Download Let it Flow: The Case for Dam Removal - ca-nv-awwa

Let it Flow:
The Case for Dam
Removal
Lori Anne Dolqueist, Esq.
Partner
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
www.manatt.com
History
From the earliest
settlements, humans
have diverted and
stored water for a
variety of uses.
Sadd el-Kara (Egypt) – oldest
known large-scale dam, dating
from 2650 BC.
Marduk Dam (Mesopotamia) –
earth dam on the Tigris, lasted
from 2000 BC to 13th century AD.
Roman Dams (Spain) the first
civilization to use concrete and
mortar in their gravity dams
around 100 AD.
United States - The Jesuits
introduced dam building to
California as they established
missions along the coastal
regions.
Progress
Dam Pros and Cons
PRO
Serve a variety of functions, including flood prevention, water
diversion and recreation.
Significant part of nation’s water supply.
Hydroelectric power provides approximately 7% of electricity in the
United States.
CON
Modifies local habitats
Affects plants, fish and wildlife.
Influences the lives of those who live downstream.
Safety and economic risks due to the possibility of dam failure.
Aging
 The average age of a dam in the United States
is more than 50 years old, and a small but
significant number are a century old or more.
 By 2020, 70% of the total dams in the United
States will be over 50 years old.
 Many dams are not expected to safely withstand
current predictions regarding large floods and
earthquakes.
 Managing aging dams is quickly becoming a
principal focus of dam engineering
Hazards
 In its Report Card for America’s Infrastructure, the American
Society of Civil Engineers gave the nation’s dams a D
grade.
 There are 14,000 high-hazard dams (where failure would
result in loss of life) in the U.S., up from 10,000 just ten
years ago.
 The estimated cost to repair the high-hazard dams is $21
billion.
 Also 12,000 dams are currently labeled as significant
hazard, meaning a failure would not necessarily cause a
loss of life, but could result in significant economic losses.
Lake Dehli
 The dam failed on July 24, 2010
after a period of heavy rain.
 Around 8,000 people in
downstream areas had to be
evacuated.
 Flood damage to homes and
businesses.
 Flooded the the city’s sewage
treatment plant.
 Approximately $50 million in
damages and $120 million in
economic losses.
Dam Removal Pros & Cons
PRO
 Environmental benefits - restoring natural river flows,
removing blockages for fish migration, re-establishing the
river habitat, and improving water quality.
 Increased opportunities for recreation and tourism related to
the restored river.
CON
 Decreased property values.
 Damage to ecosystems that have evolved near the dams.
 Release of toxins in sediment.
Issues
 Assessment of the dam’s uses, sedimentation, structural
quality, and steps for restoring the river.
 Dam removal usually requires multiple regulatory permits,
environmental review, and numerous safety precautions.
 These are multimillion-dollar projects and cobbling together
funding can take years, even decades.
 The process of physical removal can vary because of the
unique aspects of many dams and rivers.
 Even after affected parties agree that a dam should be
removed, it can often take years (or decades) to determine
how.
“If you remove it really slow, one foot
per year, you’d hardly notice the
difference, but who wants to wait two
hundred years to remove a twohundred-foot dam?”
- Tim Randle, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
Brown River Dam
 Largest river restoration project in Michigan.
 Instead of gradual draining, water began rushing
through the dewatering structure.
 The breach nearly drained the river above the dam.
 It caused flood-damage to more than 50 homes
downriver, and deposited approximately 5000-7000
cubic yards of sediment downriver.
Elwha River Restoration Project
 Largest dam removal project in U.S. history
 $350 million cost
 Removal of the Elwha Dam and the Glines Canyon
Dam
 Includes new water treatment plant, wells, hatchery and
wastewater collection
 Contested and periodically blocked for decades.
 Congress authorized the project in 1992, but it took two
decades to get the money and logistical details in
place.
Elwha Progress
 In July 2011, the reservoirs behind both dams were drawn
down.
 The Elwha Dam, closer to the river mouth, was removed first,
beginning in September 2011 and completed in 2012.
 In April 2013, with two-thirds of the Glines Canyon Dam
removed, the sediment overwhelmed the new water
treatment facilities. Addressing this issue delayed completion
of removal of the second dam until 2014.
 Salmon are moving into stretches of the river formerly
blocked by the dam.
San Clemente Dam Removal &
Carmel River Reroute
 Largest dam removal project
ever to occur in California
 Will remove the San
Clemente dam and reroute a
portion of the Carmel River.
 Began this summer and is
expected to take three years
and cost approximately $83
million dollars
San Clemente Details
 The California Division of the Safety of Dams issued a
safety order for the dam structure in the early 1990s,
determining that the structure could potentially fail in the
event of either earthquake or flood.
 Removing the dam is more expensive than buttressing, but
addresses environmental issues.
 California American Water worked with agencies and other
groups to develop a feasible approach.
 $49 million of the project costs will be funded by
customers. An additional $25 million will come from the
State through the California Coastal Conservancy. The
remaining $10 million will come from federal grants and
private donations.
Conclusion
As the nation’s dams continue to age, hundreds of
communities across the country are struggling with
decisions about how to deal with the cost to operate,
maintain and repair these structures. For some, dam
removal can be the most prudent choice by eliminating
safety hazards, restoring the environment, and revitalizing
the community.
(Graffiti on Matilija Dam)