|
Become a friend of the Klamath Bucket Brigade All donations are tax deductible |
|
This Website is Dedicated to Alvin Alexander Cheyne January 10, 1921 - June 17, 2005 |
GovTrack.us is an independent tool to help the public research and track the activities in the U.S. Congress, promoting government transparency and civic education through novel uses of technology.
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
This Report, by Camp
Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM Report or
Report) was provided to the Department
in July of 2008. Though the CDM Report
was originally intended for the
Department’s internal use, we release it
now to insure that the parties
negotiating a final settlement/dam
removal agreement have access to this
information, along with other
information already available.
During the development of
the Agreement in Principle (AIP),
substantial attention was devoted to the
lack of a settled understanding about
the risks and potential liabilities
arising from removal of the four
PacifiCorp-owned facilities on the
Klamath River. These unquantified risks
have a direct correlation to the costs
and timing of the proposed removal of
the facilities. Consequently, last
Spring the Office of the Secretary asked
CDM to provide an assessment of the
status of the known and available
scientific, regulatory and economic
information known as of that time.
The attached Report is a
snapshot of the published science as it
existed slightly less than a year ago;
it is one piece of the larger
scientific, regulatory, and economic
framework that will come into full view
during the scientific due diligence
contemplated by the AIP, leading up to
the Secretary’s determination in 2012.
The Report describes the potential risks
and liabilities of dam removal absent an
effective strategy to prevent or manage
them: it does not compare the risks and
liabilities of dam removal and a new
license, nor does it evaluate or
quantify the potential benefits and
values of dam removal. The Report’s
utility lies in the assistance it offers
the parties in specifying the further
efforts needed to quantify potential
risks and liabilities, develop an
effective strategy to prevent or manage
them, and compare such risks and
liabilities under alternative futures
for this project. Because the science
is, and will continue to be evolving
until 2012, the Report does not reflect
the final or interim position of the
United States regarding any aspect of
the AIP, Final Agreement, or Klamath
Basin Restoration Agreement.
We understand the potential for those who oppose dam removal to identify isolated portions of the analysis and postulations of the CDM Report regarding quantification of risk. But because the Secretary will undertake his own analysis, informed by all the parties to the Final Agreement for Dam removal, these postulations are of limited applicability in the final analysis. We encourage the parties to focus on the Report’s true value: its identification of factors and data gaps in the science that must be addressed in order for the Secretarial determination of 2012 to be fully informed and sound.
We understand the potential for those who oppose dam removal to identify isolated portions of the analysis and postulations of the CDM Report regarding quantification of risk. But because the Secretary will undertake his own analysis, informed by all the parties to the Final Agreement for Dam removal, these postulations are of limited applicability in the final analysis. We encourage the parties to focus on the Report’s true value: its identification of factors and data gaps in the science that must be addressed in order for the Secretarial determination of 2012 to be fully informed and sound.