July 14, 2000 Joint Agency/Public Meeting Transcript

2

1 APPEARANCES

2

3 For Southern MR. JOHN KENNEDY

California 15171 Sierra Way

4 Edison Hydro: Kernville, California 93238

-and-

5 MR. DARYL FRYER

300 North Lone Hill Avenue

6 San Dimas, California 91773

-and-

7 MS. CANDACE IRELAN

300 North Lone Hill Avenue

8 San Dimas, California 91773

9 For Resource MS. SANDRA PERRY

Insights: 555 University Avenue

10 Suite 275

Sacramento, California 95825

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

3

1 I N D E X

2

3 STATEMENT BY PAGE

4

5 CANDACE IRELAN 4

6

7 JOHN KENNEDY 8

8

9 SANDRA PERRY 34

10

11 DARYL FRYER 60

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

4

1 Lake Isabella, California

2 Friday, July 14, 2000; 2:10 p.m.

3 Woodrow Wallace School Auditorium

4

5 CANDACE IRELAN: Hi, everyone. On behalf of

6 Southern California Edison, I'd like to welcome you to

7 this afternoon's meeting about relicensing the Borel

8 project.

9 I know many of you were on this morning's site

10 visit, and I appreciate your presence here today taking

11 time out of your schedules to help us talk about

12 initiating the relicense of this project.

13 What I'd like to do first of all for this

14 meeting is to introduce myself and the rest of our

15 relicensing team, and then I will briefly go over the

16 objectives of today's meeting.

17 My name is Candace Irelan. Before working for

18 Edison -- starting with Edison five years ago, I was a

19 fish biologist and wildlife biologist. Now I work in

20 project hydro relicensing, and that's kind of my

21 background. I wanted to let you know, and now let's hear

22 from the rest of our team. John.

23 JOHN KENNEDY: Okay. My name is John Kennedy.

24 I'm the operations and maintenance supervisor for

25 Southern California Edison. I manage the three hydro

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

5

1 plants up here in the Kern River Valley.

2 PAT MARFISI: My name is Pat Marfisi, and I

3 work as a consultant on Southern Cal Edison on the Borel

4 relicensing project.

5 SANDRA PERRY: My name is Sandra Perry, and I'm

6 with Resource Insights, and we are an environmental

7 company helping Edison with the relicensing work.

8 BRIAN McGURTY: I'm Brian McGurty. I'm in the

9 hydro division of Edison responsible for water rights and

10 various aspects of water management including the new

11 cloud seeding.

12 CANDACE IRELAN: You'll notice that we have a

13 stenographer here with us today making an official

14 transcript of today's meeting that will be part of the

15 public record.

16 I would like to encourage you all to feel free

17 to bring up any questions and contribute any information

18 that you'd like during today's meeting because that's a

19 very good way of making sure that your ideas and thoughts

20 are made part of the public record.

21 When you do have something to say, if you would

22 try to speak loudly enough for our reporter to hear you,

23 and also before you make your comments, I'll ask you to

24 give your name and affiliation. Okay?

25 So with that, I'd just like to tell you what

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

6

1 our objectives are primarily for today's meeting. We'll

2 be talking until possibly about 4 o'clock. First, to

3 give you a brief description of the project and the

4 facilities and how it operates and then to explain how

5 the relicensing process works and to give you some sense

6 of the time frame of that process.

7 More importantly, I think, we are here today to

8 hear what your concerns and thoughts are about

9 relicensing this project. That is incredibly important

10 to us. So I hope that we will be able to have a good

11 dialogue.

12 And, finally, possibly the most important thing

13 is that we're looking for opportunities to work together

14 cooperatively to solve problems as a group. So that is

15 what I'm really hoping for.

16 That's why we have gone to a special effort in

17 the last several weeks to contact you to do initial

18 interviews to try to get communications started very

19 early in the process rather than as we have more

20 traditionally done, waited until later in the process to

21 try to solve problems as they have become kind of -- I

22 don't want to say ugly, but more difficult to address as

23 it gets later and later in the process. So I think that

24 that's -- those are my beginning words.

25 Are there any questions up until this point?

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

7

1 Okay. So, John, you --

2 JOHN KENNEDY: Did you want to go over the

3 total agenda or --

4 CANDACE IRELAN: Oh, okay. Sure. The agenda

5 as we see it at the moment -- first, I need the right

6 page. We've already covered introductions and meeting

7 objectives. John is going to go over a description of

8 the Borel project. Sandy is going to talk about an

9 overview of the relicensing process and schedule. She'll

10 then follow that with talking about the first-stage

11 consultation package which many of you should already

12 have received.

13 I should add at this point that we do have a

14 sign-up sheet and various other ways that you can get

15 information. If there's -- if that doesn't meet your

16 particular need to talk to me, we will find out what it

17 is that you need, what kind of information or

18 communication structure that you need.

19 And then Sandy will talk about finalizing the

20 study plan as part of the first-stage consultation. Pat

21 will then cover a summary of issues partly as we -- as we

22 laid them out initially before this meeting and also

23 hopefully including some of the issues that you brought

24 up today at the site visit.

25 So we're hoping to incorporate those things and

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

8

1 get further input from you during this meeting, and then

2 Pat will also talk about working together locally to

3 resolve issues, and then we'll wrap up by discussing what

4 are the next steps that we will take in this process, and

5 then we'll close the meeting. So I will turn the meeting

6 over to John now.

7 JOHN KENNEDY: Okay. As soon as I figure out

8 how to use the computer here.

9 CANDACE IRELAN: Yeah. We're learning

10 technology as we go along.

11 JOHN KENNEDY: If you ask me about a generator,

12 I can answer questions. About a computer -- okay. For

13 the people that were here this morning, this will be kind

14 of just an overview for you, and for those that didn't

15 get involved with the site visit, this is intended to

16 just kind of give you a slide show of the project from

17 the -- where the water comes in to where the plant --

18 where it enters the plant and exits to the river. Just

19 kind of give you a feel for the project and what it looks

20 like and -- so you can have a reference point.

21 So the first thing I'm going to do is pretty

22 hard to read. So I've got this big map here. Hopefully,

23 most of you can see it. This is the Borel project. This

24 is the lake right here, and this is Wofford Heights, and

25 this is the auxiliary dam and the main dam.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

9

1 Down at Lake Isabella here -- actually,

2 Lake Isabella is down in here, and then you have the

3 Borel powerhouse down here, and this right here is the

4 Borel canal.

5 Now, normally, at this time of year, most of

6 the time, the lake elevation is high enough to where the

7 gravity feeds from the auxiliary dam here -- we went out

8 to look at that this morning, and water enters the Borel

9 canal right here.

10 The Borel canal has a capacity of we figure

11 about 625, somewhere right in there. We have a water

12 level of 605. So, normally, that's what we have in

13 there.

14 Anyway, the canal runs through the town of

15 Lake Isabella and right down through here, and then about

16 five miles of it is right in town, and then it comes down

17 to just outside Bodfish there is the direct powerhouse

18 where it goes to the generators and goes back to the

19 river.

20 So go ahead and hit enter up there. Go ahead

21 and just hit it. Yeah. Just hit it. Just click on it.

22 Okay.

23 Oh, I should mention -- I forgot to mention,

24 when the lake elevation drops below 130,000 acre feet

25 thereabouts, this canal inside the lake bed comes out of

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

10

1 inundation.

2 Before the lake was here, the intake for the

3 powerhouse was up here, and the intake is just a place

4 where you take water from the river and introduce it into

5 the flowline which in this case is the canal, and the

6 intake has some gates and some grids to keep the logs and

7 things out of the flowline. So you can envision this is

8 about above Wofford Heights.

9 Before the lake was there, there's a conversion

10 dam across the river up here, and the conversion dam is

11 different than a dam like Hoover dam in that it's

12 designed to have the water go over the top of it.

13 They're not very tall. Maybe 20, 30 feet tall, 60 feet

14 tall type of dams. They have a small pond behind them,

15 and it's designed to have a little head pressure,

16 pressure on the water, so it can get in through the

17 flowline.

18 So, anyway, when the lake drops to 130 acre

19 thousand feet, then we have to activate this canal

20 because it can no longer feed from the auxiliary dam.

21 Does that make sense to everybody? So this is a very

22 expensive process for us to have to do and also ends up

23 costing the Corps of Engineers a lot of money.

24 At the same time, they have to contract to keep

25 the channels from the rivers to keep it clear. To give

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

11

1 you an approximate idea, that diversion was over 120 feet

2 of sand the last time we had to activate it. So it's

3 quite a project.

4 At the top of that map is the intake, and this

5 is a picture I took last week, and the intake structure

6 is right down in here. Okay. The diversion dam is up

7 here, and this is a little house we use to house our

8 controls and what have you for our gates.

9 This is in Wofford Heights. There's three

10 crosses over here. Some of the locals may know where

11 that's at, but, essentially, it's right there, and it's

12 kind of towards the end of Wofford Heights.

13 This is a picture back in '91, I think it was,

14 when the lake elevation was way low. It was below that

15 130 acre thousand feet. You can see the same house here,

16 and exposed now is what we call our intake structure

17 right here. This is the canal right here. These are two

18 gates. We can shut these gates and shut the water off to

19 the canal. The water comes down through this settling

20 pond, we call it, and through these grids.

21 And this is another view of this looking back

22 up the river. The river is coming in here, and you can

23 see part of the water is going out here to the lake,

24 bypass part of the water of the lake. The rest comes

25 down here for generation.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

12

1 The Edison Company, we're responsible for

2 activating all this stuff in the canal all the way down

3 to the auxiliary dam, and the Corps of Engineers has

4 responsibility of digging all this out all the way back

5 up to the diversion dam, and this is an overflow area

6 here. If we get a flood or high water for some reason,

7 the water just comes down here and goes over there. It

8 doesn't cause us harm at our intake structure, and that's

9 just another picture of that.

10 Okay. This is standing at the intake up here.

11 You only have to hit it once. It takes a little while.

12 The intake is back here. We were just looking at it, and

13 this is what the Borel canal looks like heading out

14 towards the lake. This is looking towards the auxiliary

15 dam this way. So you can see kind of where the water is

16 right in here.

17 Okay. This is a picture of the auxiliary dam

18 standing up on top of the dam. This is a tower for the

19 Corps of Engineers. Down at the base of this dam is a

20 couple of gates, and that tower provides access for the

21 operator to go down and operate those gates to admit

22 water into the Borel canal. These buoys out here would

23 be the actual intake. The water comes in right here.

24 You can kind of envision this canal coming out

25 like this, and it really kind of comes over here and goes

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

13

1 up there and goes across the main channel. There's a

2 couple of pipes and goes back in here where -- actually,

3 they're back in there. That's where the intake is. So,

4 you see, it's quite a stretch of canal there.

5 Okay. This is standing in the same spot

6 instead of looking towards the lake. Of course, we're

7 now looking at the canal as it goes down through town,

8 Lake Isabella. All of this right here belongs to the

9 Corps of Engineers. Okay. And they also have the first

10 300 feet inside the lake.

11 Okay. But this is all part of the project

12 boundaries. The water comes out of here. It's all going

13 this direction, and at this point, there's a measurement

14 where Edison monitors the amount of flow into the canal,

15 and the flow direction is this way. The Corps of

16 Engineers has a building right here, and they monitor the

17 water level and flow there as well.

18 So we have several points along the canal where

19 we monitor that water level to make sure that we don't

20 have a problem as far as elevation. When the canal's

21 full, that's something that we have to keep an eye on.

22 Obviously, at lower flows, then it's less of an issue.

23 And this is just another shot. This is

24 standing down below. This is at the top of the dam, that

25 access structure right here, and this is where the water

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

14

1 comes through right here, and there's a couple of gates

2 down in there. The Corps of Engineers controls the water

3 out of the lake and admits it to the Edison Company.

4 This picture was taken to show the Erskin Creek

5 bridge. This bridge has been an issue for a long time

6 because it's an old bridge, and it's narrow, and it's

7 basically a hazard for pedestrians. The bridge is so

8 narrow that two school busses cannot go across it at the

9 same time. Cars usually come screaming down this road

10 around the corner across that bridge, and you can imagine

11 the kids.

12 This is the access to get to the school, the

13 ones that walk. So it's a real hazard there, and you can

14 see the water elevation coming here through the canal.

15 So that's one of the issues that we're looking at right

16 now.

17 And this is a picture of the actual bridge here

18 standing down here looking up, and you can actually see

19 the bridge, and Judy McQuiston and John McQuiston's

20 office, they've been working for a long time to get this

21 issue resolved, and there's some good news. It looks

22 like that's going to happen now.

23 This is standing up there at that same bridge

24 looking towards Lake Isabella down this way. I just took

25 this picture to show the canal, kind of what it looks

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

15

1 like going through town. The Borel canal essentially

2 cuts off this side of Lake Isabella from that side over

3 there, and the bridge, Lake Isabella bridge, is basically

4 the only way to get across there besides a little foot

5 bridge that's further upstream.

6 This is a foot bridge that was put in -- I

7 don't know -- I'm going to say six years ago or seven

8 years ago, something like that. Just hit it once. My

9 computer's only 166 megahertz. So it doesn't work very

10 fast. This guy's got a Ph.D., and don't let him operate

11 your computers or touch your vehicles.

12 Anyway, there was an issue a few years back

13 where when the canal level is low, we have hand lines

14 that go across the canal at regular intervals. So if

15 somebody fell in here, they would be able to use those

16 hand lines to get out, and when the water level is low,

17 the kids in this area would take those hand lines that

18 hang down and tie them together and make a jungle gym

19 kind of across it, and the kids just loved it.

20 However, it was a concern to the parents and

21 the community. So, anyway, Edison worked with the

22 community to get a bridge put in here, this foot bridge,

23 so that the school kids can cross this bridge and get to

24 school.

25 This is an alternative route to the Erskin

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

16

1 bridge which is about, oh, maybe a mile on upstream

2 there. This is at the end of Webb Street in

3 Lake Isabella. This could be a possible site also for a

4 future permanent second access to the school and also

5 this community that lives on that side of Lake Isabella.

6 This is a flume. A flume is essentially a

7 canal that's elevated. Erskin Creek comes through about

8 right there, and so this flume was put in -- this is all

9 floodplain right in here -- was put in to transport the

10 water from this end to that end, and so it's elevated.

11 As you can see, it's a metal flume, a sheet

12 metal type of flume. This road right here that goes at

13 the end of Commercial Street, Commercial Street down here

14 comes in like this, and there's a lot of houses up on

15 this side of the valley, and that's an access for those

16 folks to get to their homes. It's also another possible

17 access to the community.

18 Most of the time, you can drive through here

19 and get all the way up to Erskin Creek Road again by the

20 school. So it does provide another access. However, the

21 school bus couldn't use it, and in its present form, it's

22 not really usable, but it could be possibly an option to

23 look at as far as emergency access out of that site.

24 This is Bodfish siphon formerly known as

25 Bodfish flume, and before the flume here, it crossed --

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

17

1 this is Isabella Boulevard. The flume crossed

2 Isabella Boulevard, and it was a landmark in town.

3 We were required for seismic reasons to upgrade

4 both this flume and Erskin flume, and Erskin flume we

5 ended up putting a lot more steel in and support. Here,

6 we decided to go with what is called a siphon, and a

7 siphon is nothing more than a piece of pipe. This thing

8 starts up here. This is upstream. The water's coming

9 this way and comes down through here and continues this

10 direction.

11 This is Erskin Creek -- or not Erskin Creek,

12 but there's a little creek that comes down through. I'm

13 not sure. Does anybody know what that creek is called?

14 Bodfish Creek comes down here. This pipe goes under.

15 It's 26 feet under the creek bed, and there's a little

16 hatch right here where we can access it. So it comes

17 down through here and continues down this direction.

18 One of the benefits of this pipe here is

19 there's a fire hydrant down here because we've got pretty

20 good pressure. So the fire department could access that

21 and put water and stuff. So that was a good benefit of

22 this siphon here.

23 Plus, in the local community, there was a lot

24 of people that hated to see the flume go because it's

25 always been there. It's like everybody grew up around

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

18

1 this thing, but once it was gone, then people started

2 going, well, you can see the mountains over there and the

3 trees, and I think everybody has pretty much warmed up to

4 the idea now. So I think it's been a pretty good thing.

5 This is another siphon. It's called Pioneer

6 siphon. It's just outside of Bodfish, and again it's

7 just a -- there's a seasonal creek that comes down

8 through right here, and this conveys the water from --

9 the water is going this direction, and the canal is here,

10 and the canal is over there.

11 We also right here have a monitoring station.

12 It's called an AVM, an automatic -- what is that, Brian?

13 What's an AVM mean?

14 BRIAN McGURTY: The what?

15 JOHN KENNEDY: What's AVM mean?

16 BRIAN McGURTY: Acoustic velocity meter.

17 JOHN KENNEDY: And we have this hooked to the

18 power lines at our houses so we can tell what the flow

19 is. This is Profanity flume. It's another flume. It's

20 just upstream from Borel forebay, and I just took this

21 picture to show you what the top of the flume looks

22 like. There's a walkway here that goes along here, and

23 our maintenance people and operations can walk along that

24 and inspect it.

25 This is Borel forebay. A forebay for a

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

19

1 project, hydroelectric project, is just the structure at

2 the top of the hill where the water connects to the pipes

3 going to the powerhouse, and the pipes coming down the

4 hill to the powerhouse to feed the water to the generator

5 are called penstocks.

6 So at the forebay generally you have grids, and

7 these grids are put in to keep the wood and tires and

8 other things that come down through here out of the

9 turbines. Turbines don't like big, old four-by-fours

10 going through them. It's not a pretty sight.

11 And these are automatic grid rakes. In the

12 past, operators had to come up here and manually rake

13 these things. It's a very tedious task, and it's also

14 hard on the back. So we put in these automatic rakes

15 that automatically sense there's stuff on the grid here,

16 and there's also gates up here so we close off water to

17 the penstocks that I was talking about.

18 This is an overflow wall right here and right

19 here. If we turned off a generator, let's say, or a

20 generator tripped off and the water could not go down the

21 hill from the generator to the river, the water in here

22 would come up and go over the rear wall -- when I get to

23 this point, I always forget what that is. That's a

24 spillway, yeah. Anyway, there's a spillway that goes

25 back to the river. Every hydroelectric plant will have a

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

20

1 spillway of some sort because the water doesn't stop.

2 Over here, the next frame shows you the

3 penstocks or the pipes that are connecting to the

4 forebay. Okay. And that's this picture here. There's

5 four penstocks. There's three units. So this one here

6 takes care of Generator Number 1, Generator Number 2.

7 These two are taking water, and they're connected down at

8 the powerhouse for Generator Number 3. So each of the

9 smaller units take 150 cubic feet per second, and then

10 the large unit takes about 300 cubic feet per second.

11 And this is the Borel powerhouse when it went

12 in service in 1904. At that time, it was opened by the

13 Pacific Light and Power Company who had a lot of

14 powerhouses scattered around as a predecessor of the

15 Southern California Edison Company. So Edison acquired

16 this in 1917, I think.

17 Anyway, for those of you that were here today,

18 this is the front of the powerhouse here. You can see

19 the penstocks coming down. The water comes down here and

20 makes a 90-degree turn and goes through this generator

21 and goes down and exits out this way, and this is a

22 switch yard.

23 We generate 2.4 KV, and we transmit at 66 KV.

24 So we stepped it up to 66 to transmit out, and there's

25 one line that goes over to Monolith via Havilah and

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

21

1 Lorraine. It goes over to the Tehachapi area, and then

2 the other one comes back this way, Borel, Isabella,

3 Weldon, and it ends up at the Kern 3 plant.

4 This is the powerhouse in 1919. We dug this

5 picture up in our files up there. In those days, there

6 was five generators all identical, and there was five

7 penstocks here, and there's no switch line up here,

8 you'll notice. The line comes up here, and all the

9 switch lines were in the powerhouse. So they moved that

10 out to make room in here.

11 So this is a pretty cool picture of the

12 powerhouse. It just kind of shows the historic value of

13 it. As you can see, the ivy was just getting going in

14 those days. Instead of a Hollywood sign, we had a Borel

15 powerhouse sign on top of the hill. I'm just kidding.

16 That was written on there.

17 This is called a tail race. Forebays is where

18 the water comes into the pipes and tail race is where it

19 exits. The Kern River is coming down this way, and the

20 water is coming out of here and joining it going out that

21 direction.

22 And this is an overall view of the powerhouse.

23 You've got the forebay up here. The spillway comes down

24 over here and exits back to the river. You've got the

25 penstocks here, the powerhouse, switch yard, and this is

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

22

1 the access road to the powerhouse here. Kern River's

2 right over here, right in that area.

3 This is a picture of the inside of the

4 powerhouse. There are three generators. Unit 1, Unit 2,

5 and then Unit 3 we'll see in a second. Unit 1 is rated

6 around two megawatts, two megawatts here.

7 And this is another picture of Unit 2 here, and

8 this is Unit 3. Unit 3 is 6.5 megawatts. So don't be

9 fooled by its size. All you're seeing here is what's

10 called an excitor. All of the generator is below the low

11 grade here. So when we went on the tower, we didn't go

12 down into there because of the large amount of people.

13 Anyway, this was put in about the 1950's, '54

14 probably. These are the original generators from 1904.

15 There used to be five of them identical in the

16 powerhouse. In those days, the electric system was not

17 standardized, and so there was 50 cycles out there, and

18 then they started using 60 cycles.

19 As a matter of fact, at the turn of the

20 century, there was a big debate over whether AC or DC was

21 going to be used. Thomas Edison who did a lot of

22 inventions was an advocate of DC. The problem with DC

23 was it's harder to transfer into higher voltages and

24 lower voltages to be used. So AC won out to the dismay

25 of Mr. Edison.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

23

1 Anyway, the total plant capacity is about ten

2 and a half to eleven megawatts for a full canal, and

3 that's about enough for 11,000 homes.

4 This right here is the governor. I didn't

5 mention this the last time. This is like the throttle

6 for the turbine. The turbine is this. That's the water

7 engine, if you will.

8 This is the generator that makes electricity.

9 It's got bearings on both in the middle. This senses the

10 speed of the generator and controls speed and also

11 controls how much output, how many megawatts the unit

12 puts out based on the water.

13 Now we're going over to the main dam and the

14 Kern River where it comes up the main dam of the lower

15 Kern River. This is a sign for Isabella main dam. It

16 shows some of the specs for the reservoir and for the

17 dam.

18 You can see here it's 20 feet at the top, 185

19 feet high, 1725 feet long -- short. Maximum length of

20 the lake is nine miles, shore line 38 miles. That would

21 be around the whole lake, and the surface area is 11,400

22 acres, and it says here, "Purpose, flood control and

23 irrigation."

24 This is standing up at the top of the main

25 dam. Highway 155 is coming down through here and heading

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

24

1 around the lake. We're looking -- let's see. I guess

2 this would be what? South? I never can figure it out

3 down there.

4 Anyway, this right here is where the water's

5 coming out of the main dam. The spillway is up over here

6 for the dam. For years, there was no hydroelectric

7 project here, and then a few years ago, they built a

8 hydroelectric project called Lake Gen here, and part of

9 that project was to put in gates and valves here to add

10 water to the powerhouse there. This powerhouse develops

11 about 13 megawatts. It needs about 1300 cubic feet per

12 second to generate that. So it's a low-head,

13 higher-volume powerhouse.

14 This is a slide of a raft-put-in site just

15 below the main dam that's just on the other side of

16 Highway 155. It's called Slippery Rock. The BLM put

17 in -- or developed this area here and made a real nice

18 parking lot and a way to get rafts down to the beach.

19 They put the rafts in right here and put in the rafters

20 and off they go down the river. So it's a real nice site

21 down there that they put together.

22 The next slide will show a view of the top of

23 the hill here. There's a parking lot for people to park

24 and a toilet over here. So it's a real nice facility

25 there for launching rafts.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

25

1 And, finally, we found this file, too. This is

2 called passing of the sheep. It doesn't have a date on

3 it. I would think it's somewhere around the early

4 1900's. This is Lake Isabella Boulevard here, and this

5 is all sheep coming down through Lake Isabella Boulevard,

6 and you can see the houses and stuff.

7 The lake wasn't there, obviously, but you can

8 see the terrain looks pretty much as it did now. There's

9 a lot of history in the valley here, and the Borel

10 project and the other hydroelectric projects fit right

11 into that.

12 So any questions?

13 RON HYATT: Ron Hyatt, Sierra Sailing. I don't

14 know if this was this one, John, or an earlier one. You

15 showed the project, but it had a green hash mark through

16 it, and it was a greater area than the canal area.

17 Is that like the parameters or area of

18 influence of the --

19 JOHN KENNEDY: Project boundaries?

20 RON HYATT: Yeah.

21 JOHN KENNEDY: Yeah. We identified -- the

22 project boundaries are identified, and that map over

23 there pretty much shows the boundaries the way they are.

24 RON HYATT: Doesn't it extend beyond the

25 canal?

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

26

1 JOHN KENNEDY: Well, you have the canal, and

2 then you have like a road on both sides and a fence.

3 RON HYATT: And that's the only area of

4 influence or responsibility?

5 JOHN KENNEDY: That's the area. Before the

6 barbwire fence on both sides, that's the project

7 boundaries for the canal.

8 SANDRA PERRY: But he's talking about the ends.

9 JOHN KENNEDY: Oh, the ends?

10 RON HYATT: No. Not the ends. The width.

11 JOHN KENNEDY: The width. So when you go down

12 there and you see the fence, everything down there is

13 private property or Forest Service property.

14 RON HYATT: As of your responsibility?

15 JOHN KENNEDY: Right.

16 SANDRA PERRY: John, I think the map that he's

17 referring to is the vegetation map that you were using

18 earlier that had some vegetation mapping on it. So it

19 looks like the boundaries are a lot bigger than they are.

20 JOHN KENNEDY: Oh, we apologize. We're trying

21 to find the map that showed the project. That's a

22 vegetation map, and it's not a project boundary map.

23 That would be the project boundary map.

24 RON HYATT: Okay. And does that not include

25 Keysville over there?

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

27

1 JOHN KENNEDY: No.

2 RON HYATT: Your responsibility ends at the

3 tail race? Is that what you called it?

4 JOHN KENNEDY: Yeah. Actually, I was looking

5 at that map earlier, and it looks like it also includes

6 an area called Black Gulch, I think it is.

7 RON HYATT: Yeah.

8 JOHN KENNEDY: Is that the name of it? It's

9 black. What is it? Black Gulch South? It looks like it

10 includes that. I'm not sure why. The reason these maps

11 were put out is to try to identify what the project

12 boundaries are.

13 We need to do research there, but it looks like

14 it includes that, and also at the powerhouse, it looks

15 like it goes out where the tail race is and out into the

16 river there. Why, I don't know. I don't know that

17 that's 100 percent accurate. We have to verify what's

18 going on there. Normally, we wouldn't go out into the

19 river as far as the project is.

20 RON HYATT: So area responsibility or authority

21 is within those boundary lines just outside the canal?

22 JOHN KENNEDY: Exactly. Our responsibility is

23 to keep that barbwire fence up on both sides and keep the

24 signs up and in good repair. That's it.

25 RON HYATT: Okay. Thank you.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

28

1 JOHN KENNEDY: Any other questions?

2 LOREEN LOMAX: Loreen Lomax, Forest Service. I

3 have a question. Is Borel on the National Register of

4 Historic Places for Power Plants? Has it been nominated,

5 do you know, or on the register?

6 JOHN KENNEDY: Yeah. That's a good question.

7 Brian, do you want to speak to that?

8 BRIAN McGURTY: I don't think so right now that

9 I know of.

10 JOHN KENNEDY: My answer would be no because

11 usually if you make significant changes to the plant and

12 the inside has been changed quite a bit, then it isn't.

13 I know Kern 1 is because when we were going to make

14 changes down there, we ended up looking into that as part

15 of the registry.

16 I don't believe Borel is because of the

17 changes. You can see that picture of Borel before and

18 after, and it's a significant change there. That's a

19 good question.

20 LOREEN LOMAX: Well, it looks like it still has

21 a lot of the historical quality that maybe we should --

22 but if it's already been evaluated under the criteria and

23 it didn't make it --

24 JOHN KENNEDY: That's a good question. We'll

25 look into that. It's come up a couple times, and it's

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

29

1 one of those things where you, you know, think about it

2 at the time, and then later you kind of drop it. That's

3 a good question.

4 Anybody else? Okay.

5 DARYL FRYER: So the next issue is the

6 license?

7 JOHN KENNEDY: Right. Yeah. Okay. Let me get

8 a drink of water here.

9 DARYL FRYER: Oh, wait a minute. He's going to

10 talk about the hydro license.

11 JOHN KENNEDY: This is Sandy.

12 SANDRA PERRY: Hi. I'm Sandy. I'm going to

13 talk to you about the process after.

14 JOHN KENNEDY: Okay. Okay. One of the things

15 that we went out and talked to a lot of people before

16 this meeting, a lot of the agencies and stakeholders.

17 One of the things that came out was, you know, have you

18 thought about why you want to relicense Borel. I mean,

19 you should know that before, you know, you go into this

20 thing and be able to articulate that, you know, to

21 people.

22 So, anyway, we thought that's a good question.

23 I mean, we just kind of take it for granted we're going

24 to relicense the project, but it caused us to stop and

25 take an inventory of some of the benefits of Borel, and

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

30

1 so, anyway, the first one up there is we did an economic

2 evaluation of the project, and it's economically viable.

3 I mean, a businessman isn't going to go forward

4 with a project unless, you know, the thing is going to

5 make money. So that's -- we did look at that, though,

6 and it was evaluated, and it is economically viable. So

7 we're going forward with it.

8 The Borel project and hydroelectric in general

9 is a low-cost energy source. So in this country you only

10 have so much energy, and hydroelectric is very cost

11 effective. So it makes sense to where you can keep your

12 low-cost energy sources intact.

13 So Edison Company with deregulation coming

14 along, one of the things that we never had to really

15 worry about in the past because we had a monopoly was

16 customers.

17 Customers were guaranteed, and now we're

18 looking at selling our power into the power exchange, and

19 customers will have a choice, and they can pick Southern

20 California Edison or they can pick somebody else, and so

21 for the first time going forward it could be that we

22 actually need to look at our rates and be competitive to

23 somebody else that's providing the same service.

24 So, obviously, from a business perspective, you

25 want to keep your costs as low as possible. So your

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

31

1 energy mix, you're going to start with hydro and then

2 move on up the energy chain, you know, your fossil plants

3 and nuclear and that sort of thing.

4 The efficient way to generate electricity, just

5 to give you an example, hydro, typically, the generators

6 out there in hydro convert 85 to 95 percent of the

7 available energy into electricity, and a steam plant,

8 some of the best steam plants are only about 50 percent

9 efficient. So hydro electricity is an efficient way to

10 generate electricity.

11 Systems stability, we talked about that a

12 little bit this morning. Having a hydroelectric plant in

13 the valley here stabilizes the voltage and the frequency

14 here in the valley and minimizes your blips and some of

15 those things that you would see if you were at the end of

16 a long line. So it provides stability.

17 It provides other benefits like vars and things

18 that you don't think about, but on a wind farm, they

19 require a thing called vars in order to operate, and the

20 Borel project supplies those vars. So I don't want to

21 get too technical, but that gives you kind of an idea,

22 but, anyway, having it right here in your backyard

23 provides stability.

24 Emergency power source. All we need is water,

25 and we can generate electricity. A steam plant, a

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

32

1 nuclear plant requires a power source for pumps and fans

2 and this kind of thing in order to start up. So in a

3 blackout kind of a situation, they need a power source.

4 So they either have to have something auxiliary on site

5 or normally what happens is hydro is called upon to send

6 a hot line, we call it, to San Onofre, let's say, so that

7 they can start up.

8 So if the whole system died, if the whole

9 system went down, hydro is one of the systems that you

10 can use to start up. Also, for the valley, we can use it

11 as a source for here in the valley. For the Y2K event

12 that we had this year, we had a contingency plan. If the

13 rest of the world went dark, we could actually power up

14 the valley here and keep everybody in lights. Of course,

15 we'd have to close the canyon down here because everybody

16 would want to come up and plug in. Let's see.

17 It's non-polluting, and just to give you an

18 idea, in the U.S. annually hydro prevents the burning of

19 500 billion barrels of oil or 120 tons of coal. This is

20 hydro for the U.S. The total hydro mix, which I think we

21 said this morning, was 20 percent of the total. So you

22 look at 500 billion barrels of oil or 120 million tons of

23 coal. That's a lot of fuel.

24 As far as greenhouse gases, in the U.S.

25 annually, it offsets 30 million automobiles on the road

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

33

1 for one year. Okay. That's in the United States. And

2 that's just to give you an idea. That's nearly twice the

3 CO2 that can be absorbed by all the U.S. forests

4 combined. Okay. So it's saving that in the

5 environment. Let's see.

6 It provides jobs. The Edison Company has

7 good-paying jobs. So the guys have money to go out and

8 spend in the community and, you know, at the local

9 businesses and what have you. So it doesn't hurt to

10 have -- there's not a lot of businesses of that type here

11 in the valley, and so, you know, everything helps. Let's

12 see.

13 It supports the local economy and

14 infrastructure. What we're talking about there is when I

15 get paid, I go out and spend some of it out here in the

16 local shops and businesses and what have you. The

17 company, we buy a lot of stuff for the powerhouses and

18 what have you locally here in the valley.

19 As far as the infrastructure of the valley, the

20 employees are all part of the community. We go to the

21 churches. We are involved with the charities, the little

22 leagues, and the -- you know, all of the Boy Scouts and

23 those kinds of things. So, you know, having the

24 employees here and, you know, willing to get out and work

25 in the community supports the community here.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

34

1 And then provides tax revenue. You know, the

2 plants are not free as the misconception is out there.

3 We pay head water benefit for the water, property taxes,

4 payroll taxes, and all those kind of things, and some of

5 that ends up coming back to the valley here.

6 And then history. You know, the Edison Company

7 was up here when basically there was nothing here except

8 for, you know, a few ranchers, you know, and if you think

9 about it, all of the roads, a lot of the campgrounds were

10 built by the Southern California Edison Company.

11 They've been up here. They pretty much

12 developed the valley here and enabled this valley to grow

13 to be what it is today. So they've been here for

14 basically as long as anybody else can remember and are a

15 vital part of the history of the valley. That's it.

16 Any questions?

17 SANDRA PERRY: Okay. You know, you should

18 probably put that on slide mode. Okay. Edison has asked

19 me to tell you a little bit about the relicensing process

20 as a schedule. Looking around the room here, I see that

21 there's a lot of people here that probably know a lot

22 about the process, but there are others here who probably

23 don't. So I'm just going to run through the basics of

24 the process.

25 I guess one of the main things I want to

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

35

1 accomplish is to help you understand, one, you can get

2 involved or how you can get involved. We really want to

3 make sure that people here can get involved in this

4 process, especially early. The earlier, the better.

5 So, basically, the Borel project operates under

6 a license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

7 otherwise known as the FERC. That license expires on

8 February 28th, 2005. Because it expires, Edison has to

9 apply for a new license or go through a relicensing

10 process, and that process takes at least five years to

11 get through. So five years ahead of time, we got to get

12 the ball rolling, and that's where we are now.

13 The first step in the process is preparing the

14 first-stage consultation package, and, hopefully, by now

15 most of you have received that, and that package

16 essentially initiates the process. It contains some

17 basic information about the project and a work plan that

18 I'll discuss in a little bit, a couple slides later.

19 The first-stage consultation package goes out,

20 and soon afterwards we have to have the agency public

21 scoping meeting, and that's what we're here today to do.

22 Earlier today, we went on a site visit. Most

23 of you were able to go on that. That's also a required

24 part of the process, but it's a good chance to see the

25 project and how it operates.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

36

1 The next step after this that's real important

2 for everybody here is we need to receive written comments

3 from you. Basically, within 60 days of this meeting, we

4 would like to get written comments that tell us about

5 your concerns, your issues, any thoughts you have about

6 our first-stage consultation work.

7 We'll then take that information along with a

8 lot of other information that we collect from people, and

9 we'll start conducting studies, and, basically, for the

10 next two years, we will be compiling information and

11 conducting studies trying to determine whether the

12 project if it continues to operate the way it has been,

13 if it would have an effect on the environment.

14 As we go through that, we'll compile that

15 information into what will eventually become a draft

16 application for license, and that draft will contain a

17 number of exhibits in it. It's like Exhibit A through H

18 is what they're usually called.

19 Exhibit E is the environmental document, and

20 that will contain a number of reports that describe the

21 resources and the results of our studies and any

22 conclusions that we have about the potential impacts of

23 the project. We'll circulate that draft about June 1st,

24 2002.

25 So it's a ways off, but, you know, you'll get

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

37

1 this -- in the year 2002, you'll get this draft

2 application that all of you should review and comment

3 on. There will be another comment period at that point.

4 So you would comment on it, and we would take all those

5 comments and do our best in addressing those in the final

6 application. The comments on that would be due

7 September 1st, 2002, but you'll probably get another

8 reminder besides today.

9 Eventually, we'll put all that information

10 together in the final application for license, and that

11 final application has to be filed with the FERC by

12 February 27th, 2003. There's a requirement that that

13 gets filed no later than two years before the license

14 expires, and that's mainly so that the FERC and the other

15 agencies have time to do their thing in the relicensing

16 process before the license actually expires. So those

17 are the basic steps.

18 JOHN KENNEDY: Can I say something?

19 SANDRA PERRY: Yeah.

20 JOHN KENNEDY: I know Dan over here is thinking

21 let's go back to the other slide. He's thinking so what

22 does all that mean, and, basically, what you need to be

23 thinking about, namely, I'm sure you're thinking the same

24 thing, some dates here we need to be thinking about.

25 This is today. This is a chance if you've got

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

38

1 something on your mind to say it. If you'd rather not

2 state your position, then you've got until

3 September 12th, and you can write in your position then.

4 If you have concerns or opinions or whatever, this is

5 your chance right here to be heard in this process, all

6 of you. So if you are unsure about how to go about doing

7 that, John Kennedy, 376-2837. Give me a call. Okay.

8 Now, during this period here, all of this stuff

9 is going to be digested and figured out, you know, some

10 things that are doable or whatever for the draft

11 application. Normally, you send in a letter or

12 something, and it's like this black hole out there;

13 right? It goes somewhere, and you never see was I

14 listened to or whatever.

15 This right here is the feedback. Okay. Were

16 you listened to or not? So today before you get out of

17 here or if you don't get it today, call me, and we'll get

18 you on the mailing list, okay, and you can let us know

19 how detailed you want to get as far as information.

20 You can get the big document or what I prefer

21 as giving the Reader's Digest version. You know, I don't

22 have time to read the whole darned thing, but look in

23 there and see what are some of my concerns and what have

24 you. Were they listened to or not; right?

25 So you've got -- that will come out June 1st,

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

39

1 2000, this draft application. Okay. And then what

2 happens right here is that you have another chance. So

3 if you weren't heard or you feel strongly about

4 something, you have a chance now to come back and say,

5 look, you know, I've got this concern or whatever.

6 Again, you can talk to me about it or anybody

7 on the team here and see what's going on with that.

8 Okay? So there's several places here where you have an

9 opportunity to get involved with this process.

10 Standing around the water cooler and talking

11 about it, how bad things are and this and that and the

12 other thing, does not cut the mustard. FERC does not

13 basically listen to anything unless they see it on paper

14 and you have intervenor status, they tell me. So if you

15 feel strongly, here's your chance. Okay?

16 Now, I know sometimes you feel frustrated and

17 what have you, but if you don't do anything, nothing's

18 going to change. Okay? So does that make sense to

19 everybody what these deadlines are?

20 So this is today. You've got 60 days here, and

21 I'll be glad to help you before you leave here. You can

22 get your information on what you need to put in there so

23 you can get your two cents in, and then you'll get a

24 feedback on that and have another chance.

25 Any questions?

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

40

1 SANDRA PERRY: I want to mention, actually, we

2 do have some forms in the back that you should grab and

3 fill out, and, basically, we want some information about

4 how we can contact you and how involved you want to be in

5 the process, and it asks you things like do you want a

6 copy of the first day's consultation package, a copy of

7 future documents, and so forth. So make sure and fill

8 that out, and we'll take that and get you on the mailing

9 list to make sure that you're kept informed about the

10 project and the process.

11 The next slide. This slide essentially says

12 the same thing I just walked through. I guess the thing

13 to point out is, I mean, it just kind of visually shows

14 the steps we just went through. This is all of the --

15 everything from, you know, the first-stage consultation

16 package through the date we file our application for

17 license.

18 Now, that time line is based on the traditional

19 process, and what this also shows is there's two years

20 out there during which the FERC will take all of the

21 information we provide in the application along with all

22 of the letters that it receives from the public and from

23 the agencies, and they'll prepare an environmental

24 assessment. The idea is they would use the environmental

25 assessment to prepare to issue a license and to support

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

41

1 the conditions and so forth that are contained in that

2 license.

3 So the ideal situation is that takes two years,

4 and in my experience it's usually taken longer, but the

5 more we can, you know, collaborate up front and solve

6 issues, the faster this process can happen.

7 One thing I wanted to point out about this time

8 line here is, like I said, it's based on the traditional

9 process. There's actually a new process that's available

10 to us. It's called an alternative licensing process, and

11 alls it does essentially is it moves this -- the FERC's

12 EA part into this part of the time line, and so the

13 advantage of that -- the advantages of doing that

14 basically are trying to accelerate the process. One

15 other advantage is it helps kind of keep like some local

16 control over the issues and so forth.

17 I guess the reason I'm bringing this up is we

18 would really like to get some feedback from all of you on

19 whether there's any desire or thoughts about using this

20 alternative licensing process.

21 DARYL FRYER: So let me first ask the

22 question. Does everybody understand the alternative that

23 she mentioned here? Do you understand that there is an

24 alternative process that says instead of FERC -- this is

25 a process -- the way this formal process is set up, it's

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

42

1 a process that surfaces the issues first, and then FERC

2 does its own studies and resolves issues that don't get

3 resolved locally. Okay?

4 Now, there's an alternative that says if we can

5 all agree locally, we can pull that FERC piece up front

6 and do that ourselves, and that makes sense when there's

7 a lot of agreement and further when you want the benefits

8 of that agreement to occur earlier rather than later.

9 Okay? And what we're trying to understand now, we aren't

10 committed one way or the other. Edison is not committed

11 one way or the other.

12 Is there anybody here that has strong feelings

13 one way or the other? That's what we're trying to

14 understand, what people feel on that. So Question 2, do

15 you kind of get that? There's two possibilities here and

16 what the differences are.

17 Question 2, do you have any feelings one way or

18 the other on some of the proceeds?

19 PHIL STRAND: Phil Strand, Sequoia National

20 Forest. I don't necessarily have feelings, but I know

21 you have to formally request permission from FERC to go

22 into the process, and I'm wondering what that might do to

23 your time line.

24 SANDRA PERRY: I can answer that. When we've

25 tried this before, the best thing to do is if you go to

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

43

1 the FERC with concurrence from all of the other parties,

2 it happens a lot easier and a lot more quickly.

3 So if we could get, you know, concurrence and

4 support from the Forest Service and all the other

5 agencies, we would go right away to the FERC and request

6 that to utilize the alternative licensing process, and we

7 don't at this point -- provided we can start pretty soon,

8 we don't really think that it would substantially affect

9 the time line.

10 It means a few other steps like scoping

11 meetings and so forth, but we feel like we could still

12 get it done, but we would have to come to that agreement

13 pretty quickly to make it happen.

14 DARYL FRYER: Roughly, Phil, I think it's

15 something like this in terms of what realization of the

16 benefits that have been agreed upon instead of beginning

17 out here might begin earlier. That's one big change in

18 the time line, but I think the relicensing date would

19 stay the same. It would just be based on agreements.

20 We could start doing it earlier. It's that

21 simple, and it makes a lot of sense when there is a lot

22 of agreement, and then FERC doesn't have a desire to

23 intervene and upset local agreements. They just

24 intervene when there is local disagreement.

25 SANDRA PERRY: Erik, you mentioned earlier that

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

44

1 the Forest Service had been talking about the project and

2 issues.

3 Have you tossed around this alternative

4 licensing at all? You don't really have any thoughts

5 about it?

6 DARYL FRYER: Anybody else that have a tendency

7 or a feeling?

8 STEVE SPRADLIN: Steve Spradlin, Lake Isabella

9 Chamber, and I think what you offer as far as more local

10 intervention prior to getting somebody that's not close

11 to the issues involved, you know, certainly makes more

12 sense.

13 It didn't work very well on the KR3

14 relicensing, and I don't think anybody wants to go back

15 through that. So if this one could be done in a

16 different way, I'm sure it would be advantageous to

17 everyone.

18 The thing that I'm not so sure about is someone

19 like the local business people are going to have the

20 impact and the big guns behind us as eventually developed

21 on the upper river if we sit down across the table with

22 the Edison Company at this point and say, well, sure,

23 we'd like to see these different things done for one

24 reason or another, but as it developed on the upper

25 river, it took the big guns to come in and say, hey, you

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

45

1 know, we think that this isn't going to be the correct

2 way to do this.

3 So if we can get the same attention, I think is

4 what I'm saying, and influence in this early process,

5 then that would be fine, but if you give up -- you know,

6 you assume that you have the influence at this lower

7 level and you find out later that, well, you know, you

8 didn't carry the weight --

9 DARYL FRYER: You gave up some power.

10 STEVE SPRADLIN: Right. You didn't carry the

11 weight that maybe Friends of the River or whoever might

12 have carried, that might be dangerous to get into that

13 situation, if that makes sense.

14 SANDRA PERRY: It makes sense.

15 DARYL FRYER: I can only say just one comment

16 that I have, and I'm not an expert in this area, but I

17 have been told that FERC is very responsive to local

18 agreements, that that means a lot to FERC, but we'll not

19 hesitate to cut the baby in half if there's no local

20 agreement.

21 Some of the other folks that are participants,

22 what's your view? He's afraid of losing power by taking

23 a modified approach. Anybody comment?

24 RON HYATT: Ron Hyatt. My experience in this

25 valley is it's going to be really hard to get concurrence

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

46

1 on anything, and if you were to go through the modified,

2 I'm afraid your February 2004, somebody will say, hey,

3 wait a minute, somebody slammed the door on me and didn't

4 give me a chance. Even though you do have them, right at

5 the last minute, I think you'll probably get that.

6 That's my comment.

7 SANDRA PERRY: Well, another approach here

8 instead of choosing one or the other is to sort of modify

9 the traditional approach and just, you know, try to

10 continue to do what we're doing here, and that's working

11 with people early and, you know, trying to get feedback

12 on issues and so forth and just kind of work that into

13 the traditional process.

14 So, anyways, I guess, if nobody has any

15 comments on that, maybe as you're writing your letters if

16 you could think about that a little bit, and if you have

17 any thoughts one way or the other about, you know, these

18 two different processes, you know, let us know what

19 you're thinking about that.

20 That was all I was really going to go through

21 on process. I have some other things that I'd like to

22 talk about, but at this point, does anybody have any

23 questions about process or schedule or writing letters,

24 anything like that?

25 Okay. Okay. You can go to the next slide. I

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

47

1 wanted to jump back to this first-stage consultation

2 package, the first step in the process. Again, that's

3 where we are now.

4 By now, all of you should have received a

5 first-stage consultation package. If you haven't, please

6 let us know that you need a copy. This, as I started

7 saying earlier, is the package that contains basic

8 information about the project, hydrology, maps, drawings,

9 and so forth. It also summarizes the environmental

10 resources in the project area.

11 I guess probably one of the most important

12 things it has is a study plan that basically says how

13 Edison proposes to study the resources, the potential

14 effects of the project on the resources, and it covers a

15 number of topic areas.

16 As outlined here, there's water usage quality;

17 fish, wildlife, botanic resources; historic and

18 archeological resources; recreation resources; land

19 management and esthetics, and comprehensive plans and

20 cumulative impacts.

21 Now, I wasn't really planning on going through

22 everything we proposed to do in a study plan, but I'm

23 happy to answer questions if anybody has any if you've

24 had a chance to review the first-stage consultation

25 package. If you have any questions or comments at this

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

48

1 point, I'll be happy to go over it.

2 Sue, it kind of looks like you have a

3 question. Do you have a question?

4 SUE PORTER: I'm Sue Porter, and I'm with the

5 Sequoia National Forest. I know that we've all gotten

6 the copies of our initial consultation intake package,

7 and I've been looking at them, and, obviously, we'll be

8 making our formal reply.

9 Just in general, and you and I have talked

10 before about the recreation monitoring and new studies, I

11 think maybe we're looking at some type of white water

12 boating, specifically, access-type questions, and I know

13 there's some other studies that Erik was mentioning

14 earlier, some of the watershed-, water-flow-type studies

15 for fisheries and channel maintenance and things like

16 that.

17 So we've been thinking about it, but as far as

18 specific comments at this point, I don't really want to

19 get into too much detail. We'd really like to hear what

20 the rest of the group is thinking.

21 SANDRA PERRY: Ron.

22 RON HYATT: Is this the time to express myself

23 or my concerns about what I'd like to see in there?

24 SANDRA PERRY: Sure.

25 RON HYATT: Ron Hyatt. We talked this morning

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

49

1 about water quality, and water quality is my primary

2 concern in this whole process. There's lots of things to

3 be considered, but that's my primary thought, and the EPA

4 has developed a protocol for water monitoring, and they

5 have -- I can't recall right now -- I think seven or nine

6 parameters in their protocol, and I would hope that the

7 FERC would reject any Exhibit E that did not include that

8 protocol for water monitoring.

9 And I'd also like to see it include more

10 sampling stations. I'd like to see it done from one end

11 to the other, and I know those protocols are probably in

12 excess of the influence of what SCE does with the water,

13 but nobody else is doing that monitoring right now, and

14 this is just an opportunity to maybe hang the

15 responsibility on somebody.

16 SANDRA PERRY: Uh-huh.

17 RON HYATT: Those are my thoughts.

18 SANDRA PERRY: Good.

19 DARYL FRYER: Ron, what was that protocol?

20 SANDRA PERRY: He said EPA protocol.

21 RON HYATT: EPA's protocol.

22 DARYL FRYER: On what?

23 RON HYATT: Water monitoring.

24 DARYL FRYER: Did I hear right? Salmon

25 stations?

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

50

1 SANDRA PERRY: Sampling stations.

2 DARYL FRYER: Sampling. Let me tell you, the

3 sound is terrible in this room. It diffuses. So speak

4 loudly and make sure -- we're going to continue listing

5 issues, and so make sure I get it right.

6 AIMEE OLSON: My name's Aimee Olson for

7 Kern River Tours, and something -- an issue that I'd like

8 to address is something that I think that all of the

9 rafters would like to see is one of the runs that we do,

10 we start at the bridge where the Bodfish exit off of 178

11 is, and if there's any less than 400 cubic feet per

12 second in there, we can't run through because the

13 rocks -- there's too many rocks. We cannot get through.

14 So what they do is they combine the water that

15 they're letting out of the dam and the water that they're

16 diverting through the Borel power plant. So if that adds

17 up to only 600, then there's only 200 in that stretch

18 that we're trying to run.

19 So what we were thinking is maybe trying to get

20 at least 400 cubic feet per second through there between

21 like May 15th and September 15th when we -- it doesn't

22 have to be all day, either. It may be from like 10:30 in

23 the morning to 2 o'clock in the afternoon just to give us

24 time to get past the power plant there.

25 SANDRA PERRY: So that point you're talking

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

51

1 about is the rock that you can't get around is right at

2 the Bodfish --

3 AIMEE OLSON: Actually, that's above, but we

4 can put in just below that and still do the trip, but

5 anywhere below 400, we can't make it through. It's too

6 tight.

7 SANDRA PERRY: And is that flow for rafts?

8 AIMEE OLSON: For rafts. And that's the

9 smallest rafts that we can use, too, with that flow.

10 SANDRA PERRY: Okay. Good. Thanks.

11 JOHN KENNEDY: What's the smallest raft?

12 AIMEE OLSON: It's 12 feet. Four people would

13 fit.

14 JOHN KENNEDY: Four people.

15 SANDRA PERRY: Okay. Thanks. Anybody else?

16 STEVE SPRADLIN: Steve Spradlin, Lake Isabella

17 Chamber. I don't want to be repetitious in what I might

18 have commented on earlier today, but I guess this is more

19 of a formal hearing so I will, and that was that I don't

20 think that there's any -- probably any issue from anyone

21 about the relicensing.

22 It's just what kind of mitigation at some point

23 that Edison Company might be expected to do to

24 accommodate present-day conditions over the conditions

25 that they were licensed for in the first place, and

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

52

1 that's obvious that the Number 1 difference between then

2 and now is the difference in the recreational use on the

3 body of water itself.

4 And the reference now to what Aimee was talking

5 about, and that's some kind of minimum flows, and there's

6 that one section of river there between the dam and where

7 the water's put back in that's affected. So the Chamber

8 of Commerce is only interested or only concerned or I

9 should say most concerned about one thing, the impact of

10 the recreational use on that particular part of the

11 river.

12 And one thing that we had asked about on the

13 relicensing for KR3 originally, the one and only

14 statement that the chamber had made, is that an economic

15 study be done on the impact of recreational use with a

16 different water flow, and that was never done on the

17 upper river, and we think that is a very critical impact,

18 but we can't make a wise decision on how to approach the

19 difference in this relicensing without more information

20 about what that impact is according to the different

21 water flows.

22 But, obviously, as Aimee said, for rafting,

23 those lower water flows are detrimental. They're

24 probably detrimental to some of the other uses on that

25 part of the river, too.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

53

1 So it boils down to relicensing. It's not

2 going to be a problem with relicensing, but the

3 mitigation is, you know, what can we do to negate the

4 negative impact on recreational use on that part of the

5 river due to the water flow.

6 SANDRA PERRY: Thanks.

7 HARRY WILLIAMSON: Harry Williamson, National

8 Park Service. I had, I guess, a question because our

9 primary interest is recreation, and because in going

10 through this, it was pretty obvious that white water

11 activities was one of the primary emphasis of both the

12 Forest Service and BLM.

13 At what point would you make a determination on

14 whether the existing user data was sufficient in that it

15 sort of occurs to me looking through here that it may not

16 be right now, that you're going to have to have

17 additional studies particularly for dispersed activity

18 where you don't have the advantage of going to outfitters

19 that are tracking that or some permitting system that

20 you'll make a request for additional studies for use,

21 projected use, and that type of things that would have to

22 be made, and that would also be the associated question.

23 One of the work groups might be able to assist in that.

24 SANDRA PERRY: Well, to answer your second

25 question first about the work groups, that was something

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

54

1 that we sort of wanted to float that idea later today to

2 see if people were interested in groups that focus on

3 particular issues. So Pat's going to talk a little bit

4 more about that later.

5 The first question about that you stated,

6 you're correct. We don't really have a lot of use data

7 at this point. I've actually worked with Sue a little

8 bit to try to collect whatever there is available at this

9 point, and I think there's -- it looks like there's

10 probably pretty decent data on commercial use mainly

11 because the commercial users do have permits and

12 everything down there.

13 Correct me if I'm wrong, Sue, but I don't think

14 we have very good information on private use, private

15 boating. As you said, we don't have very good

16 information on dispersed uses. We could probably pull

17 some pretty good data together on the developed

18 campground and picnic areas and so forth, you know,

19 working with the Forest Service on that.

20 So our plan at this point after we sort of get

21 through this first part and hear a little bit about what

22 people are concerned about was to start diving into

23 compiling and tabulating the data that is out there and

24 start looking for where the data gaps are.

25 Our second step would be to figure out how

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

55

1 we're going to fill those data gaps, whether we may end

2 up doing some visitor counts or maybe come up with

3 some -- you know, we'll have to talk about what

4 mechanisms are.

5 We were talking a little earlier. We do have a

6 survey effort going on down on the lower Kern River on

7 the Kern 1 stretch, and we've talked about kind of just

8 attaching some of the Borel studies to that, sort of

9 leapfrogging off of what we've already done.

10 I don't see us really starting any actual

11 visitor counts or surveys this year. I see us probably

12 trying to define what it is we're trying to collect,

13 trying to define study goals and objectives this year so

14 that, you know, the beginning of next recreation season

15 we're ready to jump on it.

16 It may be that we can hammer that out pretty

17 quickly and try to get some data at the end of this year

18 and maybe, you know, late-season data and so forth that

19 will continue on to next year. So that's where our

20 thinking is right now.

21 SUE PORTER: Sue Porter, Sequoia National

22 Forest. Before we jump off of recreation, we've focused

23 a lot today on the main dam down to the power plant, and

24 I don't want us to forget that the project goes up to

25 Free Air Point.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

56

1 The project area for the Borel power plant goes

2 all the way up to Free Air Point, the Wofford Heights

3 area, and although it doesn't happen very often like John

4 was talking about earlier, when the lake level gets low

5 enough, the canal comes out, and that's one of our points

6 is going to be access across that canal because we've got

7 campgrounds on one side of it, and when the lake gets

8 low, we've got people that cannot get to the lake, and

9 they cannot recreate on the other side. So before we

10 forget about that, I want people to remember that the

11 canal does run through the lake.

12 STEVE SPRADLIN: Steven Spradlin, Chamber

13 again. You know, you were talking about surveys and

14 different counts and things, and I think it goes without

15 saying that this is a 30-year licensing, and so to make

16 those studies without projections out 30 years to see

17 what the situation is going to be then because obviously

18 30 years ago, if that's when the last relicensing was,

19 the conditions and the uses, well, especially for the

20 recreation, is absolutely nothing to what it is today.

21 So on those studies, why, it certainly needs to have

22 projections in there for the whole relicensing period.

23 SANDRA PERRY: Thanks. Any other questions or

24 comments about the first-stage consultation plan?

25 JULIE MEANS: Julie Means, Fish and Game. I

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

57

1 thought I'd repeat what I said this morning. We're

2 reviewing some of the existing fishery studies, and we

3 will be providing comments as to whether we feel those

4 are adequate or additional studies are needed, and we

5 would definitely, I think, as Christy McGuire mentioned

6 this morning, need some sort of a letter survey.

7 DARYL FRYER: We have a lot of those. We're

8 going to review everything we heard this morning with

9 you.

10 SANDRA PERRY: Yeah. That was interesting to

11 hear people mention a letter survey. We had not

12 mentioned that, but that would be something that we want

13 to consider.

14 JULIE MEANS: I think there would be some sort

15 of difference between a letter survey and a creel

16 survey. There would be some sort of difference between

17 them.

18 SANDRA PERRY: Okay. Thanks. Any other

19 comments at this point? We are hoping to get into these

20 issues a lot more as we go on. So this isn't your last

21 chance. I guess I just real quickly wanted to get back

22 to this first-stage consultation package and the study

23 plan.

24 Basically, where we're at now is we need to

25 finalize our study plan so we can get out there and start

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

58

1 doing what we need to do to pull this application

2 together.

3 In the past, a lot of these things have been

4 sort of done in a vacuum where we just -- you know, we

5 know what the FERC is looking for. So we pull all that

6 together in the application and submit it. You know, we

7 try to work with people, but sometimes it just doesn't

8 work out that well.

9 What we want to do this time is we want to get

10 a lot of input on the study plans, on the study goals,

11 the study objectives. We want that early, and we want to

12 try to get people as engaged in the process as we can so

13 that we -- you know, two years from now, we know that we

14 did the right studies and we got the right information

15 and our application contains information people wanted it

16 to contain and the information they need to make these

17 decisions.

18 So I guess there's -- I guess my point is that

19 there's a lot of different ways to help us pull the study

20 plan together, but some of the -- just to sort of

21 highlight some of the things that we've done -- actually,

22 you need to -- can you go to the next slide? -- and that

23 we want to continue doing is before we even got to today,

24 John and Pat and some of us have been just talking to

25 people individually trying to kind of -- informally

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

59

1 trying to get a handle on what people think the issues

2 are and so forth.

3 We want to continue doing that and hearing from

4 you, and as John was pointing out, if you have any

5 questions or comments or you just don't know where we're

6 at, give John a call or Candace and let us hear what

7 you're thinking about.

8 We also heard a lot of comments and issues

9 today at the site visit, and Pat was trying to capture

10 all those, and after I get out of here, Pat was wanting

11 to kind of hash those out a little bit and see where

12 people are.

13 We've got, of course, again your written

14 comments. Give us those by September 12th, and we'll

15 utilize those in finalizing our work plan, and then what

16 we also hope to do is hold some follow-up meetings.

17 Those we haven't defined exactly what that would look

18 like. We're thinking maybe we can do some outreach

19 meetings to try to keep people informed about what's

20 going on.

21 We've also been tossing around the idea of

22 little study groups to try to focus on some issues, and

23 again that form I handled you earlier asks you some

24 questions about how involved you might want to be in

25 those types of forums.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

60

1 So I guess in terms of -- I don't know how many

2 other ways to say that, but just get us information, what

3 you're thinking on these studies, and then we hope to

4 also -- while these things are being done, continue to

5 work with people and report to you what our findings are

6 and whether we need to make some changes or things like

7 that. So I think that's all I wanted to --

8 DARYL FRYER: Good. Let's talk about review,

9 what we heard from you this morning very quickly. We're

10 not going to take a formal break, but let me tell you

11 there's some coffee back there. I'm having a little bit

12 myself. If you want to go ahead and grab a cup, do so.

13 I'll try to make this so you can see what we're

14 talking about. This is what we heard this morning. If

15 this discussion isn't in your mind, tell me, and I'll

16 rehash it, and that's what we'll try to do.

17 Getting to your point, the first thing, fish

18 and management, and again we're just trying to understand

19 and make sure that we're hearing what your issues,

20 concerns, and questions were.

21 A letter survey -- that's the word that you

22 used -- a concern about access surveys, access surveys,

23 non-fish and game management, small-mouth bass

24 management. These are the concerns we heard this

25 morning. Campground utilization is a concern.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

61

1 Steve, economic impacts, the water-flow impacts

2 on the economy, the possible pathways, landscaping, and

3 adventure -- some new out-of-the-box thinking in terms of

4 how to leverage the resource from an economic point of

5 view.

6 If you want to stop me, stop me, and correct

7 me. Tell me this is not quite what I meant or --

8 protecting the petroglyphs, water quality, and we heard a

9 number of different flavors of that.

10 There was the sediment concern. There was

11 water-quality issues. Somebody mentioned the oil --

12 possible oil and things like that at the reservoir

13 level. Also, water quality issues at the canal level.

14 A couple of females actually came up and

15 mentioned to me personally that two-cycle motors as being

16 a possible issue and something that needs to be looked

17 at.

18 One thing we talked a lot about as a group is

19 the mortality of juvenile fish. That was an issue -- I

20 remember that was an issue. Oh, yes. That was your

21 issue.

22 TINA THARALSON: Tina Tharalson, Forest

23 Service. It was associated with the mortality of

24 juvenile fish as they're entrained into the Borel canal.

25 DARYL FRYER: Again, if this triggers other

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

62

1 thoughts --

2 JULIE MEANS: Julie Means, Fish and Game. It

3 seems like there was quite an extensive discussion about

4 the application of algaecide in the canal and whether or

5 not that's an issue --

6 DARYL FRYER: Yeah. We're going to get to

7 that, right. Thank you. That's the very next thing.

8 And then there were a bunch of questions that I

9 characterized I just put it in a bucket about how the

10 plant was run.

11 The first one was the use of algaecide to

12 remove moss. A lot of people wanted to know what are you

13 using, how much are you using, how often, how do you

14 monitor the impacts.

15 And then also closely related was a question

16 here sort of following up on the sentiment, I think, how

17 often do you have to remove sediment, where is it, how do

18 you do the removal, sort of kind of like operating

19 questions.

20 A couple of people came up with an issue about

21 web sites, and let's just stop here for a second. What

22 are we doing on web sites? Let's let people know.

23 SANDRA PERRY: Okay. We have a web site. It's

24 called Resource Insights Dot Com, and our hope was to

25 post everything pertinent to this proceeding on that web

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

63

1 site to make it accessible to everybody.

2 I think, but I can't -- I haven't actually

3 validated this. I'm pretty sure the first-stage

4 consultation package is up on that site. Hopefully, it's

5 there. If it's not right now, it will be very soon.

6 Hopefully, just go to Resource Insights Dot

7 Com, and there will be a box, a little sub menu, that

8 says Borel Relicensing, things like that. Click on that,

9 and there should be things like information on meetings,

10 agendas, meeting minutes, if we have those, any reports

11 that were produced, and so forth.

12 HARRY WILLIAMSON: Harry Williamson with the

13 Park Service. Will that have the ability if we get into

14 draft or work studies or will it be interactive, sort of

15 a single text where we can go in on any given time period

16 and see since we'll be needing infrequently what other

17 agencies have commented so we always have sort of a

18 contemporary idea of where those studies are both

19 physically and how they're progressing?

20 SANDRA PERRY: I think it's not like that right

21 now, but I think that we can make it that way if there

22 was an interest in doing that.

23 You're not meaning that you could go into the

24 documents and edit them or anything?

25 HARRY WILLIAMSON: No. I'm saying that you

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

64

1 would control that, but, basically, if someone comes in

2 with comments, you can go in, and you can -- because this

3 thing is basically a living document, you can go in, and

4 people can see what agencies made what comments, maybe

5 how that manifests and changes, you know, and accrues and

6 changes to the draft and that sort of thing. If this

7 were reduced, just to be passing around a hard-copy

8 version which will always be out of date.

9 DARYL FRYER: You know, a number of people --

10 you weren't the only one expressing an interest in what

11 the web site is. I think if that takes shape, we should

12 get information as to what's available on the web site

13 and what they're saying, let's make it a useful tool for

14 the information.

15 HARRY WILLIAMSON: And the other point is for

16 sure the resource agencies have computer capability,

17 E-mail. I think generally most people have that, even

18 NGO's and other individuals that are interested. If you

19 also had and what you're probably going to do is a full

20 set of everybody's name and E-mail addresses as contact.

21 DARYL FRYER: Oh, that would be very valuable,

22 too, particularly cross contact, and thank you for that

23 advice and guidance on how to make this web site valuable

24 to these proceedings.

25 This is a question that has come up in many of

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

65

1 our interviews, and it came up today. Several times to

2 me personally people came over and asked can we use this

3 proceeding to get more water at KR3 and kind of simplify

4 the thing, but people expressed the idea that KR3 and the

5 Kern up there is the classic American rafting place and

6 is there some way that we can make that better. That's

7 heard an awful lot, and folks are going to give us some

8 words on that.

9 JOHN KENNEDY: I think Daryl --

10 DARYL FRYER: I'm Daryl Fryer. The purpose of

11 the meeting is to Kern issues, if that's an issue. It's

12 on the board. We're not going to get more issues. It is

13 a separate license. Kern 3 has its separate license.

14 There are some issues still pending on that license.

15 Borel is a license, but if it's an issue and it's on the

16 board, they're not going to walk away from it at this

17 time.

18 I think there's one angle on this for sure

19 that's unquestioned to me, again, an outsider and not an

20 expert, but Kern River to me is an example of what can

21 happen if at the local level there's no agreement and

22 we're reliant on the National Forest Service to make the

23 decisions, and they really will come in and cut the baby

24 in half.

25 You know, one of the most interesting things I

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

66

1 had a white water rafting business person here in town

2 explain to me, just common sense, you don't have to know

3 anything about my business, just take common sense,

4 what's the smallest amount of water that's of any use to

5 anybody? It's the amount of water you need, an

6 individual needs, to kayak, and what we got was less than

7 that.

8 So you got Edison pampered operating procedures

9 to do releases and things like that. I mean, everybody

10 walks into that. So I think that there's a real lesson

11 to be learned there. It seems to me as an outside

12 observer in the process local agreement is where the

13 action's at. Where the sides harden and entrench and get

14 stiff and harder, how the process proceeds, it will get

15 fixed.

16 DARYL FRYER: Daryl Fryer again. We're talking

17 about Borel here. Number 3 is a separate project,

18 separate issues. Well, again, it's on the board here.

19 Okay.

20 TERRY HENRY: Terry Henry, U.S. Forest

21 Service. I think that it may be on the board, the issue,

22 but I think it's very important to realize it is a

23 completely separate issue, and there's no way that this

24 project is going to be able to perfect a decision that's

25 been made on KR3 and just lay that out flat. So people

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

67

1 really understand, it's a done deal.

2 I know it's still got things pending on it, but

3 it's separate from this, and this is the basis for your

4 comment, that we have a number of hydroelectric sites

5 that we're dealing with right now that need to be

6 relicensed in the next few years, and even though it's

7 probably much too late, it would have been nice if they

8 could have been looked at all at once together in some

9 type of plan that deals with KR3 to Isabella to Borel to

10 Democrat and 178 so we could talk about the flows that

11 are needed along the entire system.

12 Trying to cut the river into sections and

13 planning this one and that one and that one again out of

14 order without a continuous situation -- water flows

15 downhill -- seems like an unreasonable way to go about

16 doing any type of environmental assessment. That's the

17 opportunity to make that statement. So --

18 DARYL FRYER: It does seem like the times are

19 changing, the attitudes are changing. There's more

20 arguments to agreements and certainly more realization

21 that we have to look at this on a much grander scale and

22 not chop things up.

23 TERRY HENRY: I do understand it's beyond the

24 scope of this meeting.

25 DARYL FRYER: Okay. Thank you very much for

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

68

1 that comment. Did this discussion trigger an elaboration

2 or a new set of thoughts about issues?

3 LOREEN LOMAX: Yes. Loreen Lomax, Forest

4 Service. One thing that I would like to see is maybe

5 this is part of the process -- maybe I should have said

6 this in the process is that the Native American community

7 in this area be brought in.

8 Even though this is a public meeting, perhaps

9 there can be a meeting with the Native American community

10 with regards to concerns. There have been concerns in

11 the past with water levels going up and down and erosion

12 of sites within the Borel canal, particularly the intake

13 area.

14 And also with the higher use of recreation in

15 some of these areas, if we're looking at that, there are

16 going to be impacts to some of the sites, and I know

17 within our study plans we are looking at that and ways to

18 assess whether these effects are -- or whether operations

19 are causing effects to these sites.

20 And not to put the finger on him, but Ray Vega

21 is here from the Native American community, and he's also

22 chairperson for the interpreter center, and he has a

23 connection with the community.

24 So if in the planning process and in the

25 process phase if there's some way you want to work with

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

69

1 me and him as well to set up a meeting with the Native

2 American community, we can set that up possibly at the

3 interpreter center or somewhere else where we would have

4 facilities for that, but I think it's really important at

5 this point to get those concerns because there's -- what

6 was it? '92? It was in '91, '92, there was some

7 concerns.

8 DARYL FRYER: I saw them. I must say that I

9 heard that thought expressed. Do you want to elaborate?

10 RAY VEGA: Ray Vega, Kern River Counsel. I

11 think I said my peace up there this morning, and I'd

12 rather not comment any more on it.

13 DARYL FRYER: Thank you. Again, did this

14 trigger any more comments or thought about issues,

15 anything that the folks would be comfortable raising at

16 this point?

17 We're going to move on in our agenda, then, and

18 I'm conscious that we want to get out of here now as soon

19 as possible. Let me just see a show of hands. We

20 probably have 15 more minutes of going on.

21 Is that okay with people or do you want us to

22 cut it at 4:00? Is it okay to go 15 more minutes? It

23 looks like people can live with that. Let's see.

24 Now, where are we on the agenda? Okay. We're

25 going to have a brief discussion here about -- now, John,

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

70

1 how do I get this thing to escape?

2 This is really intended to be a highly informal

3 discussion, but I guarantee that the people sitting

4 farther back are going to have a hard time seeing this.

5 Struggle with me. If you want to move forward, do so.

6 But what this says is working together locally

7 to resolve issues, you want to try something new, and,

8 again, this is intended to be just an informal discussion

9 about some possibilities. We're going to throw out some

10 ideas, and in the spirit of this whole workshop what

11 we're trying to get a sense of is just your reaction and

12 what ideas this triggers in your mind and what level of

13 interest there would be in trying to address some of

14 these things locally.

15 Now, I think that we are pretty much in

16 agreement that what the process for resolving issues is

17 usually like. Well, for those of you that can't see this

18 very well, how things work, how things usually work.

19 Well, Number 1, local parties disagree, and we

20 start off with a bit of conflict here, you know, I want

21 more of this, and, no, I want more of that. That's the

22 way things start off, and then through the process local

23 parties become entrenched in their position, you know, I

24 said I want more of this, I said I want more of that. It

25 becomes entrenched, rigid, stuck.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

71

1 The relicensing date comes near. These dates

2 that Sandy was talking about earlier start getting closer

3 at hand, and then the issue of resolution is taken from

4 local hands. Someone else outside says this is how it's

5 going to be, and no one really wins, and there's lots of

6 delay relative to the possibility of reaching agreements

7 earlier.

8 It's not only that the process needs to be

9 different, that we need some more dialogue at the local

10 level. It's also that the intent has to be there to

11 reach an agreement. There has to be an intent. You

12 know, there's not a silver bullet here like this process

13 will fix this solution. It's the process combined with

14 the intent to reach agreement that will generate some

15 goal.

16 And so the idea is, you know, for those folks

17 that have been in this business a while, there just has

18 to be a better way of doing this, and the idea is what if

19 we work together in local teams, you know, to resolve

20 issues right here. You know, so a vision of improvement,

21 what could we do in small local teams, and, you know,

22 again, don't lose sight of the fact that this requires

23 the intent as well as this process of small teams. There

24 has to be the intent to reach agreement but a vision for

25 improvement.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

72

1 If we had local teams, we could move from the

2 old approach where we have lack of communication and

3 understanding, really negative perceptions. I mean,

4 everybody thinks everybody else is doing -- you know, the

5 deals are made behind closed doors, the decisions are not

6 made locally, the people that have to live with it don't

7 have any input into it, and poor results that no one

8 really gains.

9 I mean, that story about the minimum amount of

10 water you need for anybody to get any use out of it is

11 really compelling to me. It blew me away. The

12 litigation, that minimum amount of water, won't resolve

13 for years. I mean, it's a huge delay. I mean, with that

14 lesson in hand, maybe we can create a new intent to work

15 together to seek solutions that work, end up with

16 positive perceptions.

17 Everything is in the open. Decisions are

18 really made by people that have to live with them. If

19 not great results, at least good results. Everyone is a

20 little better off and a much earlier benefit. You can

21 start getting on some of the key weekends where you need

22 the water possibly in the next 18 months, not six years

23 from now. That's the kind of thing we're trying to talk

24 about, but everybody understanding everybody else's

25 situation and has the intent to reach agreement.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

73

1 So, again, I'm very conscious of the fact that

2 we're taking up your time, and so we were thinking, you

3 know, if we had -- again to get you thinking about this

4 specifically, we put up some ideas here based on the

5 issues that we heard and the discussions that we've had

6 and sort of what would a team deliver, and you ask

7 yourself if you got together in some small teams what

8 would a team deliver, what would it look like.

9 Well, if we had somebody looking at the minimum

10 pool, the key to the process would be what's needed to

11 achieve the minimum pool and getting started with that

12 process, you see, on the one hand, but there's a lot of

13 possibility for a deal to be possible here on minimum

14 pools because, you know, folks own businesses that have

15 to spend millions of dollars periodically to clean out

16 those canals when they merge out of the water, and that

17 creates an opportunity to perhaps buy some storage rights

18 during -- you know, there's a whole situation here that

19 can create an opportunity for a deal.

20 Canal crossings. You know, there's still a

21 second bridge that hasn't been done. You guys have made

22 wonderful progress on the first one, but maybe get some

23 community involvement and get that bridge funded.

24 Recreational facilities. There would be an

25 agreement on recreational improvements. White water

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

74

1 boating, the key deliverable would be an early agreement

2 about the access, the flows, and the time of those flows,

3 and let's get started. Let's start realizing the

4 benefits of that community economic partnership.

5 You know, we'd have to have help from you,

6 Steve, but I think the deliverable would be a plan on how

7 to leverage the resource for local greater economic

8 benefit and probably also with a lot of planning about

9 where funding sources could come through and so forth,

10 but really get people involved in thinking that through.

11 It's a huge idea to get more leverage out of

12 the environment up here. There's just got to be a right

13 position for the future with the way the demand for this

14 kind of recreation is going to be in the next 20 years.

15 That's got to be the right approach.

16 So we're trying to give you a sense of what

17 kinds of teams would be possible, what would the team

18 deliver, what would they create, how the ones that have a

19 star by them are inherently part of the relicensing.

20 The other ones, though, are agreements and

21 working relationships among a lot of the same parties

22 that would be involved in the relicensing. The other

23 ones aren't hard-core relicensing issues, but they

24 involve all of the same parties, much of the same

25 dialogue, and it just seems to us to be something that

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

75

1 would make a lot of sense to try to move forward with.

2 So the next question might be what would a team

3 do, and that's sort of a rough picture of a local action

4 team. What would they do? Well, what we're thinking

5 here is that the team itself gets involved in problem

6 solving and thinking through what the issues are.

7 Take the bridge example. The team itself

8 starts working to try to understand what are possible

9 funding sources, what agencies do we have to coordinate

10 with, creatively secure funding where needed, you know,

11 take action, make recommendations to the key decision

12 makers, minimum pool, you know, working with the Army

13 Corps of Engineers and people that really are the water

14 owners, the folks that really are the key decision

15 makers.

16 Water owners are critical decision makers of

17 the minute pump pool. That's a lot of local reasons for

18 that, the aesthetic implications. That one just looks

19 like a win-win-win from all over the place, the minimum

20 pool idea.

21 When you get into it, just look at all the

22 stakeholders, but they would agree on the meeting

23 schedules and the deliverable, but they would agree on

24 the meeting schedules, the activities, the deliverables

25 be open minded and understand each other. Let's see.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

76

1 I've had a number of these fall on the floor

2 and get mixed up. So the other thought is if there were

3 any local participation or interest here in local

4 participation, here are the kinds of things that, you

5 know, Edison would be willing to do to provide this type

6 of support, and this is local support, the things that

7 John and his people would be wanting to provide, assist

8 with plan meeting sites, help recruit key parties,

9 arrange to transcribe meetings, provide meeting

10 facilitation, and I think most importantly coach the team

11 on how to be effective, take effective action in this

12 kind of arcane Byzantine regulatory processes.

13 For example, if you want to really pull some

14 levers here, you have to become, quote, intervenors.

15 Well, that would help you figure out exactly what you

16 have to do to become an intervenor.

17 Now, I'm not talking about the proceedings. A

18 lot of you folks have been involved many times, and the

19 bottom line would be to make it easier for you to be

20 heard and reach agreement and get some of these things

21 done.

22 And here's another question. What are the pros

23 and cons of the idea? Does the idea make more sense on

24 some issues than others? Is there an issue or two where

25 it is a slam dunk, we should start this immediately? And

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

77

1 what role would you want to see Edison play, you know,

2 how could they help really make something like this

3 happen?

4 So let me just ask quickly your thoughts -- we

5 can turn the lights back on -- your thoughts on pros and

6 cons of trying to formalize something like that. Any

7 thoughts?

8 STEVE SPRADLIN: Steve Spradlin, Chamber.

9 There was a lot of good comments made today, the Forest

10 Service saying things like, you know, why is this process

11 being done three different times when we're talking about

12 one resource and things like that where you cannot divide

13 it because it is one whole thing.

14 I mean, that's so basic that it's a wondrous

15 thing that they do something about it sooner than this,

16 but, obviously, it's too late, and the other thing is

17 when you talk about the give and take, and really even

18 though it was stated that KR3 is a done deal, it was done

19 and the parameters and the highs and the lows, but that

20 still doesn't mean that on certain times of the days

21 Edison still has the flexibility of being within those

22 maximums or minimums.

23 So if the minimum water flow is five or fifty

24 or a number that doesn't mean that, the maximum can be

25 something different, that you can accommodate different

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

78

1 situations. Really we've got a two-week schedule, and

2 we're talking about three hours a day or something. You

3 say that's great because the rest of the time we get full

4 use of the water like that.

5 It's just like when Chuck Williams is going to

6 release more water for the national championships, those

7 are all things you can do if you work together and

8 communicate, whereas if you said once it's done and it's

9 done for a 30-year period where they say we're not going

10 to give you an ounce more water than we have to because

11 we won.

12 So this is the thing that we work together, and

13 we realize that August is the highest priced kilowatt in

14 the year. So every bit of water that you guys give up

15 during the month of August when it's critical means a

16 lot, and so you say, well, okay, take the water 22 hours

17 a day and have our blessings, but a couple hours, you

18 know, give us that extra amount that a kayak can go down.

19 DARYL FRYER: You know, my instincts are in

20 this situation because I've known the local people here

21 at Edison for quite a few years, Steve, is that there is

22 the intent to find win-win here, and I don't know about

23 the rest of the system, but right here, right now, there

24 is the intent to find win-win, and I don't think you have

25 the mentality here that we're not going to do that at the

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

79

1 KR3 because we won in a legal proceeding.

2 These are local people that say win-win. I

3 mean, let's do this early, and let's have it behind us.

4 I mean, it just seems like the amounts of water and the

5 needs and so forth are real possible, but those are real

6 possible at one level, but the level you're talking about

7 is a much grander level that it excites everybody.

8 What's your perception of that? I mean, see,

9 it's hard to differentiate Kern from right here. Right

10 here and now is what we're talking about in the sense of

11 attitude and intent to find agreement and win-win.

12 STEVE SPRADLIN: What was the question?

13 DARYL FRYER: What's your assessment of the

14 situation here?

15 STEVE SPRADLIN: On this particular relicensing

16 issue or --

17 DARYL FRYER: On this particular relicensing

18 Borel intent agreement.

19 STEVE SPRADLIN: I think it's a piece of cake

20 compared to the KR3 because the issues aren't nearly as

21 great as they were on the other one, and yet if this is

22 all the options and all the questions this early on, then

23 there's nothing that's not doable.

24 And Sue brought up a good point, and that's we

25 keep seeing to focus on the water flows on that lower

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

80

1 part, but certainly the impact of the Borel canal through

2 the lake when that becomes an issue is a big issue, and a

3 minimum pool, like you said, which saves ultimately the

4 Corps and Edison Company millions of dollars by not

5 having to reactivate that, it is a big issue.

6 When you're talking about a minimum pool and

7 you're talking about the money to buy a minimum pool, you

8 know, that's not necessarily true that you have to buy

9 the water from minimum pool.

10 The amount of water that in a flood year that

11 goes unused down the river because it cannot be captured

12 because of not having the capacity would fill that

13 minimum pool in that one year that you have that excess

14 capacity and really was like free to the water users that

15 own it because they didn't expect it.

16 It goes unused and unclaimed in that excess

17 year. If you have the capacity to hold that minimum year

18 prior to that 100-year flood, you could hold that water,

19 and nobody would have to pay for it.

20 DARYL FRYER: We would have to have a lot of

21 people to have to agree to that because that has flood

22 control issues and so on, but that's what this is about.

23 Let's get together, and let's do that, you know, if it

24 makes sense.

25 Other thoughts on the pros and cons of the

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

81

1 idea?

2 JUDY HYATT: Judy Hyatt, Kern County Board of

3 Supervisors. I think you're going to find the atmosphere

4 a little bit different than it was when KR3 got started.

5 Since that time, there have been a number of

6 moves in the valley to be collaborative in their

7 thinking. The valley-wide chamber is coming together.

8 People are looking at issues a little bit differently

9 than they did before as opposed to mine and yours, and

10 I'm hoping that through this process that that thinking

11 will continue.

12 It's worked in some areas of our valley very

13 well already, and Steve and his group from the

14 Lake Isabella Chamber are working very hard to get the

15 valley-wide group together to address all the issues that

16 face all of us at one point in time. So I think the

17 atmosphere is going to be different.

18 DARYL FRYER: Yes.

19 JUDY HYATT: And I think you're going to find

20 perhaps a little bit more willfulness on behalf of the

21 people where you don't come into this in an adversarial

22 relationship.

23 There's still going to be those that want to

24 sit back and wait and see, but I think you're going to

25 find more willingness on the part of the people who want

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

82

1 to be a participant in what's going to be said because

2 you're talking about 30 years, you know.

3 DARYL FRYER: What kind of thoughts do you

4 have? Any other pros and cons? Sue, you looked like you

5 might have something that you wanted to say. On Edison's

6 role, we posted a role up there that we thought would be

7 helpful to any team, to any group of people that were

8 thinking about doing this, getting involved.

9 Any reaction to that role?

10 JUDY HYATT: Are you talking about being the

11 facilitator kind of thing? Judy Hyatt.

12 DARYL FRYER: Uh-huh.

13 JUDY HYATT: I think it's a wonderful thing.

14 DARYL FRYER: Does this actually help? That's

15 what we're trying to understand.

16 JUDY HYATT: Yes. Oh, yes. At least I believe

17 so. If you get all the people in one room and get it on

18 the table and get it discussed and have someone there to

19 keep the discussion on track, I can't see how it would

20 not work.

21 DARYL FRYER: Are there any parties that feel

22 that it just doesn't make sense to do this? And we

23 really want to participate in trying to reach early

24 agreements in relicensing areas like water and

25 recreation. Just no desire? Tell me, is that because

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

83

1 you feel there isn't any or is that because you just want

2 to think about it some?

3 JUDY HYATT: Well, I, for one, think it's

4 important because the sooner you can get some of these

5 things out of the way I think the easier it will be to

6 deal with those issues. It will perhaps take a little

7 bit more study, a little bit more in-depth research.

8 JOHN KENNEDY: One of the problems --

9 DARYL FRYER: That would be much less likely to

10 have them cut in half.

11 JUDY HYATT: Exactly.

12 JOHN KENNEDY: One of the problems I see is

13 people have a tendency, it's just a natural tendency, to

14 maybe sign up for a team or whatever to do something, and

15 interest wanes, and pretty soon you've only got one or

16 two people, and nothing ever comes out of it, and you do

17 this a couple, two or three, times, and you just feel

18 like, you know, nothing's going to happen.

19 So it would have to -- like Pat was saying,

20 there would have to be an intent that -- you know, which

21 can actually -- we're empowered to actually do something

22 here. We've got the right people on the team that can

23 make those decisions. There's no reason to have a team

24 with people that are not -- can't make the decision;

25 right?

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

84

1 In other words, if I got to go to my boss and

2 get a decision on something, he's the one that should be

3 on the team, you know. So those kinds of things. And

4 also if, let's say, there's five agencies that would need

5 to collaborate in order for this thing to happen if

6 you've only got two of them.

7 So there's a commitment that has to be made.

8 So, you know, from a downside, that's what I would see.

9 I mean, you know, if we decided to go this route and we

10 felt that it was really doable, having a commitment from

11 people.

12 You know, look at the amount of people that we

13 have here in the room now. We've got, you know, mostly

14 the agencies and stuff, but, you know, people, they just

15 don't have this feeling that they can actually make a

16 difference, you know.

17 DARYL FRYER: If you take something like the

18 minimum pool, look at all the players, and this is just a

19 quick brain storm. This is probably not complete by any

20 means, but on a quick brain storm, it looks like any one

21 of these players could be a deal buster.

22 You have to have coordinated agreement among

23 all these players and probably more that we didn't think

24 about before you could even, you know, start moving the

25 process forward, and so we were trying to think --

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

85

1 ERIK OSTLY: Erik Ostly with the Forest

2 Service. One of the important things I've seen in

3 meetings is people coming in, they have to have an open

4 mind to give and take, and it takes more than just a

5 facilitator, a significant more.

6 It needs somebody who is skilled in conflict

7 resolution, in getting people to come to agreements they

8 don't want to make in order to make a consensus. The

9 facilitator keeps things going, but it takes a lot more

10 personnel skills and meeting skills to take people with

11 different views to break down their barriers and move

12 into getting a consensus on this if this is how we want

13 to manage this.

14 DARYL FRYER: We did about 25 or 30 interviews,

15 and I think five or six of those people made that same

16 point. This is a key point that keeps getting back to

17 us. If you want to try to do this on tough issues,

18 you've got to have conflict resolution capability on the

19 spot. It's not just writing down what people say.

20 That's not going to cut it.

21 ERIK OSTLY: That person has to guide the group

22 as far as keeping it going to a resolution.

23 DARYL FRYER: Okay. So, look, the way to bring

24 this idea to closure so we can get this meeting closed --

25 boy, I really apologize for this. We've got the sign-up

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

86

1 sheet back here. Please take the time to indicate any

2 possible interest that you have in this.

3 We will follow up and contact people and see if

4 there's a coalition of the core players around any of

5 these issues and try to get something on this. This is

6 what we think is a really agreeable part of the solution

7 here of making this a benefit to all the local parties

8 here.

9 JUDY HYATT: One last comment. Judy Hyatt. If

10 they could see results before the end of a five-year

11 period on little items, I think you would maintain the

12 interest, and the committee wouldn't go from twenty

13 people to ten people.

14 JOHN KENNEDY: I agree. That's going to be

15 short term types of things because two or three years

16 doesn't cut it.

17 DARYL FRYER: There's a couple of these where

18 you can see agreement here real fast.

19 JUDY HYATT: Right. And if that could be, you

20 know, brought to the public's attention, this is what

21 we've accomplished so far, I think the --

22 DARYL FRYER: That's right. That's a very good

23 point. So it's two key points. It's sort of like

24 critical success factors is facilitation and early wins.

25 Okay.

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

87

1 Let's move on with our agenda. Thank you very

2 much for giving us your reaction to this idea, and if you

3 give us any indication of interest on your part, we will

4 follow up on that.

5 DARYL FRYER: Go ahead, Jack.

6 JOHN KENNEDY: Do you want me to go ahead?

7 DARYL FRYER: Yeah.

8 JOHN KENNEDY: The next steps, written

9 comments, as we mentioned before, are due September 12th

10 of this year. You can put those or mail those to

11 Candace Irelan at this address.

12 We've got some handouts on this information for

13 you. Again, you can call myself or Candace for this

14 information. We've also got some guidance here for

15 submitting the written comments, what should you say in

16 there, you know, how should it be structured.

17 You should include a background on the issue to

18 identify the issue and include a background, any

19 information that's needed for that or in need for a

20 study, you know, that sort of thing, kinds of methods

21 that might be most appropriate in your mind, how

22 information will be useful in making decisions. That's

23 very important that you state, you know, why would you

24 want to do this, you know, what's the purpose of this.

25 And then from there we'll evaluate input from

WOOD & RANDALL

Bakersfield, California

88

1 stakeholders and chart a course of action as far as this

2 relicensing process. So there you have it. September

3 12th is the date.

4 DARYL FRYER: That information is on a

5 handout. Where's the handout?

6 SANDRA PERRY: Where is that? John, do you

7 have that handout with that information on it?

8 JOHN KENNEDY: No, I don't. I dropped the ball

9 on that.

10 BRIAN McGURTY: I don't think it got printed.

11 So if anybody needs it, now it's time to write it down.

12 It's in the package on Page 2.

13 JOHN KENNEDY: And, again, you can call either

14 myself or Candace. My number's 376-2837, and I'll go

15 ahead and make copies of this,