said Class One and Class Two dams are scheduled to be inspected every two years and three years, respectively. But a national model calls for inspections every one year, two years and five years for potentially high-hazard, significant-hazard and low-hazard dams, respectively, according to information from the Kentucky-based Association of State Dam Safety Officials. “Obviously, the more often you see a dam, if there were a problem to come up, you would be able to identify that more quickly,” said Mark Ogden, the association’s project manager. Asked if waiting five or more years to inspect potentially high- or significant-hazard dams is too long, Ogden, a registered professional engineerand retired Ohio Department of Natural Resources administrator, replied, “The easy answer to that is, yes. … A dam is like any other man-made structure; it deteriorates or it can if not properly maintained.” Of the 75 dams covered by the emergency orders, virtually all are listed in the National Inventory of Dams, maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, as earthen dams, which Ogden pointed out are more susceptible to failing compared to other types of structures. The 75 dams were built from 1830 to 1989. The median age, or halfway point on the list, is 1955.The Greenville News earlier reported that of 604 listed dams in Greenville, Spartanburg, Pickens, Oconee, Anderson and Laurens counties, nearly 95 percent are earthen, which is about the samepercentage of the total 2,439 listed dams statewide. The newspaper’s analysis of the NID also found that of the total number of dams in the six-county region, 417, or 69 percent, didn’t have a listed Emergency Action Plan (EAP), defined as an action plan to be taken by a dam owner to

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu4

reduce the potential loss of life and property damage in an area affected by a dam failure or flooding. Yanity said, though, only Class One and Class Two dams are required to have EAPs.Only eight dam owners out of the 75 covered by the emergency orders had submitted EAPs at the time of their last-known prior inspections; the rest either provided no EAPs, or no information on that was listed, The News’ latest review found, though Yanity contended that "many more than eight have submitted EAPs."

Upstate emergency ordersHenry Jacobs, owner of a Spartanburg County dam bearing his name and located on a tributary of the Turkey Hen Branch stream near Cowpens, received one of the 75 emergency orders.Under the emergency orders, dam owners are required to lower water levels or empty their reservoirs under the supervision of a licensed South Carolina professional engineer, and provide the results of a “detailed” inspection by the engineer, “including a plan of action to be taken,” to DHEC. Jacobs' order requires him to submit his inspection by 5 p.m. Monday. “I’m in the middle ofthat whole process, and I don’t have enough information from DHEC to give you anything that’s concrete information,” Jacobs told The News, declining further comment. In an October 2014 letter, DHEC inspector James West informed Jacobs his Class Two dam is “not functioning properly,” noting there is “severe erosion” around a concrete discharge pipe, which could “compromise the safety of the dam.” “Should this dam experience difficulty … the impacted area downstream would need to be evacuated and downstream roads blocked,” according to the letter.Another Upstate dam – the Broadway Lake Dam, located at the convergence of Broadway and Neals creeks near Anderson, and owned by Anderson County – also received an emergency order. Jon Batson, the county’s storm water manager, said the county hired a private engineering consultant to design repairs to the dam, noting there is “some erosion” on the back side of the dam and around a concrete block structure at the end of the dam’s primary outlet pipe.“It was something that we were aware of, and we were working with the local DHEC office on it,” Batson said. The Class Two dam received an overall poor rating in an inspection last December, DHEC records show. At least eight other Class One or Class Two dams under the emergency orders also received poor ratings in their last-listed inspections, while two Class Two dams in Edgefield County and another Class Two dam in Greenwood County garnered overall unsatisfactory ratings in inspections from 2012 through last year, records show. Under DHEC regulations, an unsatisfactory ranking means that a “dam safety deficiency is recognized that requires immediate or emergency remedial action for problem resolution.” Asked about the three dams that received unsatisfactory rankings, Yanity told The News, “At this time, repairs for the dams have not been made and they have been referred for enforcement action.”

‘Hanging over my head’In July 2013, DHEC issued an emergency order – one of the previous three issued statewide since 2010 – for the Wesley North Pond Dam, a classified high-hazard dam in Anderson County, records show. Dam owner Ramona Wesley said she had her approximately 1.5-acre pond, located across the street from her Williamston home, emptied in response to the order and has left it drained. “They wanted to me to get an engineer over here and all that, and I couldn’t afford it,” she said. In his written response, Yanity said Wesley and a Richland County dam owner “lowered their reservoirs and left them as is.” He also said dam owners are “responsible for the costs to rebuild or repair their dams.” DHEC issued another emergency order in 2013 for the Anne Parks Short Branch Dam on Short Branch Creek in northern Greenville County near The Cliffs Valley community. The Class One dam received an unsatisfactory rating in a follow-up inspection this year, records show. “I would like to clear this up. It’s been hanging over my head,” said Mac Parks, the trustee for his mother’s estate, which owns the dam, when contacted by The News. Yanity said the dam’s owner “did not comply,” noting DHEC “hired a contractor to install siphons to lower the water level.” “It has been referred to our enforcement division to make repairs and for DHEC to recover costs,” Yanity said. A June 23 inspection report said that “thick vegetation, including weeds, small trees, shrubs, brush, and other deleterious vegetation, must becut and removed from the entire dam.” Parks said problems with the dam started about two years ago when “beavers moved in,” stopping up an overflow pipe and building a dam across the emergency spillway. DHEC also wants trees removed from the dam, but “it’s impossible to get a

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu5

car in there,” he said. Parks, who lives in Greenville, said he was a small boy in the early 1950s when his grandfather and three other men bought property off Short Branch Road and built the dam there to create a third fishing pond, which he estimated covers about three acres.He said his mother, who is 90 years old, inherited the property from her father but “hasn’t been upthere in years.” “She never dreamed it would be a problem,” Parks said.

(A few bucks for a dam.)Second Hagg Lake dam, costing hundreds of millions, would displace Stimson Lumber (photos)By Dana Tims | The Oregonian/OregonLive, October 30, 2015, oregonian.com

The new and potentially controversialpossibility of building a second damjust downstream from Scoggins Damin western Washington County just hitthe table. Elected officials and otherscaution that a second, smaller damremains only one of a handful ofoptions for meeting future instreamflow needs in the Tualatin River andprotecting the structure against amajor earthquake. But they alsoacknowledge that the proposal,however preliminary, is going to raisea ruckus. "Water, increasingly, isbecoming a necessity throughout theUnited States and the world andthere are few options for storing it,"Washington County commissionChairman Andy Duyck said."Unfortunately, we have to look at allthe options."

Letters went out Tuesday to the 23 downstream property owners whose land would be inundated by water impounded by a new dam. A Nov. 9 informational session has also been scheduled to field the anticipated raft of questions. The letters were jointly signed by Clean Water Services and the federal Bureau of Reclamation, which owns Scoggins Dam. The effects of a second dam wouldn't stop with landowners. Due to geographical necessities, it would need to be built on the spot where Stimson Lumber Company has operated a sawmill since 1929. The company current employs 175 workers at the site. Relocation would be costly, Stimson CEO Andrew Miller said Thursday. But he's not willing to rule it out, either. "We understand that this is a top priority for the region to expand its water supply for future generations," Miller said. "If we can meet our needs while helping the county to meet theirs, this needs to be at the center of the table for discussion."Miller described himself as "indifferent" to moving the mill's location, as long as it is as close as possible to the existing site. Miller and Duyck agreed that the cost of buying land for a new mill and paying for its estimated $100 million construction would fall to the public. So would having to relocate affected property owners. "Unfortunately, we have to look at all the options," Washington County commission Chairman Andy Duyck said.

Even so, until more complex financial and logistical calculations can be made, it remains possible that the option could be less expensive than raising and seismically fortifying Scoggins Dam.For starters, they noted, Scoggins Dam, at 2,700 feet in length, is more than twice as long as the 1,100-foot-long downstream dam that could replace it. And it's estimated that Scoggins, built in 1975 – long before scientists determined that a major earthquake in the Cascadia Subduction Zone would destroy it – needs at least $360 million in seismic retrofits. That estimate doesn't include the cost of a local proposal to raise the dam's height by 12 feet to increase drinking-water

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu6

This is looking down the spillway coming out of the lake. Scoggins Dam is a 151-foot-high zoned earthfill structure that is 2,700 feet long at the crest and contains 4 million cubic yards of material. The upstream side of the dam is faced with rock riprap for protection against wave action; the downstream side is faced with topsoil and planted with grass. Total capacity of Henry Hagg Lake is 59,910 acre-feet. /Staff

capacity. Reliance on the existing dam is significant. In addition to supplying drinking water to about 400,000 Washington County residents, Scoggins Dam provides irrigation serving 17,000 acres of county farmland. And more than 20 percent of the water impounded behind the 151-foot-high dam is released into the slow-moving Tualatin River to maintain water quality. The dam's impounded water also creates popular Henry Hagg Lake, which attracts more than 800,000 recreationalists annually. The letter to property owners indicated that a final menu of options won'tbe settled upon until late 2016. Other choices, which have been discussed for as long as a dozen years, include piling dirt on the back of the existing dam to fortify it and building a new concrete dam along the back of Scoggins Dam. Regardless of which route is eventually chosen – construction is not expected to get underway for anywhere from five to 10 years – there's widespread agreement that the cost will ultimately be footed by a combination of federal and statedollars, along with contributions from Washington County ratepayers. "What we know for sure is that doing nothing is not an option," Duyck said. "Beyond that, we have many more questions than answers at this point."

(The drought is the worst ever and they write about S. Carolina.)Emergency repair orders issued for 75 private dams in South CarolinaBy Jenny Jarvie, 11/1/15, latimes.com

After a historic rainfall flooded homesacross South Carolina, the lake whereFrank Lee planned to spend hisretirement — paddling his kayak andfishing for bream — has vanished.From his brick patio, all he can see is apuddle of mud and a small creeksurrounded by a circle of homes thatmay soon face the challenge of raisingas much as $1.5 million to fix the damand restore the lake. “It isn’t pretty, isit?” said Lee, 80, a retired insuranceexecutive, as he gazed at the brownsilt bed of Cary Lake, a 56-acre privatepond whose dam overtopped early thismonth, flooding this tiny suburbancommunity northeast of Columbia. “It’s a tall order for 46 homeowners, many elderly and on Social Security, to come up with more than a million dollars,” he said. “I don’t know where the funding will come from.” With South Carolina still reeling from the destruction caused by the 1,000-year flood, many homeowners are now under emergency orders to drain small ponds and lakes and rebuild unsafe dams. The state Department of Health and Environmental Control has issued 75 emergency orders, calling on property owners and homeowner associations across the state to submit repair plans.

Many who own property by the water — some of whom are already struggling to rebuild damagedhomes — are uncertain how, or even whether, they will restore their ponds and lakes. Experts estimate that it could cost $200,000 to $2 million to rebuild many of the dams to meet current safety standards. After the Oct. 4 flood, when Hurricane Joaquin-fueled storms dropped as much as 20 inches of rain, few dispute that failed or compromised dams could pose a threat to residentsdownstream. The question is who is responsible, and who is prepared to pay, for rebuilding these small earthen dams, some of which were built more than a century ago.Some areas, such as Arcadia Lakes, are calling for federal money to repair the dams, arguing that the private lakes perform a public service by controlling storm water runoff or even supportingpublic roads. Without the lakes, they argue, the property values of “lakeside” homes are likely to plummet, affecting property taxes and basic municipal services. “Arcadia Lakes without the lakes is not Arcadia Lakes,” said the town’s mayor, Mark Huguley, noting that the city’s motto is “Seven Lakes, One Town.” Yet the prospect of state or federal assistance for private owners of dams is

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu7

A home in Georgetown, S.C., is inundated by floodwaters from the Black River. Now the state is calling on property owners and homeowner associations to submit repair plans for unsafe dams.(Sean Rayford / Getty Images)

uncertain in the fiscally conservative Southern state. In 2013, four of South Carolina’s seven House representatives and both U.S. senators voted against a $51-billion emergency aid packagefor victims of Hurricane Sandy. The state House budget committee will meet next week to assess the impact of flooding and potential recovery costs.

Since the flooding, South Carolina has faced heavy criticism for its lax dam safety inspection program, one of the nation’s most poorly funded. Of the more than 2,400 state-regulated dams, most of which are earthen dams on private property, 180 were deemed high-hazard potential, according to the Assn. of State Dam Safety Officials, a nonprofit organization. Much of the water damage has taken place along the Gills Creek watershed, a 70-mile-long network of streams, ponds and lakes that weaves through the cities of Arcadia Lakes, Forest Acres and Columbia. Beginning in the early 1900s, earthen dams were built to create recreational lakes, and in recent decades, neighborhoods have grown up around the scenic waterways. As pressure mounts to improve dam safety, some homeowners complain that they have not been given enough time to comply with the state’s emergency orders. If a homeowner does not lower his or her lake, state officials will hire a contractor to implement the order, charging the cost to the dam owner. Violating the order also could result in a $1,000 fine and, if criminal charges for noncompliance are successfully pursued, penalties of up to $500 a day.

Ashley Bryant Noojin, a clinical psychologist who owns a small, six-acre pond in Eastover, southeast of Columbia, said the state gave her only a few days’ notice to drain her pond, even though her dam had no mechanism to control the water. After an engineer she hired submitted a report to the state agency this week, she was informed he was not adequately certified. Two dayslater, a state official warned her that she would be subject to penalties if she did not comply.“The expectations are nearly impossible for private homeowners to meet,” she said. “I’m just one person who happens to own a dam and I’ve not got an endless bank account.” Yet amid all the confusion, some communities are confident they can repair their dams. At Cary Lake, where a rush of water from Jackson Creek wrought more lasting damage — overtopping the dam, breaching it, and wiping out a public roadway — Anita Owens, 84, a retiree who has lived on the lake for decades, remembered how homeowners chipped in to repair the dam in 1987, after a breach caused by heavy rainfall. “I’m not worried,” she said. “We can’t spend a whole lot of money on houses on the lake and not rebuild the dam.”

(Just the facts.)Dams don’t need to be removedOCT. 31, 2015, registerguard.com

The Oct. 29 column by general managers of neighboring utilities was anexcellent assessment of hydropower, salmon and their co-existence. Calls for removing the lower Snake River dams have been ongoing for more than 20 years. For many of those years it has been demonstrated that the four dams and the salmon do well together. As the general managers wrote, “overall salmon abundance is way up since 2000, with a record-setting return of 2.5 million adults in 2014, the most since the

Bonneville Dam was built in 1938.”

The American Public Power Association, representing more than 2,000 public utilities nationwide, supports the Bonneville Power Administration’s effort to provide clean hydropower — the nation’s largest source of renewable electricity, accounting for 51.6 percent of domestic renewable generation. In fact, the APPA, in its 75th anniversary celebration, issued a brief that calls for the modernization of existing hydropower equipment (such as pumped storage) to increase its capacity, along with other development of hydropower. I ask those who favor dam removal to lookat the statistics regarding the amazing salmon returns under the existing system, and at the potential for additional hydropower to provide an even greater and cleaner future for all. The overwhelmingly high rate of salmon returns disprove the old argument that dams need to be

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu8

removed due to high salmon mortality. The idea that dams should be removed should be put aside like yesterday’s old worn-out socks that have outlived their useful lives.Katherine Schacht Vice president Emerald People’s Utility District,Chairwoman-elect Policy Makers Council,American Public Power AssociationEugene, OR

(Duhhh, without them there’s not enough water!)Why dams are at the heart of California’s water warsBY Spencer Michels, November 3, 2015, pbs.org California is soul searching right now onhow to deal with the drought. Should itbuild more dams? Or are there alreadyenough dams — more than 1,400 — inthe state, and not enough water to fillthem up anyway? A year ago, when thewater shortage was becoming acute,Californians passed a $7.5 billion waterbond, with nearly $3 billion slated to go towater storage, which most people read asdams. But despite the passage of theproposition, Californians are still arguingover whether to build dams and which outof several proposed to construct.

Tuesday on the PBS NewsHour, I’ll be reporting on the dam question, and how it has become a real issue as the drought has worsened. While looking through some archives of the Department of Water Resources I came across a group of black and white photos that evoked a flood of memories. It was the 1968 dedication of Oroville Dam on the Feather River — still the tallest dam in the United States, a major piece in California’s State Water Project. As a 30-year-old reporter for KCRA TV in Sacramento, I was there, as was Gov. Ronald Reagan, and ex-Gov. Pat Brown (father of current Gov. Jerry Brown), since he was regarded as the father of California’s extensive water system. It was a joyous occasion, full of hope. And it may have been the last time that nearly everybody agreed it was a good thing to plumb the whole state and tame the natural rivers.I worked on a documentary that year that essentially showed all the good the water system was bringing to the state. I’ve been covering California water issues a long time, and I’ve been interested in the topic even longer. I remember that in seventh grade social studies in San Francisco, a student teacher led our class through a whole semester on the California Central Valley Project, the federal program to build Shasta Dam and several others, and send water souththrough a federally funded canal. We didn’t hear about any opposition. But shortly after Oroville got built, California seemed to embody with increasing vigor the old saying (sometimes attributed to Mark Twain) that “whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting.” The usual adversaries were the north, where most of the water falls, and the south, where the people and the farmers are thirsty, since they built their cities and ranches essentially in the desert. It was always a tough sell to get the north to agree to send its water south, but it happened, creating one of the world’s great plumbing systems. Then, in the 1980s, politicians proposed a canal around the periphery of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, where most of the state’s waternaturally flows on its way out to the ocean. The so-called peripheral canal would have made it easier to get water south, supposedly with less disruption to the ecosystem of the Delta. But the north wouldn’t buy it; they claimed it was just another scheme to steal northern water. Visions of Southern California swimming pools and lush golf courses — all filled with northern water — played heavily on the minds of Northern Californians. Voters turned the peripheral canal down.

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu9

As the years went by, the water wars ebbed and flowed. Mostly flowed. The environmental movement came into its own, and dozens of groups like the Environmental Defense Fund and theNatural Resources Defense Council started questioning the never-ending thirst of the farmers andthe Southern California cities. But big water users, like Southern California’s Metropolitan Water District – the MET – and the Westlands Water District in agricultural Kern County, used their power and influence to get the politicians in Sacramento on their side. For years they fought over the rules and the distribution and the price of water. Then came efforts to mediate the disputes and bring the sides together. Alliances between environmentalists and cities seemed to ease the rivalries for a while, and the federal government tried to bring peace to the warring factions.

Now, however, the traditional split is as evident as ever. The environmentalists, the biology professors, the Friends of the River, the AquAlliance and others are pushing hard against new dams and new water to raise profitable crops like almonds. They say existing dams have already caused drastic declines in the fish population, especially salmon that go up California’s rivers to spawn. The farmers and the Southern California cities are pushing hard for more water storage, saying that in good, wet years the reservoirs can fill up and provide water in dry years. And they are pledging to try to recharge underground aquafers, which have become depleted as people draw more and more water from wells. The Brown administration and some water districts are preaching conservation and more reliance on these underground water supplies, but say that above ground storage is necessary to fill up the underground. And Governor Brown is advocating for tunnels, rather than a canal, to get water through the Delta and to the pumps that take it south.That battle is ongoing. In any case, it’s been a fascinating ride: great public works projects, water moving from north to south, and the whole state engaged in what seems a never-ending debate. Watching it, and reporting on it, could be a full-time job if everyone found the politics and production of water as fascinating as that teacher of mine who had a bunch of 11-year olds studying California’s water distribution for a whole semester. I wonder if anyone else was paying attention.

(Good thing there’s no water behind it.)State: Dam near Jackson indanger of collapsekcra.com, Nov 03, 2015

An emergency repair operation isunderway as a 100-year-old dam in theFoothill city of Jackson, CA. Stateofficials said the dam is in danger ofcollapse.(Video at: http://www.kcra.com/news/dam-collapse-danger-in-jackson/36243722

(Excerpts. Is a mine tailings dam really a dam or just a pile of random material poorly engineered and/or constructed? Remember Buffalo Creek!)Two dead, dozens missing after dams burst at Brazil mineMARIANA, BRAZIL | By Stephen Eisenhammer. 11/6/15, reuters.com

Casualties from two collapsed damsat a Brazilian iron ore mine owned byBHP Billiton and Vale mounted onFriday as rescue teams searched fordozens missing in the mud and debrisleft by the flood that devastated avillage in the country's southeast.Firefighters confirmed 30 injuries and

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu10

at least two deaths, but said the count was likely to rise as pouring rain slowed the search and mudslides knocked out roads and cell towers. "I heard screaming and saw the water coming fast, about 15 (49 feet) or 20 meters (66 feet) high," said survivor Antonio Santos, a construction worker who was at home in the village of Bento Rodrigues when the dams broke on Thursday afternoon. Bento Rodrigues is 150 km (93 miles) southeast of Belo Horizonte, Brazil's third largestcity and the capital of the mining state of Minas Gerais. "Within 10 minutes the whole lower part ofthe village was destroyed, about 80 percent of it," he said in a gymnasium crowded with survivors in the nearby city of Mariana. Santos said he knew of four people who were swept away, includingtwo children and two adults in their 50s. Firefighters said they did not (know) if they would find all of those swept away by the wall of water released by the successive bursting of the two dams holding iron ore tailings and waste from the nearby mine.Television footage from the scene showed Bento Rodrigues, population 600, devastated by the fast-moving floods that tore off roofs, leveled trees and swept away cars. The floods extended as far as the town of Barra Longa, 80 kilometers (50 miles) away. The town was partially underwater.Hundreds of families were evacuated from the area after escaping to higher ground, Duarte Junior, the mayor of Mariana, 25 km (16 miles) from the mine, told television channel GloboNews after declaring a state of emergency on Friday morning.

RELATED COVERAGESamarco says one worker dead, 13 missing after dams burst in Brazil The head of emergency planning at Samarco, the joint venture company that runs the mine, told GloboNews of reports of seismic activity in the area in the hour leading up to the incident. The University of Sao Paulo's seismic center reported four weak tremors near Mariana and the town of Ouro Preto. The center said it recorded tremors magnitude 2 to 2.6 within an hour before the dams burst, but added it was impossible to say they caused the disaster without more extensive research. ---------.

(Guess they were wrong!)BHP-Vale Dam in Breach Was Upgraded With First Rubber Top By Danielle Bochove, November 6, 2015 — bloomberg.com

Concrete spillway raised one meter at Santarem dam in 2014UK's Dyrhoff has been in touch with Samarco to offer help

One of the two dams that burst at an iron-ore mine in southeast Brazil Thursday had been upgraded with an inflatable rubber top that was the first of its kind to be used in Brazil, according to its designer, Dyrhoff Ltd. Samarco Mineracao SA, a joint venture between BHP Billiton Ltd. andVale SA, commissioned Dyrhoff to design and supply the rubber dam in 2014, according to Dyrhoff’s director, Don Mason. Mason said he doesn’t know which of the two failed dams, Santarem or Fundao, burst first and has no information yet about the cause. The ruptured structures, which triggered mudslides that buried dozens of homes, were deemed “totally safe” byauthorities in July, according to Samarco. The inflatable rubber top is meant to provide an advantage in times of high water flow because it can deflate, reducing the pressure on the underlying concrete structure, Mason said in a telephone interview from Kent, in the U.K., on Friday. “But having said that, it’s up to the dam safety people, or the engineers, to calculate the impact of any additional load that would be placed on the structure by raising the water level by one meter,” he said. “We designed and we supplied an inflatable rubber dam which was one meter high and 30 meters wide, and that was installed on the spillway of the Santarem dam,” Mason said. “There was a concrete spillway, and it raised the level of the spillway by one meter.”

Safety LawsSamarco also performs its own inspections according to federal safety laws, it said Friday in a statement posted on its Facebook account. Before the rubber dam was installed on the pre-existing concrete dam, “about 70 percent of the reservoir capacity had been used up by tailings disposal, thus reducing the availability of water to be abstracted,” according to a December 22, 2014 post on the Dyrhoff website. BHP’s Chief Executive Officer Andrew Mackenzie told reportersin Melbourne that a full investigation would be required to establish the cause of the incident in

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu11

Brazil, and the company would fully cooperate with local authorities. In an e-mail statement on Friday, Vale said it has offered support and assistance to local authorities.

Rescue WorkersSamraco said it was working with police, firefighters and other rescue workers to attend to the injured and homeless in and around the traditional mining town of Mariana in the state of Minas Gerais. It couldn’t confirm the number of victims and missing or the cause of the accident. A local hospital confirmed one death while a mining union reported 15 to 16 fatalities and 45 people missing. The wall of mud hit Bento Rodrigues, a village with about 600 inhabitants, and the number of people affected in the area could rise to 2,000, the Globo news website reported, citingestimates from the prefecture where the mine is located. The mud flow is 8 kilometers (five miles) long and 2.5 meters (8 feet) deep, Globo said, citing military police. The waste material, known in the industry as tailings, is mostly silica from iron-ore processing and doesn’t contain chemicals that are harmful to health, Samarco said. In an e-mailed statement Friday, Vale expressed solidarity with those affected and said it has offered support and assistance to local authorities.

Hydro: (And, an impossible balancing act that makes everybody unhappy.)David Deen: Relicensing hydroelectric facilities on the Connecticut RiverNOV. 1, 2015, BY COMMENTARY, vtdigger.org

Editor’s note: This commentary is by David Deen, who is the river steward for the Connecticut River Watershed Council and a state representative from Putney. He is the chair of the House Fish, Wildlife and Water Resources Committee.

The Class of 2018 does not refer to agraduation class from one of our areaschools, but instead refers to licenses thatthe Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC) will issue to operate five ConnecticutRiver hydroelectric facilities, all of whichwere set to expire in 2018. The real storyabout the class of 2018 is that each facilityindividually, and all five of them as acombined class, have an impact on theConnecticut River. The five facilities togetheraffect more than 120 miles of river. Startingat the upriver facility, they are the Wilderhydroelectric dam, the Bellows Fallshydroelectric dam, and the Vernonhydroelectric dam, owned and operated byTransCanada NE Hydro, a multinationalcorporation. First Light, another multinational corporation owns and operates the Northfield Mountain pump storage hydroelectric facility and the Turners Falls hydroelectric dam in Massachusetts. River users face the relicensing of four hydroelectric dams and a reservoir pump storage operation, all of which affect the river all at once. The facilities are looking to renew their licenses for 40 years. The huge task of assessing the impacts of these facilities will stretch over four-plus years and require of those involved millions of dollars in field studies, thousands of hours of reading, writing and attending endless meetings. And that only gets us to the actual formal application by the project owners to FERC. FERC then has two additional years of review

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu12

before they issue the licenses. No one has done this level of review on this reach of the river since the river was first dammed back in the late 1700s. The facilities generate electric power and income for the owners using the Connecticut River, a public trust resource that belongs to all of our citizens equally. That public trust status places an affirmative responsibility on each state to protect the quality and quantity of the waters and to see that the dams operate in such a way that the river meets our water quality standards. When thesedams were last licensed, the Clean Water Act, the Federal Power Act, nor the Nation Environmental Protection Act had yet become law or they were in their infancy and not fully implemented. In the previous licenses, the issues reviewed were the safety of the dams for downstream property, and how much power could each facility produce. Implementation of the environmental protection laws in theintervening years has changed how FERC looks at hydro projects. FERC now must balance the environmental impacts with power production. That requires as complete an evaluation of the impacts of the facilities on the river as it is possible to obtain by in-water and on-shore evaluationsof what the changes in reservoir levels, the changes in flow rates, the changes and rate of changein river water levels, and a myriad of other effects hydro operations have on our river.

In a natural river, water level and flows do change over time. A heavy rain will raise the level and flow, while a drought will lower them. Usually, there are seasonal changes as well; summer means low flows while spring and fall mean higher flows. Water temperatures in a natural river rise and fall based on the season, but now think about those same changes in water levels, flows,and temperature of the river when facility operations change them on an hourly basis. Aquatic species have evolved to deal with the natural changes in a river over the course of a year. They have not evolved to cope with the changes in flows, velocities, fluctuating water levels, and temperature changes over a matter of hours. These are very different situations and it is importantto our river that we evaluate the impacts of rapid changes on the health of the river, our own enjoyment of the river, and the species depending on it for life. Evaluations of the impact of the facilities are underway and have been, in some cases, for the past three field seasons. Active river users have probably noticed a number of new markers floating in the river, an increased number of boats conducting studies, transect markers across the river measuring erosion, divers in the water looking for dwarf wedge mussels, and people walking or crawling around on the shore looking for insect and amphibian activity. In total for the five facilities, there are currently 70 field studies in various stages of completion. The next step is to evaluate what the studies reveal about the dam impacts on the river. This body of knowledge is unique and extraordinary in scope.No one has done this level of review on this reach of the river since the river was first dammed back in the late 1700s. We knew that the salmon, shad and other fish runs stopped but for the most part we are unaware of the other impacts of these dams. If the relicensing process works properly, the findings from all of the fieldwork should be the basis of the formal relicensing applications and lead to license conditions that will, if necessary, change facility operations in the interests of our river. So river users have a once in a lifetime opportunity to address the impacts from these five facilities and lessen any damage the operations of these facilities have on the river. The relicensing of hydroelectric facilities does not get much attention from elected officials. In this case, ask your governor to pay attention to this relicensing. It takes gumption and persistence to see those changes put in place but the Connecticut River Watershed Council, other NGOs, and state and federal resource agencies are at the table and working hard for the river.

(Why not, the dam’s there?)Helena irrigation district looking to generate hydropowerBy TOM KUGLIN Independent Record, missoulian.com, 11/2/15

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu13

Wilder dam

HELENA, MT - The Helena ValleyIrrigation District is looking to retrofit itspump plant at Canyon Ferry Dam toproduce hydropower. The Bureau ofReclamation, which operates the damand owns the adjacent property wherethe pump plant is located, recentlyreleased an environmental assessmentfor the Sleeping Giant HydropowerProject. The document proposes alease of power privilege (LOPP) to theirrigation district for a hydroelectricproject. The project would design andretrofit new electrical generators to thedistrict’s existing water pumps, as wellas construct power lines and a substation to tie into existing transmission lines. The lease would be for 40 years. “We’ve been looking at hydro for quite a few years, and it’s mostly so that we cancontinue to service and improve our existing infrastructure,” said Jim Foster, irrigation district manager. “Our project is from the 1950s, the concrete is getting old, and everything is extremely expensive. Basically, our funding is through our farmers and ranchers and this could give us a new source of revenue.”

In 2013, Congress passed the Bureau of Reclamation Small Conduit Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act, giving preference for LOPP to irrigation districts or water user associations. The act made pursuing a project for HVID more feasible, and district officials began speaking withgroups experienced in hydropower, Foster said. At a public meeting in Helena on the environmental assessment recently, Lindsay George of Sleeping Giant Power LLC told attendees that the project would not impact flows or supply for irrigation. “It’s a pretty simple way to add electrical generation to existing pumps,” she said. The project would generate about 9.4 megawatts of electricity -- enough to power about 1,600 homes per year, according to the environmental assessment. Bob McDonald of ESC Engineering explained the findings of the environmental assessment, which showed few impacts from the project. He said the project is notpredicted to affect water quality or fisheries, nor is the pump station considered a historic building.Anglers might be impacted from a visual standpoint with power lines, but at 70 feet high, the lines pose little danger, McDonald said. With additional revenue, the irrigation district can look at modernizing infrastructure, Foster said, such as piping that could save water, increase public safety, and prevent the spread of noxious weeds.

“We’re not doing this to make a lot of money. Our main goal with such a limited source of revenueis to keep reasonable, sustainable rates,” he said, adding that modernizing could open up other potential hydropower projects. Due to the unique infrastructure of the Helena Valley Irrigation District, the Sleeping Giant project has not been modeled after other irrigation hydropower projects. For example the Turnbull project near Fairfield simply diverts water into a “drop” with a turbine, Foster said. “This one has to take an existing three-story concrete pumping plant and try to adapt it to take in the water and make it work. It’s more technical and more difficult,” he said. The environmental assessment is available on the Bureau of Reclamation website at www.usbr.gov/gp/mtao/nepa/helena_valley.html. The public can comment on the project until Nov. 13.

(When are we going to get seriousabout what’s renewable energy?)Eversource angling for stateclean energy dealBy Jon Chesto, Globe Staff, November 05, 2015,bostonglobe.com

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu14

The Northern Pass transmission line would cut through New Hampshire, but its fate could be determined by officials in three other New England states.Officials at Eversource Energy, the utility behind the $1.6 billion power-line project, talked to analysts on Tuesday about how they’re preparing, along with Canadian partner Hydro-Quebec, tobid for a clean energy contract that would be overseen by regulators in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. If Eversource and Hydro-Quebec win the contract, they could use it to help finance Northern Pass, a big power line that would bring power from Canada to southern New England.

Eversource, formerly known as Northeast Utilities, will likely have competition: Rival power line developers are also lining up for the opportunity for this three-state bidding process, and power plant owners other than Hydro-Quebec are expected to participate in the bidding as well. State officials say they’ll use the competition to get the best possible price for the power. The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities last week approved the “clean energy RFP,” as it’s known, essentially OK’ing the rules governing the bidding process. Rhode Island officials have already approved it as well. After it is endorsed in Connecticut, the bidding can start, and final bids will be due within 75 days. It’s unusual for three states to be seeking clean energy in this way. But officials argue that by working together, they can help build a bigger, more cost-effective project or projects. These clean energy bids would bring more electricity into the region with the hope it will make the grid more reliable and curb the region’s relatively high electric prices.“We’re trying to do what we can to work collaboratively . . . to get the best project,” said Matthew Beaton, Governor Charlie Baker’s energy and environmental affairs secretary. “If we can buy more together collectively and get better deals and share the burden of transmission among otherstates, it makes it that much better for our ratepayers.”

Another benefit: Bringing in wind power or hydropower from the north could help Massachusetts meet its aggressive greenhouse gas reduction goals. Also toward that end, Baker is pushing the Massachusetts Legislature to pass a law that would initiate a new long-term contract bidding process, one that could bring considerably more hydropower into Massachusetts from Canada.The Northern Pass project faces some fierce opposition in New Hampshire. But Leon Olivier, executive vice president at Eversource Energy, said he has seen the opposition soften since the company adjusted its plans in August to put 60 miles of the 192-mile power line underground, particularly through the White Mountains. “There’s always going to be hard-core opponents to it but I would say there was more dialogue this time,” Olivier told analysts on Tuesday.

Water: (Better than going thirsty. Some plumbing! Big plans on a tough road.)Parker dam and reservoir offer hope for thirsty Colorado communitiesTo handle projected population growth, planners aim to build more reservoirs to hold morewater before it flows out of stateBy Bruce Finley, The Denver Post, 11/02/2015, denverpost.com

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu15

PARKER — The recent rain sent asurplus surge of 6,000 gallons a minute,diverted from Cherry Creek, gushingunder semi-arid high plains into theWest's newest major water stash. Andeven though the $170 million Rueter-Hess Reservoir southeast of Denverremains less than a third full — after 4½years of waiting for moments like this —suburbs are celebrating their vision andtenacity in simply getting it — and a $50million water treatment plant — done. "This is why we have reservoirs: takingadvantage of a wet period," ParkerWater and Sanitation District managerRon Redd said. "Now, 75 families for an entire year will have their water needs met. If we didn't have this reservoir, that water would be leaving Colorado and on its way to the Gulf of Mexico."Colorado water planners facing a projected 163 billion-gallon statewide annual shortfall by 2050 now are aiming to emulate water-stressed Parker (population 50,000), which labored for three decades to build its 185-foot-high Frank Jaeger dam, reservoir and plant. Parker's leaders were driven by a desire to enable population growth up to 120,000 people without pumping more from dwindling underground aquifers.

Colorado officials have begun re-working a controversial state water plan — designed to support 10 million people — by including more details and targets for construction of reservoirs.Boosting the statewide capacity to store an additional 130 billion gallons (400,000 acre-feet) would go a long way, along with everybody using less, to sustain a growing population, Colorado Water Conservation Board director James Eklund said. Among the dam-and-reservoir projects Front Range water providers are proposing:

• Chimney Hollow, southwest of Loveland (90,000 acre-feet).• Glade, northwest of Fort Collins (170,000 acre-feet). • Galeton, northeast of Greeley (45,000 acre-feet); • A bigger Gross Reservoir, west of Boulder (72,000 acre-feet). • And possible new reservoirs in western Colorado.

But completing any new reservoir has proved difficult, compared with the dam-building feats of the 20th century that enabled massive settlement across the arid western United States.A confluence of factors — huge costs, political opposition, environmental laws — complicate efforts to develop new water supplies. Beyond inundating land, dams and reservoirs require federal government approvals from the Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation and other agencies. States, too, are obligated to ensure water quality and minimize environmental harm. Drought-prone California in 1999 completed the $1.9 billion Diamond Valley reservoir between Los Angeles and San Diego, adding the capacity to store an additional 800,000 acre-feet. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California operators, diverting from the Colorado River, finally filled it in 2003. Parker officials began their project in 1985 after anticipating a water shortfall as suburban development exploded. Longtime Parker Water employee Frank Jaeger scouted sites, filed for permits and obtained rights to divert water. Town leaders initially planned areservoir to hold 16,200 acre-feet of water. At first they focused on flooding Castlewood Canyon State Park. Courts rejected this. Jaeger then negotiated with landowners for the current site, between Parker and Castle Rock. Environmental studies started in 1997. Designs were done in 2002. Construction began in 2004. In 2008, Jaeger and other suburban officials decided to make it a bigger reservoir, holding 75,000 acre-feet. The reservoir was completed in 2012. And an adjacent water-cleaning plant last summer began operating — bringing reservoir water to residents who long have relied on declining underground water.

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu16

Any state push to build reservoirs will require determination and patience, said Jaeger, now retired. "You'll need state sponsorship," he said. "And you'll need somebody who is going to stay around for the whole deal. They're going to take a lot of heat." More dams and reservoirs likely would cost hundreds of millions and, if off the main stem of a river, require huge amounts of electrical power to pump water. Parker installed five grid-powered motors — three 1,250 horsepower, two 500 horsepower. These move water from headwaters of Cherry Creek, at a diversion point near Stroh Road, through a 3-mile, 48-inch-diameter steel pipe that runs up a 250-foot-high hill before it reaches Rueter-Hess. Then there's the matter of obtaining enough water to fill Rueter-Hess, factoring in annual evaporation losses of about 3 percent. Parker secured limited junior rights to surface water and, in May 2011, began diverting to fill the reservoir. When senior rights holders call for water in dry times, Parker's diversions must stop. Today, Rueter-Hess holds21,000 acre-feet. The water treatment plant uses state-of-the-art filtering and chemical treatments to remove algae and minerals such as phosphorus so that the reservoir water is safe. As Parker Water's team formally opened the plant last month, Redd said state planners will need to get started soon. "It took Parker Water 25 years," he said. "They'll probably need more storage than what they are indicating. ... You're never disappointed with more storage."

Other Stuff: (Hydro projects have the best museums and visitor’s centers. You won’t find this at other energy producing sites.)Grand opening soon for new Wanapum Dam museum Museum almost, but not quite, finishedBy CHERYL SCHWEIZER, Staff Writer | .columbiabasinherald.com, 11/1/15

WANAPUM DAM, WA — The sign on the doorsays the new hydro museum at Wanapum Dam isalmost finished – but not quite. Tom Stredwick,public information specialist for the Grant CountyPUD, said a grand opening is being planned, withthe date to be announced.The museum is in the new office building at thedam, about 2,000 square feet of exhibit space,Stredwick said. The new museum replaces theprevious museum located near the base of thedam; that building is now inside a fenced arearequiring permission to enter. The old museumfeatured exhibits of the Wanapum, for whom the dam is named, along with exhibits on hydropower and managing the river’s ecosystem. When the old museum closed the PUD built a new museum and cultural center dedicated to the Wanapum, which opened Sept. 15. It's located at Priest Rapids Dam. The new hydro museum cost about $1 million, Stredwick said. Its exhibits focus on Wanapum Dam, hydropower production, how the dams affect the river and wildlife, and how the PUD works to mitigate the impact.

The exhibits were developed by a company called Formations, and PUD employees worked with the company to produce them, Stredwick said. The goal was to give visitors a look at some of the sights and sounds of the dam, and to learn more about its operations. “Hands-on interactive,” Stredwick said, especially for children. There are video tours of the dam, including places where the public usually isn’t allowed. There are some history lessons about the dam’s construction, anda chance to see some of the tools used, then and now. Kids (and adults) have the chance to operate the dam in a mock control room. There’s a relief map of the area between Rock Island Dam and Priest Rapids Dam, which was an exhibit in the previous museum. There’s also plenty

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu17

of information about wildlife, a look at the different kinds of fish along the river – at life size, too – and how biologists harvest fish to ensure the survival and enhancement of fish populations.It’s not all technology; there’s also room for some art, a light fixture in the shape of turbine blades,schools of fish swimming from the ceiling. The grand opening should be sometime in November or early December.

Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu18

iThis compilation of articles and other information is provided at no cost for those interested in hydropower, dams, and water resourcesissues and development, and should not be used for any commercial or other purpose. Any copyrighted material herein is distributed withoutprofit or payment from those who have an interest in receiving this information for non-profit and educational purposes only.