<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 10">
<meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 10">
<link rel="File-List"
href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CT47F7%7E1.SCH%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml">
<o:smarttagtype
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="stockticker"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PersonName"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="country-region"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="State"></o:smarttagtype><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object
classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:41.75pt;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:41.75pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
letter-spacing:-.25pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->It is depressing enough to have a Director of PCFFA
defending PacifiCorp’s terrible water quality management on the
Klamath, but the errors in Mr. Spain’s apology below are glaring.
(1) Spain confuses the Section 401 water quality certification with
PacifiCorp’s application for a certification. It is true that
PacifiCorp seeks certification for a new license like the 1956
license, which they dream should be without fish passage. The State
Water Resources Control Board CEQA EIR, however, will consider
several alternatives, including dam removals, in developing
conditions for a certification. The SWRCB is not limited to
granting or denying exactly what PacifiCorp hopes for; instead, the
Board can impose conditions. <br>
<br>
Spain’s purported fear that PacifiCorp could comply with all the
conditions without removing the dams is unjustified, in part for the
reasons described in the Op-Ed published by PacifiCorp’s Dean
Brockbank, which Spain attached. As Brockbank notes “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.” PacifiCorp achieved that approval by proving to the utility
commissions that dam removal is cheaper than retrofitting the dams
to provide the full volitional upstream and downstream fish passage
which is already mandated by federal licensing conditions.
Conditions that may be imposed by the State Water Resources Control
Board will only further tilt the cost savings in favor of dam
removal. These dams are history.<br>
<br>
Spain projects that litigation will delay dam removal when FERC
issues a license that will make it cheaper for PacifiCorp to remove
the dams than to comply with conditions. But there is no guarantee
that there will be no litigation concerning the KHSA and KBRA and
the flawed NEPA process currently under way. Anyone can sue. Plus,
Spain neglects to mention the $1 billion albatross hanging around
the neck of the KHSA--the need for federal legislation and
appropriations. We don't think Congress will jump to pass the
legislation required by the KHSA, and this could delay that process
indefinitely.. By contrast, no new legislation is needed for a FERC
license that leads to dam removal.<br>
<br>
Finally, Spain claims there is no legal way to gain the additional
protections of the interim measures except through the KHSA. Again,
he overlooks the Biological Opinion issued by National Marine
Fisheries Service for the protection of Coho salmon, and the Interim
Conservation Plan that NMFS negotiated with PacifiCorp to avoid
liability under the Endangered Species Act. It is, in fact, those
documents not the KHSA that have produced most of the operational
changes seen thus far. <br>
<br>
Tom<br>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt"><span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"></span><o:p></o:p></span>
<br>
<br>
On 8/23/2011 4:51 PM, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:FISH1IFR@aol.com">FISH1IFR@aol.com</a> wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:1706a.635dca7e.3b8596ec@aol.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16434">
<font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">
<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
moz-do-not-send="true"
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
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.klamathrestoration.gov">www.klamathrestoration.gov</a>
.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2">======================================<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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.pcffa.org/">www.pcffa.org</a><br>
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fish1ifr@aol.com">fish1ifr@aol.com</a></font></div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>==========================================================</div>
<div> </div>
<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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tstokely@att.net">tstokely@att.net</a> writes:</div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT:
5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:
transparent" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><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>
</span></font>
<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"><font
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color="#000000"
face="Arial" size="2">
<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
moz-do-not-send="true"
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> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">==================================================</font></div>
<div> </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"> </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"> </p>
</font>
<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"> </p>
</font>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 10">
<meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 10">
<link rel="File-List" href="msajsig_files/filelist.xml">
<title>Important notices</title>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Author>Tom Schlosser</o:Author>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:LastAuthor>Tom Schlosser</o:LastAuthor>
<o:Revision>2</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>3</o:TotalTime>
<o:Created>2006-04-06T17:04:00Z</o:Created>
<o:LastSaved>2006-04-06T17:04:00Z</o:LastSaved>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>15</o:Words>
<o:Characters>91</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Morisset Schlosser et al.</o:Company>
<o:Lines>1</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>105</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>10.6714</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="2050"/>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/>
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="Section1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="http://www.schlosserlawfiles.com/CONFIDENTIALITY%20NOTICE%20040606.pdf">Important
notices</a></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>