<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16434"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>Colleagues....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The Klamath mainstem water quality issues raised by this
attached <EM>Two Rivers Tribune</EM> article has already been thoroughly
answered by PacifiCorp's Dean Brockbank, in an OpEd published earlier in the
<EM>Reddling Record Searchlight</EM> on June 27th. That OpEd is attached
below for your information.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Two observations of my own in addition, however, to bring some much needed
perspective to the mis-statements and half truths in the original Two
Rivers Tribune article:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>(1) The 401 Water Quality Certification now pending before the California
State Water Resources Control Board is not for dam removal, it
is <U>only for a full FERC relicensing of up to 50 years</U>. <EM>So
why would anyone want to push forward to help PacifiCorp secure one of
the last requirements for a full FERC relicensing?</EM></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Some opponents of the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA)
(including the Hoopa Valley Tribe, a representative of which is quoted in the
article) still strongly believe that if only they can just get the Water
Board to <U>flatly deny</U> that 401 Water Quality Certification permit for the
full FERC relicensing Application, that this alone will automatically lead to
dam removal perhaps faster and easier than under the already agreed
to KHSA. Some opposing groups also believe this is the only way to
jettison the other half of the Klamath Basin Settlement, which is the 50-year
Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) [I will leave aside why this would be
itself a bad idea to focus on just dam removal]. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>This strategy, unfortunately, is a high risk gamble with the fate
of the Klamath that might well not pay off.</STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Since no state water agency has EVER just flatly said no to a FERC
relicensing application, in the view of those of us who are KHSA proponents, it
is far more likely that what would come out of this FERC-required process is a
qualified "yes" but with additional mitigation measures that,
unfortunately, PacifiCorp <U>just might be able to meet without removing
the dams</U>. In other words, as compared to the already signed KHSA,
which is moving toward a final decision in March 2012 on four-dam removal
targeting 2020, there is -- in KHSA proponents' views -- a much
higher risk that moving forward with that 401 Certification would simply
open up the way for PacifiCorp to relicense the dams instead of taking them
down. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>And since no dam relicensing 401 Certification has ever been just
flatly denied by a state before, proponents of the KHSA dam removal route
(including PCFFA) estimate that at best such a denial would just open the
process up to delays from many more years of litigation, during which
time PacifiCorp would be able to simply continue to run the dams as usual
-- <EM>without any water quality mitigation measures of any sort</EM> -- on
routine annual extensions while multiple and serial levels of litigation and all
its many appeals is all still pending. Advising Attorneys
with considerable experience in such FERC litigation estimate that
reliance on this 401 Certification denial route could well delay dam
removal -- <EM>if it happens at all</EM> -- until well after the 2020 removal
target date under the already existing KHSA. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>And even if California flatly denies the 401 Certification for
its three dams, and this ruling survives years of litigation, this might
well not be the case in Oregon, which has much weaker water quality laws, has
only the one dam (J.C. Boyles) with the smallest negative impact on water
quality, but that dam is by far the most valuable to PacifiCorp of the four
in terms of total power produced. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In other words, even forcing the FERC issue might still not result in all
the dams coming down, even after many years of litigation, but Oregon's J.C.
Boyle could well remain. With a new 50-year licensing, this would mean the
next opportunity to obtain the equivalent river restoration as under today's
KHSA <U>would not occur until after 2062</U>. To many of us involved in
this process, this risky "alternative" FERC route is simply not an
acceptable gamble. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In short, those groups who signed on to the KHSA (including PCFFA) and
are thus diligently pursuing dam removal through the more direct KHSA route
believe the risk of the alternative FERC/401 Certification route is far greater
than the risk of the KHSA by comparison. This is why we have supported the
KHSA and why we oppose the Water Board moving the FERC relicensing Application
forward through the 401 Certification process while the KHSA is still being
implemented and still has a chance of success.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>(2) As noted by PacifiCorp's Dean Brockbank in his OpEd below, by trying to
sabotage the KHSA and potentially forcing the company back to the regular FERC
relicensing route, in addition to reintroducing much more uncertainty
about whether four-dam removal will ever finally be achieved, one also loses all
the benefits of the KHSA in terms of various "Interim Protective Measures"
to help protect water quality and fish in the lower river that the
KHSA requires, and which PacifiCorp is now paying several million
dollars per year to fund. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There is no other legal way to gain the additional protections of such
"Interim Measures" except through the KHSA. Aggressive efforts by the
Hoopa Valley Tribe to impose such "interim measures" via the FERC process alone
have already failed before FERC and lost in the US Court of Appeals for the
DC Circuit. Efforts by PCFFA to impose similar water quality improvement
conditions on PacifiCorp through state court litigation under California's
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act also failed. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Detailed descriptions of those Interim Measures can be found in
Appendices C & D of the KHSA (available at <A href="http://www.klamathrestoration.gov">www.klamathrestoration.gov</A>).
A copy of PacifiCorp's June 2011 first Annual Report on the KHSA's
Implementation is also attached, and will bring you up to date on what the
Company <U>has in fact been doing</U> under these KHSA-required measures to
improve water quality in the river and to mitigate the impacts of its dams
during the "interim period" until the four dams can be removed under the
KHSA -- <STRONG>which is still projected for 2020</STRONG>.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Reasonable people often disagree, particularly when they try to estimate
likely future outcomes of highly uncertain and complex decisional
processes. But those who support the KHSA and its companion KBRA have very
good reasons -- only some of them outlined above -- for pushing both parts of
the Klamath Settlement Agreement forward instead of relying on a flawed FERC
process conducted by an agency (FERC) which has never ordered a dam removed
against the wishes of its owner in its entire history. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A very detailed Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on four-dam
removal in the upper Klamath, with estimates of its total costs
including mitigation measures, is all due out in late September, 2011 for
public review and comments. To get more information on the DEIS
preparation process, and to get on the notice list for this and other
KHSA-related information, sign up on the notice list available at: <A href="http://www.klamathrestoration.gov">www.klamathrestoration.gov</A> .</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10">======================================<BR>Glen H. Spain, Northwest
Regional Director<BR>Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations
(PCFFA)<BR>PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370<BR>Office: (541)689-2000 Fax:
(541)689-2500<BR>Web Home Page: <A href="http://www.pcffa.org/">www.pcffa.org</A><BR>Email:
fish1ifr@aol.com</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>==========================================================</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<P style="MARGIN: auto 0in" class=bodytext-bodytext><B style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000><FONT face="Times New Roman">Dean Brockbank: Klamath Deals Already Producing Results
<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></FONT></B></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=bodytext-bodytext><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000><FONT face="Times New Roman">Op-Ed<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=bodytext-bodytext><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000><FONT face="Times New Roman">June 27,
2011<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=bodytext-bodytext><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000><FONT face="Times New Roman">Redding Record
Searchlight<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></FONT></P>
<P style="BACKGROUND: white"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>The
June 13 "Speak Your Piece" "Water quality suffers as Congress dithers" ignores
the facts on the ground and in the water to make several alarming claims of
governmental malfeasance and corporate indifference. Fortunately, the dire
picture painted by the authors does not exist. In fact, to make their points,
the authors simply ignored the many active steps PacifiCorp and other
stakeholders are taking right now to implement elements of the landmark Klamath
agreements, including actions to improve Klamath River water quality, aquatic
habitat and the chances that the fishery will be more
abundant.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="BACKGROUND: white"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT color=#000000 size=3>For
example, to date PacifiCorp has provided more than $1.5 million to a coho
enhancement fund administered in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries
Service and the </FONT><A href="http://www.redding.com/news/topic/california-department-of-fish-and-game/"><FONT color=#0000ff size=3>California Department of Fish and Game</FONT></A><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000> to support the survival and recovery of coho salmon
in the Upper Klamath River basin. Under the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement
Agreement (KHSA), PacifiCorp will continue to contribute more than $500,000
annually until the three Klamath dams in California are decommissioned. Measures
to enhance tributary cold water flows critical for salmon, keep key coho streams
connected to larger tributaries and limit the impact of livestock on river
habitat are among many activities directly supported by the
fund.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="BACKGROUND: white"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>In
addition to this funding, PacifiCorp is making changes to operations and flow
releases to improve conditions for salmon, supporting research on fish disease
that will aid in the development of management strategies to combat this
problem, and funding improvements to hatchery operations that will benefit coho
salmon.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="BACKGROUND: white"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>Many
other activities to improve water quality in the Klamath watershed are well
under way and will continue both before and after Congress acts to approve and
implement the agreements. These current water-quality improvements include pilot
projects and studies of measures to reduce nutrient levels in the river and
improve water quality throughout the watershed, which have already begun. If the
interior secretary issues an affirmative decision to proceed with dam removal,
more than $6 million is committed to fully fund significant water-quality
improvements.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="BACKGROUND: white"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>In
coordination with various state and federal agencies and the Karuk and Yurok
tribes, parties to the KHSA are now actively monitoring water quality over
approximately 250 miles of the Klamath River from the Link River dam in Klamath
Falls to the Pacific Ocean. This unique monitoring effort is supported by
$500,000 in annual funding from PacifiCorp and will continue each year until the
dams are removed.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="BACKGROUND: white"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>Significant progress is being made on other fronts as well.
PacifiCorp has received approval in both California and Oregon to begin
collecting surcharges to cover the company's share of dam removal costs in 2020
and has already transferred all of its internal engineering and other
operational information to the appropriate federal agencies crafting a detailed
plan to remove the dams.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="BACKGROUND: white"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>Like
everyone else, PacifiCorp is waiting for the interior secretary's decision on
whether to proceed with dam removal and a full and fair debate in Congress, but
a lot has been accomplished since the agreements were signed last year and that
work will continue. It is important to remember that the improvements described
above are being implemented now as a result of the KHSA and would not be
required in the absence of the agreements. This is a testament to the efforts of
the involved parties to craft solutions to these complex resource issues that
avoid the alternative of continued litigation and the deferral of water quality
and habitat improvements that are happening
now.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<H1 style="MARGIN: auto 0in"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><FONT color=#000000><FONT face="Times New Roman">####################################################<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></H1></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 8/23/2011 12:29:00 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
tstokely@att.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: verdana, tahoma, sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(51,51,51); FONT-SIZE: 12px" class=Apple-style-span>
<H1 style="BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM: rgb(0,0,0) 1px; TEXT-ALIGN: left; PADDING-BOTTOM: 10px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 5px; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; LETTER-SPACING: -1pt; PADDING-RIGHT: 3px; FONT-FAMILY: Georgia; COLOR: rgb(83,75,52); BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; FONT-SIZE: 26px; BORDER-TOP: rgb(0,0,0) 1px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; PADDING-TOP: 10px; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial">PacifiCorp
Continues to Pollute With Permission</H1>
<DIV style="Z-INDEX: auto; POSITION: static; PADDING-BOTTOM: 10px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-TOP: rgb(204,204,204) 1px dotted; PADDING-TOP: 5px" class=entry>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 0px; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial"><A title=http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/pacificorp-continues-to-pollute-with-permission/ href="http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/pacificorp-continues-to-pollute-with-permission/">http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/pacificorp-continues-to-pollute-with-permission/</A> </DIV>
<H3 style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Georgia; FONT-SIZE: 12px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Clean
Water Act Deteriorates on Klamath River</H3>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">By
Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune</P>
<DIV style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: x-small"></SPAN><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>PacifiCorp is on deck to receive yet another abeyance of its
California Clean Water section 401 certification today at the State Water
Resources Control Board meeting in Sacramento further delaying the power
producer’s obligation to reduce its pollution of the Klamath River.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>Prior to the culmination of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement
and Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement—two linked deals that
compromise permanent water deliveries to agricultural interest for the removal
of four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River in California and Oregon—the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had nearly finished its process to
re-license the antiquated dams.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>The final step, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
process and the Clean Water Act Section 401 certification, was stalled in 2008
because of a commitment amongst the Interior Secretary, numerous stakeholders,
and PacifiCorp to enter into serious negotiations under an Agreement in
Principle.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>Those negotiations were completed in February of 2010 when the
Interior Secretary, along with then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of
California, and then Governor Ted Kulongoski of Oregon met in Salem, Ore. to
sign the documents. Dozens of stakeholders also signed, including several
Klamath River Tribes and environmental groups. Legislation was due to be
enacted by May 10, 2010, but it was not, and has not.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>Although three tribes signed, three did not; The Hoopa Valley Tribe,
the Resighini Rancheria and the Quartz Valley Indian Reservation. Also,
several environmental groups were either excluded from the negotiations or
voluntarily left the table because of their disagreement.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>There are rumors that Oregon Senator, Jeff Merkley plans to circulate
a draft discussion bill in the near future, however, the rumors have not yet
been confirmed.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>The current Water Board resolution proposes to delete all deadlines
for enactment of federal legislation.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>“This is simple avoidance of the Board’s duty to protect California
water quality,” Hoopa Valley Tribal Council member, Hayley Hutt said. “Stop
hoping that the KHSA will do this Board’s work. Instead, they need to complete
the CEQA [California Environmental Quality Act] analysis on PacifiCorp’s
Section 401 application.”</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>The Hoopa Valley Tribal Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA)
regularly tests water quality on the portion of the Klamath River that passes
through the Hoopa Reservation. According to TEPA Director, Ken Norton, recent
tests confirm what the Tribe suspected—levels of total phosphorous, nitrogen
and blue-green algae exceed applicable standards.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>“The Water Board’s resolution says to continue the abeyance until the
Secretarial Determination (due in March of 2012), but what they do not say is
that the Secretary cannot legally make a determination if dam removal is in
the best interest of the public until federal legislation is introduced,” Hutt
said. Hutt will testify in front of the Water Board today in Sacramento.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>Although proponents are equally frustrated with the delay in progress
to improve Klamath River water quality, they stand by the Settlements they
negotiated and signed.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>Craig Tucker, the Klamath Campaign Coordinator for the Karuk Tribe
said that the Karuk Tribe continues to believe that a negotiated settlement is
the surest way to dam removal. “I’ll stand by that until proven otherwise,” he
said.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>Tucker emphasized that the introduction of federal legislation must
occur by March, at the latest, and the stall is not due in any part to the
parties.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>“It hasn’t been for people’s lack of trying and effort,” he said. “We
are now on Congress’ clock. We need to get behind it and move it forward.”</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>Sean Stevens from Oregon Wild, a large non-profit environmental group
based out of Portland, Ore. said the group has tried to stop the Water Board
from giving PacifiCorp a free pass to continue polluting the Klamath
River.</P>
<P style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" dir=ltr>“Now that there’s a science report that says it’s unclear if dam
removal will reduce pollution in the Klamath River, it’s even more important
for the Water Board to address water quality in the Klamath River with or
without the Settlements,” Stevens said.</P></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>==================================================</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px"><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px"><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.6em; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px" align=left><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT></FONT> </P></SPAN></FONT></BODY></HTML>