Handshake Deal Reached in Baker Relicence

On May 17, 2004 a handshake on an Agreement-In-Principal was reached between Puget Sound Energy (PSE), state and federal resource agencies, Skagit Basin Tribes and non-government organization on measures that should be included in a new 30 to 50 year license for PSE’s Baker River Project. The 50-year license issued by Federal Power Commission (now the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) (FERC) in 1956 for the Baker Project expires on April 30, 2006. PSE and the interested parties have been working to relicense the project for the last four years with studies and proposed Protection, Mitigation, and Enhancement measures (PME’s) in diverse resource areas including terrestrial; aquatic; cultural; and recreation and aesthetic. The aquatic PMEs agreed to in the handshake will result in significant structural and operational changes in dam operation that create an improved environment for fish. Some of the key aquatics PMEs include: increased sockeye fry production; improved downstream passage for juvenile salmonids; improved upstream passage guidelines for the protection of juvenile fish in the Skagit River downstream of the project; and a commitment to acquire and preserve aquatic habitat. The Agreement-In-Principal was formalized in June 2004 and a comprehensive Settlement Agreement for submission to FERC for inclusion in the new license will be completed in September 2004

In a nut shell all there work will be done by 2012!
They need to work on dewatering first but there not!
A little late if you ask me!

Homer,

Of course 2012 is a long way off, and it probably doesn't seem right that PSE can continue to short change the fish in the Skagit with low flows for 6 years into their new license. There are two important reasons for that 6 year lag, however. (Also, I think that's reduced to 5 years, but would need to check.) First, the estimated time for design and construction for the additional small turbines at Lower Baker Dam powerhouse is 4 years. FERC never requires a licensee to perform design or contruction before a license is issued. There is absolutely no way PSE would agree to spill water (a lost energy opportunity) to augment flows when they are not generating. Second, and this is likely the key, there would not have been a settlement agreement (even preliminary as in this "handshake" deal) without the time extension. Obtaining faster action on the project flow management improvement would have required delays, make that longer delays, on other important project features.

In order to obtain an agreement that contains more mitigation and enhancement than likely would have been achievable absent an agreement, the agencies and tribes have to allow some concessions to PSE. In a perfect world, we could have it all, have it now, and it would be, well, PERFECT. But this is the world we live in, and we have to deal with people and companies whose interests are not the same as our own. As a result, we make agreements that are less than what we would really like, but are greater than what our experience has shown we obtain through the adversarial and litigation processes.

If this Baker agreement becomes the new project license, a lot of good things are in store for Baker River sub-basin fish, wildlife, and recreation. However, it will occur over a period of years. When I consider what is now on the table and contrast it with what I believe would be obtained through the traditional adversarial licensing process, I think the new license represents a reasonable and acceptable outcome. I hope you will too.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Well said Salmo g
Thanks