Why Would North Coast Residents Pay $500 Million to Have Less Water?—Letter to the Editor

MendoFever Staff January 17, 2024

Dear Editor-

Somebody should ask San Rafael’s Congressional Representative, Jared Huffman. 

A group led by Huffman is promoting the destruction of our regional water infrastructure. Their aim is to substantially reduce our regional water storage by removing Scott Dam and Lake Pillsbury. Estimated cost: $500 million. 

Huffman’s plan goes against the interests of the North Coast’s nearly 1 million residents, and runs counter to the Biden-Harris administration’s White House Global Action Plan on Water Security. The report makes clear that the US continues to suffer from inadequate water infrastructure. From the report: 

“Here at home, water crises are becoming more frequent and intense. Historic droughts threaten our supply of water, and failing infrastructure and chronic underinvestment deprive our most vulnerable communities of safe drinking the source of both life and livelihoods, water security is central to human and national security.” 

We in the North Coast can relate. 

The White House report adds that its 2021 $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill “will invest in water infrastructure…that includes billions of dollars in funding for projects across the country to build new water reuse, efficiency, storage, and conveyance facilities that secure and grow our water supplies.” 

The law directs $550 billion towards projects that will specifically increase water security, storage capacity, and modernization of water infrastructure. We can surmise from Huffman’s stated position that he is not advocating for the North Coast to receive the benefits of these already approved historic federal funds.

When the federal government is spending hundreds of billions of dollars to provide Americans with more water, why would we pay $500 million to have less?

Over the last decade, the North Coast has faced a prolonged regional water crisis. In addition to the nearly $1 billion California has received to date from the Biden infrastructure bill to improve water infrastructure, the state sat on $2.7 billion specifically allocated for water storage development for almost a decade. 

Yet, Representative Huffman intends for us to spend upwards of $500 million to reduce the North Coast’s freshwater storage by 26.2 billion gallons (80,650 Acre Feet) — equal to 9 months and 12 days of water for all 714,420 humans in the district. 

Three key consequences that Huffman’s dam destruction plan does not address: 1) The increased fire risk our residents and firefighters will face due to reduced water availability. 2) The impact on agricultural producers from starving our land of water and aquifer recharge. 3) The economic and environmental costs and health impacts on residents from increasing water and food costs and worsening water scarcity. 

Also missing from Huffman’s project: who will pay the $500 million to fund his destruction of Scott Dam? Taxpayers or ratepayers, it is still us. How does he plan to replace the year-round water supplied by Lake Pillsbury to residents and the new diversion facility – particularly in drought years? Why is he completely disregarding the stated wishes of Lake County, where the lake resides? 

Further, as a result of Sacramento’s housing mandates to all California cities and counties, our region’s demand for water is only going up. How does Jared Huffman square this reality with his plan? How does he square it with the potential $90 million project Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) wants for an emergency water pipeline to the East Bay after Marin “almost ran out of water in 2021”?

Huffman’s group does not have a plan to address our region’s water insecurity. So far, he is only offering his constituents another government entity to manage the reduction of our water resources and, in all likelihood, more taxes. This sounds an awful lot like the failed SMART train, of which Huffman was the campaign co-chair. 

When it becomes evident that this was a grave mistake for Mendocino and Sonoma Counties, who will be held accountable for such a decision? How will the economic, physical, and mental suffering of Mendocino and Sonoma County’s citizens be compensated for? How will we bring back the lost businesses and how many decades will it take for new storage to be approved, funded, and built? 

Prudence dictates that we build a new water source before we remove our current water source. 

Most can agree that California needs more water storage, even China. So why is Huffman pushing a $500 million plan to reduce our water storage without a solution for our water needs? 

He owes all of us an explanation and a plan. We have the land and historic funding for more water storage. All we are missing is leadership. 

Chris Coulombe, a Veteran running for Congress in California’s 2nd Congressional District. christocongress.com or @christocongress on social media platforms.

PG&E formalizes plan to eliminate Mendocino National Forest lake in landmark move

PRESS DEMOCRAT - By Mary Callahan

In a landmark moment, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. formalized its plans to tear down two more-than-century-old dams on the Eel River — removing the barrier that forms Lake Pillsbury, freeing the waters of the river and restoring the lake footprint to a more natural state.

The moves are part of a 94-page draft surrender application submitted to federal regulators and made public Friday as part of the utility’s plan to decommission its Potter Valley powerhouse and all the infrastructure that comes with it — including Scott and Cape Horn dams, sited slightly downstream.

PG&E has said work deconstructing the dams could begin as early 2028, depending on regulatory approval and environmental review of the plan.

Scott Dam, built in 1921, would come down first, either in phases or all in one season.

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. initial draft plan

The plan fulfills long-held dreams of conservationists and fishery groups to see the cold, clear headwaters of the Eel River, part of the Mendocino National Forest, reopened to migrating fish and to restore natural river flows in hopes of reversing the decline of native fish stocks.

“Dam removal will make the Eel the longest free-flowing river in California and will open up hundreds of stream miles of prime habitat unavailable to native salmon and steelhead for over 100 years,” said Brian J. Johnson, California Director for Trout Unlimited. “This is the most important thing we can do for salmon and steelhead on the Eel River, and these fisheries cannot afford to wait.”

PG&E is still determining which of two approaches to take in removing Scott Dam, primarily related to how to handle sediment accumulated behind the dam and how best to release the stored water to limit its dispersal.

In a win for Sonoma Water and Russian River water users in Sonoma and Mendocino counties, PG&E also has agreed to evaluate a regional proposal to retain enough of smaller Cape Horn Dam, built in 1907, and a mile-long diversion tunnel to allow continued, wintertime diversions from the Eel to the East Fork Russian River.

The idea is to draw off limited water when Eel River flows are high in order to top off Lake Mendocino and prevent the Russian River from running dry in summer, while still allowing salmon and steelhead trout to migrate up the Eel River to its headwaters unimpeded.

Local officials said they were excited to see the proposal included in PG&E’s draft, the first of two that will be circulated for public review over the coming months before a final surrender application is filed in January 2025. Two different approaches are being considered for diversions — one called a roughened channel and the other, a pumpback system involving embedded pumps, requiring less infrastructure in the water to move diversions toward the tunnel.

Sonoma County Supervisor James Gore called it ”big deal,“ saying PG&E ”could have taken the easy way out … and moved ahead with a less complex solution — one that doesn’t deal with multiple jurisdictions, partners, opinions, end goals.“

Members of the regional group, which includes the Round Valley Indian Tribes, are in the process of creating a joint power authority to establish the framework for governance and funding of the proposed diversion system, dubbed the new Eel-Russian Facility.

A tremendous amount of work still lies ahead to design, engineer, finance, establish operating protocols and arrange water rights in order to bring the diversion proposal to fruition.

But Gore, many of whose north county constituents depend on Russian River flows for municipal and agricultural use, as do thousands more in Mendocino County, said they knew what was coming and know what’s at stake in ensuring diversions continue, even if it comes at a cost.

“Everybody knows, unless they’ve been hiding under a rock, that the days of free water are gone,” Gore said.

The regional proposal comes with a pledge to move forward without delaying dam removals and promoting restoration of the fishery.

Proponents signed onto the regional proposal include the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Humboldt County, Trout Unlimited and California Trout, whose focus is ensuring improved conditions in the Eel River. Many have long resented the abundance of water removed from the Eel, though diversions have lessened in recent years.

In many ways, the membership reflects the makeup and goals of the Two-Basin Solution Partnership, a stakeholder group brought together by North Coast Congressman Jared Huffman in 2019, after PG&E first announced it would not renew its federal license for the aging hydroelectric project.

The partnership made a bid to acquire the project in order to maintain diversions while restoring fish passage, though it was unable to meet a timetable set by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to submit an application.

Huffman, D-San Rafael, has continued to maintain that the dams would come down and that room remained for a two-partnership, win-win resolution.

He said Friday that the new application “is a major step forward to achieving the Two-Basin Solution I’ve advocated for years.”

The impending loss of Lake Pillsbury, a 3 1/2-square-mile reservoir popular with boaters and other recreators, is a tremendous blow to those who have homes along its shore or traditions of visiting and camping there, though Lake County officials continue to fight the proposal.

Four communities totaling about 300 homes and cabin have been built since the dam went in, along with campgrounds, a marina and other amenities, all “built up around Lake Pillsbury being in existence,” Lake County Treasurer/Tax Collector Patrick Sullivan said in a video presentation last month to the Russian River Water Forum.

Dam removal would mean the immediate and ongoing loss of $750,000 in sales and occupancy taxes each year, as well as $40 million loss in property values, Sullivan said.

PG&E alone has five family campground and a group campground it plans to take out.

The entire proposal would eliminate a key visitor destination for the county that Supervisors Eddie “E.J.” Crandell and Bruno Sabatier said in the same video must be addressed through monetary considerations and creation of other economic opportunities.

They and members of the Lake Pillsbury Alliance also have cited concerns about wildlife populations that have grown up around the lake, the longtime use of the lake as a water source for firefighting aircraft, and other concerns.

“There are 300 property owners, ranchers, that have been misrepresented and underrepresented through the process, and they’re underrepresented this moment, in the initial draft,” said Carol Cinquini, a representative of the Lake Pillsbury Alliance, whose grandson is the fifth generation to grow up using the lake.

Cinquini said the review necessary before the full surrender is complete still leaves time “so a lot can happen.”

But PG&E says it has no other plan but removing the dam.

It also reduced the lake level earlier this year due to newly analyzed seismic concerns that will prevent it from allowing the lake to be restored to full capacity in the future.

In the meantime, the utility has put all of the lake basin and the shoreline, and “a wide area” along 11 miles of river downstream of the lake under permanent conservation easement held by the Mendocino Land Trust, protecting the wildlife and prohibiting future development on the land.

The easement allows public access to the area in perpetuity.

Huffman, in September, said “it is going to be a bumpy ride for the next few months, maybe the next year or so,” as stakeholders begin to embrace the reality of decommissioning and tend to the details.

Lake Pillsbury aficionados, in particular, he said, would realize the lake already isn’t what it’s been, with reduced capacity, “boat ramps that don’t go in the water,” and “a big bathtub ring (around the lake) that isn’t as pretty as they would like to see.”

But ultimately, the conversation will “change to the point where a lot of them will realize it’s going to be a beautiful place to be and to recreate and to live, if they choose to do that,” Huffman said.

“It’s just going to be different.”

The draft surrender application is in circulation to the public until Dec. 22, when all comments on referred alternatives are due to PG&E. Comments can be sent electronically, which is preferred, to PVSurrender@pge.com, or via regular mail to Tony Gigliotti, Senior Licensing Project Manager, Power Generation, 12840 Bill Clark Way, Auburn, CA 95602

A final draft is to be submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission by June 3, with another round of public comments through July 18.

The final surrender application is due to the federal commission Jan. 29, 2025.

You can reach Staff Writer Mary Callahan (she/her) at 707-521-5249 or mary.callahan@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @MaryCallahanB.

The Loss of Lake Pillsbury....the Latest from the Russian River Water Forum

Mendo Fever

by Monica Huettl - October 20, 2023

At the most recent meeting of the Russian River Water Forum Planning Group, members discussed PG&E’s “non-binding acceptance in concept” of the Proposal to take over the Potter Valley Project diversion facilities, the importance of Lake Pillsbury, and the seismic vulnerability of Scott Dam and downstream communities.

On October 5 the Russian River Water Forum Planning Group met in Ukiah, facilitated by Ben Gettleman and Jim Downing of Kearns & West. For those who want to catch up on the prior meetings and the Eel River/Russian River issues (see links at the end of this article).

Janet Pauli, Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission, informed the group that PG&E has responded to the New Eel-Russian Facility Proposalsubmitted at the end of July by the Proponant team of MCIWPC, Sonoma Water, and the Round Valley Indian Tribes. PG&E provided a statement including a “non-binding acceptance in concept” of the proposal. The proposal includes two alternatives to the existing Cape Horn Dam. PG&E will include the proposal in its initial surrender and draft decommissioning plan to be submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on November 15, 2023. The draft plan will also include PG&E’s proposal to remove Cape Horn Dam and will be posted for public review and comment. 

Pauli said, “We were pleased that PG&E thought enough of our proposal to accept it, non-binding acceptance . . . This is a huge step forward.” The proposal will have to receive support from the National Marine Fisheries Service and California Department of Fish and Wildlife and from representative governmental and non-governmental entities from the Russian and Eel River basins. There were questions on which of the government agencies and NGOs were to be included on the approval list. The Proponents will be putting together that list by talking with Planning Group members and the caucuses. Pauli said, “Because PG&E accepted, it’s the beginning of the next phase of the story.”

Issues to be resolved include financing for the project, design studies for the diversion alternatives, and water rights. Grant Davis of Sonoma Water said, “There have only been preliminary meetings with PG&E,” and that water rights are “one of the more exciting parts of the discussion.” A presentation from the Water Rights Working Group is scheduled for the November Planning Group meeting.

Carol Cinquini and Frank Lynch of the Lake Pillsbury Alliance presented their case for saving the lake. They believe dam removal will harm people and ecosystems of the Eel and Russian Rivers. Lake Pillsbury is the recreational gem of the Mendocino National Forest. The lake basin is teeming with wildlife.

Lynch said that Lake Pillsbury provides immediate access to water for fire responders. Lake Mendocino is 20 minutes away by air for the planes to fill up. If Lake Pillsbury is lost, it could affect domestic wells, as the groundwater is recharged by the lake storage water. There is a huge amount of uncertainty for the community. They would like to see a cost-benefit analysis of dam removal versus dam rehabilitation. Advocates for dam removal point to the successful removal of dams and restoration of habitat on the Klamath River. Lynch said that the Eel and Klamath are not comparable, as the Klamath has year-round flow, while the Eel does not. 

Cinquini said, “In the worst-case scenario, we want to be made whole again. We will aggressively pursue mitigation and compensation for adverse impacts to Lake Pillsbury property owners, homeowners, and businesses. We will continue to work with Lake County and other agencies on mitigation planning where our interests align, and we will actively engage in the FERC decommissioning process.”

Lake County Supervisors Eddie EJ Crandall and Bruno Sabatier showed a video and spoke on the regional benefits of Lake Pillsbury, which they say stores water to support agriculture worth $743 million per year, and supplies drinking water from the Potter Valley Project to 600,000 people downstream in inland Mendocino, Sonoma, and Marin Counties. They estimate it could cost as much as $1 billion to remodel the Potter Valley project and restore the habitat of the upper Eel River.

Crandall said that mitigation must be implemented. He wants to establish a fire protection measure, establish water rights, and water storage. If the dam is removed, the restoration of vegetation needs to be done correctly, along with building roads and safety measures. The sediment load built up behind the dam needs to be addressed. Climate change and drought mean water storage is more vital than ever. 

Sabatier said “The fire season is longer by 75 days. . . .It’s very real what we’re experiencing, let’s not fight about what we’re experiencing.” Speaking of water storage, “Right now we have a known quantity. We’re choosing to throw that away and move forward as if it’s a foregone conclusion rather than continuing to have the conversation.”

In the video, Lake County’s Tax Collector, Patrick Sullivan, said “We need a solution that demonstrates concern for Lake County. There is a potential loss of over $40 million in property values, with resulting property taxes, sales tax, occupancy tax, and other entities paying taxes. . . . PG&E should be responsible for the costs, but there is already an effort to evade responsibility.” Comprehensive restoration costs could exceed the costs of dam removal. Adding fish passage might have been more cost-effective. Lake County will face a loss of revenue, an increased burden on a rural county already strained. 

Crandall is seriously concerned about fire danger after talking to fire-fighting hotshots who said they need Lake Pillsbury as a water source during fires. The fire retardant that’s dropped from planes has been the subject of lawsuits, and if CalFire is prohibited from using the fire retardant, then the lake water becomes critical.

Sabatier said there are only two tule elk herds in national forests in California, one of which is the thriving herd at Lake Pillsbury. Without the lake, destination tourism will be lost. 

Crandall wants to know if PG&E is going to restore the habitat. The state has billions to build new water storage. Why remove existing water storage?

Sabatier said “Lake County is here to plead” for more studies before moving forward. Lake Pillsbury is in Lake County, yet the RRWF is issuing press releases, and making plans without consulting Lake County.

Guinness McFadden, MCIWPC, said “Lake County may be pretty poor financially, but they’ve got a couple of Supervisors who can really speak. I appreciate you guys.” McFadden said PG&E admitted their studies are incomplete. “The dearth of the fish can’t be blamed on Lake Pillsbury. These people have a religious fervor, only a small percentage of the Eel River water is diverted. If you watch the video A River’s Last Chance, it goes through multiple reasons why the salmon counts are down.”

Sabatier said, “We all know the power of PG&E. . . . Currently, PG&E is requesting a rate increase while they plan to do the least possible.” Lake County forgave PG&E $20 million in fines after the fires. The utility uses lawyers to its advantage, for example, the transfer assets to a new entity called Pacific Generation. Sabatier added, “This is something we have to keep an eye on so they can’t sneak away without liability.”

Vivian Halliwell, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, Institute for Fisheries Resources, thanked the Lake County group for their presentation and said they raised some issues she wasn’t aware of. But she cautioned that PG&E is right to be concerned about the seismic issues at Scott Dam, as the utility will be responsible if something happens. PG&E wants to get out from under the cost of seismic retrofit on a money-losing project. In reference to the economic concerns, Halliwell said, “It’s pretty bad for everybody. . . . We’ve had fishing closed in the ocean off of the Eel River for about 35 years now, for commercial and very limited sport. That was a really valuable fishery for numerous ports up and down the Coast, including Ft. Bragg in Mendocino County, where I used to fish out of years ago.” 

Halliwell’s colleague, Andy Colonna, questioned why PG&E is not sitting at the table with the Planning Group. With regard to the seismic concerns about Scott Dam, Colonna said “If you look under the Bartlett Fault, it’s underneath that dam, it’s a really big fault. And USGS, not even PG&E, the USGS, has claimed it’s a mega-thrust fault, so it will multiply the effects. So a 6 point whatever will be like a 9 in its impact. I live on the lower end of the Eel. If the feces hits the fan up there, that 65-foot wave of water is realistically going to come right down, all the way into just below Eureka. We’re already sitting on the San Andreas that comes out of Cape Mendocino. . . . So I would love to see the thing stay as it is, but it really isn’t safe. . . . Now you guys are attached to that lake, and I can understand why. I’m also attached to the lower Eel, and you can understand why. I think we’re all going through separation anxiety. . . . “ 

Charlie Schneider, of CalTrout, suggested looking at upstream storage. The Lake Pillsbury area has several opportunities that can be developed into upstream storage that will help recharge the river and groundwater.

Glenn Spain, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, said the proposal calls for NMFS to require minimum restoration of instream flows. Minimum restoration is not enough. We want and need optimum flows there. How are the Russian River interests going to pay for the Eel River water in a continued diversion? “If there’s going to be a viable agreement to continue a diversion, there has to be a payment that goes into Eel River restoration.” Spain urged the Lake County Supervisors to get in touch with the Klamath River Renewal Corporation to see its successful models for restoring recreational and economic opportunities and for fire suppression. Spain said, “Don’t go into this without a plan.”

Crandall, replied that as a member of the Robinson Rancheria Tribe, he can empathize with Eel River interests need to be made whole, but “We would think the headwaters would be as important as the rest of the Eel River.” He thanked the group for listening to each other with respect and concluded, “PG&E just basically threw the piece of meat on the ground and are expecting everyone to fight over it.”

The next Planning Group meeting is November 2, 2023.

Here is a link to the recording of the October 5 Planning Group meeting.

Side Note regarding Congressman Mike Thompson’s efforts: Thompson wrote to the US Forest Service and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, asking both agencies if they have statistics on how Lake Pillsbury is used in fire-fighting, and whether they have contingency plans in place should Scott Dam be decommissioned. USFS replied that they consistently use Lake Pillsbury and water downstream to fight fires, as does CalFire. CalFire replied that it does use Lake Pillsbury, but more often uses Clear Lake to fight fires. CalFire noted that the land around Lake Pillsbury is mostly the responsibility of the USFS and that removing Lake Pillsbury should not adversely impact CalFire’s ability to fight fires in the region. Thompson forwarded his letters and responses to FERC, where they can be found on the FERC E-Library.

Brief report on the Russian River Resiliency Subcommittee kick-off meeting on September 26, 2023: The purpose of this subcommittee is to “develop sustainable project concepts (beyond the PVP) that will improve insight on water availability, address water supply reliability, and reduce demand, with the aim of improving water supply reliability in the Russian River watershed under drought and climate change conditions.” The three co-chairs of the Resiliency Subcommittee are Jaime Neary, Russian Riverkeeper, Jay Jasperse, Sonoma Water, and Adam Gaska, Redwood Valley County Water District. Kearns and West has generated a Matrix of existing water saving projects, as a collaboration hub for the region, and to prevent duplication of effort. The subcommittee will work with the Russian River Confluence on finding grants for water conservation projects and encouraging citizen participation with community outreach activities, modeled on the Keep Tahoe Blue organization. Here is a link to the slides and a recording of the July 26 meeting.

Lake County discusses value of Scott Dam/Lake Pillsbury at the Russian River Water Forum · 10-05-2023

On October 5, 2023 Lake County Supervisors and the Lake Pillsbury Alliance gave concurrent presentations to Russian River Water Forum discussing the regional benefits of Lake Pillsbury and potential impacts if Scott Dam is decommissioned.

Click here to watch Lake County’s Scott Dam/Lake Pillsbury video.

What Is the Fate of Lake Pillsbury If Scott Dam Is Decommissioned?

Photo by Mike Nelson

Mendo Fever

Monica Huettl - September 8, 2023

Continuing our coverage of the Russian River Water Forum efforts to find solutions for Russian River water security and restoration of Eel River fisheries, we are taking a look at Lake Pillsbury. The Eel River groups have wanted to remove Scott Dam and Lake Pillsbury for years. The Russian River groups are mainly concerned with keeping some form of diversion tunnel facilities operational and have not taken a stand on the Lake Pillsbury issue.

The Lake Pillsbury Alliance was formed in 2019, around the time that PG&E was working through the FERC relicensing process. When PG&E decided not to renew the hydroelectric license, the company became unresponsive to hearing from Lake Pillsbury residents. 

Frank Lynch and Carol Cinquini, second and third-generation cabin owners and lifetime recreational users of the Lake Pillsbury area, contacted four homeowners’ associations around the lake and formed a 501(c)(3) organization so that Lake Pillsbury’s interests could be part of the discussions. They tried to get a seat on Congressman Jared Huffman’s ad hoc committee but were denied. The County of Lake tried to join the Two Basin Partnership but was also denied. Lynch says Lake County’s interests have been marginalized for years. 

Lynch said the Ad Hoc, Two Basin Partnership and the RRWF were “stacked with interests against Lake Pillsbury.” All of the Eel River groups are actively advocating for dam removal. The Russian River groups are concerned with maintaining the diversion. Cinquini’s take is that anything concerning Scott Dam and the Lake Pillsbury basin area is considered PG&E’s problem.

One of the many Bald Eagles found at Lake Pillsbury [Photo and permission to use by Walt Leonard]

Lynch said RRWF Planning Group member Eddie Crandall, Lake County Supervisor, was “helpful in getting us a seat on the RRWF Planning Group. Lake County wrote a letter in support of our membership.” Cinquini and Lynch then lobbied for a seat at the table, explaining how their stakeholders deserved consideration because they would be the most directly impacted if Scott Dam was removed. Cinquini added, “We wanted to be part of the process, we respect the process. We know we are a minority voice.”

The studies done by the Two Basin Solution focused on water supply and fisheries, but Lynch and Cinquini assert that none were done to assess the impacts to the Lake Pillsbury basin communities and ecosystems if Scott Dam was removed. The Two Basin Partnership’s Phase II Feasibility Studies are located on Huffman’s Ad Hoc website and earlier Feasibility Studies are located on the Two Basin Partnership website. 

Cinquini pointed to the various studies and discussions that analyzed capital costs of dam removal and water storage, including possibly raising Coyote Dam at Lake Mendocino, removing Cape Horn and Scott Dams, and building new infrastructure and water storage facilities. The less expensive solution of remodeling and renovating the existing dams was not considered. Cinquini said “None of the studies take a holistic approach to problem solving, looking for win-win solutions for everybody.”

While Lake Pillsbury has few permanent residents, the area is heavily used by the four homeowner communities and other recreational users year-round. The beauty of Lake Pillsbury is its remoteness. It’s off-the-grid, off-the-beaten track, and attracts people who want to be immersed in nature. In the summer, there are thousands of people camping on the weekends, and many families spend weeks in homes and cabins on both private and federal lands. Cinquini said, “Lake Pillsbury is well-used and well-loved.”

Without the lake, would there be continuing resort/camping opportunities in the same location along the Eel River? Perhaps a deep river with big swimming holes, and opportunities to kayak and fish? Lynch says without Scott Dam, the river would probably dry up in the late summer, leaving unconnected pools of water. When Cape Horn Dam and Van Arsdale Reservoir were built in 1907, there wasn’t enough water in Van Arsdale to send through the diversion tunnel, so Scott Dam was created in 1922 to store more water.

There has been talk for years of decommissioning Scott Dam. With the changes that would bring, Lynch said PG&E has not offered any compensation or assistance to business owners and residents if Lake Pillsbury is removed, “PG&E offered zero help. They referred us to FERC.”

Congressman Mike Thompson, representing Lake County, “has shown interests in our position, but no tangible help has been forthcoming,” according to Lynch. Jared Huffman doesn’t represent Lake County, and he hasn’t included any assistance for the Lake Pillsbury community in his statements.

Some in the RRWF are saying Lake Pillsbury isn’t needed for fire protection. Lynch said, “Without Lake Pillsbury as a resource, the community around the lake would be 100% vulnerable. Water from Lake Pillsbury has been used to fight fires in five counties. It is used to fill fixed-wing aircraft, helicopters, and tanker trucks. Without Scott Dam, the river would not be deep enough in fire season for them to dip into. Suggestions that water from Lake Mendocino, Blue Lakes and Clear Lake be used are not feasible. They are too far away from the National Forest.”

The environmental groups have shown concern about pike minnow, an invasive species found in Lake Pillsbury. Lynch said, “The pike minnow is a non-native fish that was introduced years ago. It’s a dominant species that is already found in the Eel River. People blame Lake Pillsbury, but we would like to see the pike minnow gone. Lake Pillsbury is not to blame for the pike minnow’s existence.”

Another expensive problem connected with dam removal is what to do with the sediment. Some estimates claim that half of the 21 million cubic yards of sediment could wash away and clog up downstream habitat if Lake Pillsbury is removed. Lynch said “The costs for removal of sediment are going to be exorbitant.”

The two sides on the Russian River Water Forum are focused on a diversion that represents less than 2% of the Eel River water supply. Once Scott Dam is gone, they are now talking about building a new reservoir in Potter Valley for water storage. Lynch says it would be so much cheaper to modify the existing dams to improve the fish passage. Cinquini asks us to think about the cumulative capital cost of all of the plans.

Lake Pillsbury is the recreational anchor of the Mendocino National Forest. Lynch has talked to Forest Service representatives, who expressed concern about fire protection and loss of habitat if Scott Dam is removed. Lynch said, “It will change the dynamic of the National Forest and would be a tragic loss.”

Inquiries to the offices of Congressman Mike Thompson, Lake County Supervisor Eddie Crandall and PG&E’s media center, asking for comment about the impact of dam decommissioning on the Lake Pillsbury Community have not received a response.

PG&E Proposes Reducing Russian River Flow and Transferring Potter Valley Project to Subsidiary

MENDO FEVER - July 18, 2023 by Sarah Reith

Fly fishing on the Russian River south of Frog Woman Rock [Picture by Matt LaFever]

The Potter Valley Project has two deadlines for public comment coming up next month. One is a proposal for a flow variance, which takes into account recent developments with the embattled water diversion facility.

The other is garnering statewide interest in PG&E’s request to transfer its non-nuclear generating assets to a subsidiary called Pacific Generation. That includes all its hydropower projects, some of which, like the one in Potter Valley, are running under expired licenses and are slated for decommissioning. Potter Valley has not been able to generate electricity since December of 2021, due to a broken piece of equipment in the powerhouse.

Agencies and members of the public have until August fourth to comment on PG&E’s request to reduce flows into the East Fork of the Russian River from 75 cubic feet per second to 25, with flexibility to reduce the flows to 5 if water temperatures below Scott Dam exceed 60 degrees Fahrenheit or 16 degrees Celsius. This is a mitigation measure to protect salmon, which require cold water. PG&E says its request includes provisions for water temperature monitoring, which the National Marine Fisheries Service as well as the Round Valley Indian Tribes have requested.

Five cfs is what the Russian River has gotten in severe drought years. But PG&E is reducing the storage capacity of Lake Pillsbury, in response to a recent revelation that Scott Dam is more susceptible to seismic risk than was previously known. To that end, the spillway gates on top of the dam remain open, though typically they would have been closed in April. Water is only being released through the needle valve at the bottom of the dam.

According to Sonoma Water, Lake Pillsbury currently holds 51,965 acre-feet, which is a little higher than it was this time last year, in spite of a dramatically wet winter. 

Water is released from the reservoir for three different uses: The East Fork, which serves fisheries and human water users in the Russian River watershed; the Potter Valley Irrigation District, which has a contract with PG&E for up to 50 cfs; and the fisheries in the Eel River. The current request does not address the amount of water that would be released for the Potter Valley Irrigation District. According to Janet Pauli, a longtime Potter Valley advocate, the district is currently using about 20 cfs on an on-demand basis, though its contract has not been curtailed.

PG&E has requested flow variances every year since 2006, when its license was finalized with custom mitigation measures designed by regulatory agencies. Its most recent request states that it is developing a proposal for a long-term flow regime that will comply with environmental requirements in both watersheds as the spillway gates remain open.
PG&E has stated publicly that it intends to remove both Scott Dam and Cape Horn Dam, unless it can find a buyer that can operate the project. Sonoma Water Agency, which gets the lion’s share of water from Lake Mendocino, is trying to figure out how to continue the diversion without the dams. Removal of the two dams is estimated to cost between $118-236 million. The cost would be borne by ratepayers.

But the project could be in place for years. The license for the Kilarc-Cow Creek hydro project in Shasta County expired in 2007. PG&E filed an application to surrender the license in 2009. That project consists of two powerhouses, three dams, and an assortment of penstocks and spillways in two watersheds, each about 80 square miles. Now, ranchers and irrigators, who have water rights tied up in the project, have filed a motion to intervene in PG&E’s request to transfer the expired license to a newly-formed subsidiary. According to an article in an industry publication last year, “PG&E seeks to transfer its non-nuclear generation assets into the subsidiary company and then sell a minority stake in Pacific Generation.” The company believes that “would provide an efficient source of equity financing to help PG&E fund wildfire risk mitigation and clean energy investments.” PG&E would maintain majority ownership and its employees would continue to operate its assets.

But the Cow Creek water users told the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that “the Commission should not approve transfer of the now-long expired license unless and until Pacific Generation has demonstrated its capacity to safety and effectively accomplish license surrender and project decommissioning, without adverse impacts on landowner interests or the environment. In deciding whether to approve the transfer, the Commission should also consider whether the proposed transfer of the license would further delay or otherwise interfere with the license surrender and project decommissioning.”

The California Hydropower Reform Coalition also weighed in, noting that the proposed transfer would be “the single largest transfer of FERC-issued licenses in California history.” Eight of the 22 projects are undergoing relicensing, and three are in the process of surrendering their licenses. The Coalition requested and was granted a thirty-day extension of the public comment period.

The Coalition’s 87-page filing includes testimony by Chris Shutes,  Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, a member organization. He doesn’t think PG&E has done a good job taking care of its assets, and argued that allowing it to transfer the licenses would give it further excuse to slow-walk long-deferred maintenance and decommissioning on a number of projects.

He listed PG&E’s bankruptcies, inadequate insurance, and “patterns of delay, short-term fixes over long-term reliability, and inadequate consideration of public safety” as reasons to be leery of the utility’s assurances. 

His supporting examples included PG&E’s costly forty-year delay in rebuilding or decommissioning a powerhouse on the Feather River; a 24-year delay in restoring the Battle Creek Restoration Project;  and Scott Dam’s seismic liabilities.

Earlier this year, the Division of Safety of Dams downgraded Scott Dam’s safety assessment from satisfactory to fair, based on the Gannett Fleming engineering firm’s findings of seismic deficiencies.

After establishing similarities among three small hydro projects that are deteriorating, costly to maintain, and, in the case of Scott Dam, potentially dangerous, Shutes urged the Commission not to transfer the Potter Valley Project’s license to Pacific Generation, writing that “the Potter Valley Project is itself a set of both short-term and long-term liabilities.”

The deadline to file comments about PG&E’s proposal to transfer the licenses to its subsidiary Pacific Generation is August 12th. 

Instructions for commenting on proposals before FERC and signing up for notices:

Potter Valley Project docket No. 77-313

The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.  Please file comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission’s eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.  Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp.  You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments.  For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY).  In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy.  Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to:  Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC  20426.  Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to:  Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.  The first page of any filing should include the docket number P-77-313.  Comments emailed to Commission staff are not considered part of the Commission record.

This filing may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the "eLibrary" link.  Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document.  You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects.  For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, for TTY, call (202) 502-8659.  Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant.

Environmental, fisheries groups sue PG&E over Potter Valley Project operations

Mendocino Voice - By Kate Fishman

POTTER VALLEY, CA, 5/17/23 — The coalition of fishing and conservation groups that sued the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) last summer has now filed a lawsuit against Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), which operates the Potter Valley Project, claiming that the project fosters illegal “take” of threatened salmon and steelhead populations. 

The groups hope the lawsuit will lead to operations changes ahead of imminent decommissioning of the project, for which PG&E will submit its final surrender application to FERC in 2025. The suit says PG&E maintains water temperatures below the dams that are too high for salmonids, operates Cape Horn Dam and its fish passages facilities in a manner that injures and kills species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), blocks access to high-quality habitat above the dams, and makes it difficult for juvenile fish to migrate out to sea.

Two lawsuits in play 

Following the expiration of the Potter Valley Project’s 50-year license, PG&E has been operating the 100-year-old water diversion project (which no longer produces hydroelectric power) under annual licensure. Last year, when a 20-year Biological Opinion saying that project operations were safe for fish species under the ESA expired, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) wrote to PG&E saying that its activities were no longer covered by the prior Biological Opinion. 

“Cape Horn Dam, the associated infrastructure, fishway maintenance, and flow operations to achieve fish passage at the passage facility are neither described within the Description of the Proposed Action, nor are their effects to listed species assessed within the Opinion,” Assistant Regional Administrator of the California Coastal Office Alecia Van Atta wrote to FERC. “Consequently, we did not authorize incidental take resulting from these effects (e.g., delayed or blocked migration and predation of ESA-listed salmonids caused by the configuration and full operation of the Cape Horn Dam fish passage facility).” 

This led California Trout, Friends of the Eel River, Trout Unlimited, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, and the Institute for Fisheries Resources to sue FERC when the regulatory entity opted not to put NMFS’ suggested conditions on PG&E’s interim annual licenses. The suit under the ESA says that FERC caused illegal take of threatened California Coastal Chinook salmon and Northern California steelhead trout in the Eel River.

The groups have now filed a similar suit against PG&E. To sue FERC, they had to file within 60 days to dispute a licensing decision, Matt Clifford of Trout Unlimited explained; to sue PG&E, they had to declare intent and give the utility 60 days to respond. 

“We’re really hopeful now that dam removal is going to happen,” Charlie Schneider of CalTrout told The Voice. “We’re years and years ahead of where they were on the Klamath initially. … That’s really encouraging, but what we really want to make sure of is that we’re not harming fish in the interim.” 

Decommissioning doesn’t necessarily mean dam removal

These groups also advocate for removal of both Scott and Cape Horn dams in the decommissioning process, as the dams diverting water from the Eel River to the Russian River for primarily agricultural water rights block fish passage along the river’s full length and to its headwaters. The Eel River was recently named one of America’s Most Endangered Rivers in 2023, in part because of the potential for dam removal. 

“The river above the dams is really amazing habitat that’s been cut off for 100 years,” Clifford told The Mendocino Voice. 

PG&E Spokesperson Paul Moreno told The Voice that PG&E’s initial draft application to FERC in November of this year will include “removal of all in-water facilities (dams and features in rivers), unless an entity steps forward with a proposal of which PG&E will consider.” That entity would need to demonstrate financial and technical ability to operate portions of the project by July, Moreno explained. 

ussian River water users who currently rely on the diversions for their livelihoods have advocated forming a body to possibly take over the project and continue discussions that happened most recently in Congressman Jared Huffman’s now-dissolved Two Basin Partnership. The new Russian River Water Forum (RRWF) held its first meeting on Wednesday. 

Members of RRWF’s Planning Group include supervisors and county staff from Mendocino, Humboldt, Sonoma, and Lake counties, as well as representatives from both basins and from the Lytton Band of Pomo Indians, Pinoleville Pomo Nation, Potter Valley Tribe, Yokayo Tribe of Indians, Round Valley Indian Tribes, and the Wiyot Tribe. Most of the groups currently suing PG&E are represented as well. The RRWF’s most important mandate is to identify water supply resiliency solutions, per the meeting. 

The issue also becomes more pressing as PG&E has determined that heightened forecasts for seismic activity create risks for communities downstream of the dam. Spillway gates that would normally be closed in the spring, preserving water upstream, now remain open, lessening the risk. This means that less water will be stored at adjoining Lake Pillsbury, such that flows to the Russian River will likely mimic a year of drought despite 2023’s abundant rainfall.

Further, years of low flows combined with dam diversions can have impacts that are felt down the line, even if dramatic changes were made this year.

“Salmon season is closed this year for the second time,” said Vivian Helliwell, Watershed Conservation Director for the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations. “West Coast salmon and steelhead populations are really struggling right now, and along with them our coastal and inland communities that rely on these fish for food and jobs.” 

The Russian River had its lowest steelhead numbers on record this year, Schneider said. 

“There’s not a lot of projects that rise to this level of importance if we want to have salmon in the future,” he said. “This is a place where I think we can make a big difference.” 

PG&E maintains that the project does not engage in unlawful take of fish. 

“We have just received the complaint and are reviewing it,” Moreno wrote to The Voice on Tuesday afternoon. “We are confident that our Potter Valley Project’s operations are in compliance with all environmental laws, including the Endangered Species Act.” 

Read the full lawsuit here. 

FERC: Not so Fast....

FERC: Not so fast to PG&E decision on Scott Dam gates, pending review of impact on protected species

By Kate Fishman | March 29, 2023

POTTER VALLEY, CA, 3/29/23 — Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E)’s decision to leave the spillway gates open at Scott Dam this spring and in the future due to increased risk of seismic activity in the area may put the utility out of compliance with its license to operate the Potter Valley Project, according to a letter from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to PG&E’s president on Tuesday. In the letter, FERC Director of Hydropower Administration and Compliance CarLisa Linton notified PG&E that the utility could violate its mandates to protect federally endangered species by reducing water storage in Lake Pillsbury so significantly (around 10 feet).

She said the utility must complete an amendment application detailing any environmental impacts of the decision, outlining planned mitigation or avoidance measures, and demonstrating consultation with relevant agencies and tribes. FERC specifically asked to see correspondence with federal and state resource agencies including the National Marine Fisheries Service, as well as “interested” non-governmental organizations and tribes — plus responses received from said entities, and PG&E’s response to that input. 

“Pending approval of an amendment application, you are required to maintain compliance with your existing license, as amended,” Linton wrote. 

Scott Dam spillway gates normally close as early as April, and FERC’s letter could impact PG&E’s approach to managing the water resource this year. Linton indicated that FERC plans to thoroughly review the amendment’s potential impacts.

“We anticipate that, before acting on any such amendment request, the Commission would have to prepare an analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act and complete ESA consultation,” she wrote. If formal ESA consultation is necessary, that process can be lengthy.

Should it be approved, PG&E’s plan to keep the spillway gates open in spring indefinitely would carry a big impact for the Russian River watershed, relied on by many in inland Mendocino County. When the news broke in mid-March, it accelerated existing concerns around water access as PG&E moves forward with developing a license surrender and decommissioning plan for the Potter Valley Project. 

“What’s being created is perpetual drought circumstances,” 3rd District Supervisor John Haschak said of the open gates in supervisors’ reports at Tuesday’s meetings. 1st District Supervisor and Board Chair Glenn McGourty pointed out that the decision makes it exponentially more necessary for Russian River water users to find alternatives for the Eel River diversions they rely on, including raising Coyote Valley Dam and pursuing water storage infrastructure in Potter Valley.

In a message to The Mendocino Voice prior to Tuesday’s letter, PG&E spokesperson Paul Moreno said that the utility has hired a consultant as part of its early decommissioning and license surrender planning schedule. 

“We do intend to reach out to stakeholders,” he wrote. 

Learn more about the Potter Valley Project’s current phase here, and read the letter from FERC below. The Voice will continue to update on the operation of Scott Dam as more information is known.