HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter from Supervisor Teeter - Oroville Dam Settlement Agreement Menchaca, Clarissa
From* Bennett, Robin
Sent: Friday,June 9, 2017 12:01 PM
To: 'Sheldon.Fort@asm.ca.gov'; 'Grima, Curtis; 'Jerry.Crow@sen,ca.gov'; 'Page, Laura'; BBS
CC: 'Joshua.Cook@asm.ca.gov'; "Shane.Starr@mail.hous,e.gov'; Snyder, Ashley; Menchaca,
Clarissa
Subject: Emailing - 170602 Town of Paradise 2006 Settlement Reopener Request.pdf
Attachments: 170602 Town of Paradise 2006 Settlement Reopener Request.pdf
Good Morning,
Supervisor Doug Teeter is forwarding a copy of a letter he recently submitted to the Town of Paradise regarding the
Oroville Dam Settlement Agreement (SA). It is attached for your knowledge, and review.
Thank you,
Robin llenrzelf.,.,
Exectaire Assistata
(5,70) 872-6304 rbennett&'blitlecoun.t.y.ne
Rutte Cowqy Styem7isors (.Yfice
Su, ei-visor Doiqg Teeter,
.P
Board J o 'Sitpervisors, Dish ict 5'
747 Elliott -/load
-Paradise, CA 95969
Doug Teeter Supervisor, Fifth District
Board of Supervisors
CountyButte 747 Elliott Road I T: 530.872.6304 dteeter buttecounty.net
•C A t I F O R NIA paradise,California 96969 F: 530.872.6339 buttecounty.net/boardofsupervisors
June 2, 2017
Town Council via E-mail
Town of Paradise
555 Skyway
Paradise,CA 95969
RE: Request for Town of Paradise to request reopener of Oroville Dam FERC 2100 Settlement Agreement
Dear Mayor,Vice Mayor, Councilmembers and Town Manager;
I appreciate the opportunity to provide my reasoning in reopening the 2006 Settlement Agreement("SA")that
the Town of Paradise is a party to. The SA and associated documents can be found at:
http://www.water.ca.gov/oroviIIerelicensing/settlement agreement.cfm
I believe the documents are a compelling read as many communities have economic success stories related to
water sports development, case in point:
http://www.canoekayak.com/canoe/whitewaterparkspsb/#wDK'ddb77GOF5PZ4.97
The SA's Recreation Management Plan outlines many potential future improvements,even including a
whitewater park. A reopener would hopefully allow new public comment on a document done a decade ago.
I'd surely ask,"Where are we with those studies and/or improvements listed?" and "What are the public's
recreation needs today?"
I support Butte County's legal dispute with the California Department of Water Resources("DWR"). However,
can also understand why many signed the SA. Past Mayor Sam Dresser's reasoning on why the Town became a
settling party was to have a seat at the table, represent the Town's citizens and improve area recreation. As you
may know,the County is not a Party to the agreement and therefore cannot reopen the agreement.
While there may be additional reasons to request a reopener(SA 4.15), 1 submit these three:
1. The effective date of the Licensee Obligations (DWR) in the agreement has not begun, as that date is
tied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issuing DWR a Final New Project License (SA 1.3.1).
Eleven years ago,over 50 Parties signed an agreement to"resolve all issues"with a New Project License
Request for Town of Paradise to pursue reopener of Oroville Dam FERC 2100 Settlement Agreement
Town of Paradise
June 2,2017
Page 2
(SA 2.1). The"issues" are over a decade old,though I imagine the spillway incident just created a whole
new set of issues;
2. The SA's monetary figures need to be adjusted to today's dollar value(i.e.for current mitigation and
construction costs). The SA's$61,270,000 of unescalated funds potentially paid to the Supplemental
Benefits Fund (Appendix B, E 1.0) if adjusted for inflation alone would be$75,165,339(@1.88%annual
inflation). However, I imagine today's construction costs have exceeded the inflation rate; and
3. SA Recreation Management Plan's Review and Revision Program (RMP)outlines the frequency for
revision at annually, 6 and 12 years, respective of the component (p.7-23). "The RMP provides a vision
of the desired future condition for recreation resources in the project area,establishes long-term goals
and objectives for managing recreation resources in the project area,and identifies both site-specific
and programmatic recreation measures to be implemented over the term of the anticipated new
license. My belief is that the 11 year old "future condition" is out of date. Even if it was implemented in
2006, it would be one year away from review and revision. While many of the main recreation
measures may remain unchanged, many forms of water recreation were not mainstream in 2006(i.e.
standup paddleboarding,wakesurfing,flyboarding,and hydrofoil kiteboarding). In addition, rebuilding
the spillway has affected and may forever alter nearby recreation facilities.
I hope this letter will result in the Council's direction to staff to have on your next agenda a discussion on
reopening the Settlement Agreement due to"Material New Information" and"in The Public Interest".
I look forward to your support in "truing up"the Settlement Agreement to be closer in time and value with the
issuance of DWR's license. A reopener could greatly improve recreation opportunities that will benefit the Town
of Paradise, others in Butte County and visitors to the Oroville Dam facilities. Please feel free to contact me with
any concerns,questions or comments.
Respectfully,
/s/
Doug Teeter
Cc Congressman LaMalfa
Senator Nielsen
Assymblymen Gallagher and Dahle
Butte County Board of Supervisors