|
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20426
OFFICE OF HYDROPOWER LICENSING
Mr. Larry E. Kelly, Chairman
Toledo Bend Bi-State Alliance
210 Hillcrest Drive
Anacoco, LA 71403
Dear Mr. Kelly:
Project No. 2305-016--Texas and Louisiana
Toledo Bend Project Sabine River Authority--LA & TX
NOV 23'1999
This refers to our review of the Commission's records as well as various
information filed with our office concerning Toledo Bend Bi-State Alliance's (TBBSA)
and others' request that we change the minimum reservoir operating level for the Toledo
Bend Project, licensed to the Sabine River Authority (SRA), on behalf of recreational use
of the reservoir.
As discussed below, we offer our preliminary conclusions regarding this matter
and our reserved authority under license article 43. Specifically, we conclude, based on
the available information, that insufficient evidence exists to warrant changes to the
project's minimum reservoir level, as provided for under article 43. Further, we provide
TBBSA and SRA the opportunity to provide comments and additional information in
response to our preliminary findings. We will carefully consider all comments and
information provided in making our final determination in this matter.
BACKGROUND
The Toledo Bend Project was issued a 50-year license in October 1963 and began
full operation in May 1969. The project has a normal reservoir elevation of 172 feet
mean sea level (m.s.l.) and a minimum resel-voir elevation of 162.2 feet m.s.S. The
project is operated in accordance with an operating guide that allows it to generate both
primary and seconrlarv power.l Primary power is produced ~-om May through September
and can be generated at any elevation above 162.2 feet m.s.l. Secondary power is
produced throughout the year when the reservoir is above 168 feet m.s.l. The project
power is sold, under a long-term power sales agreement, to Gulf States Utilities
Company, Louisiana Power & Light Company, and Central Louisiana Electric Company
(power companies).
SRA has since 1976 been operating the project under the current operating
guide, which it developed within the framework of the license requirements.
TBBSA's 1998 REQUEST FOR A HIGHER MINIMUM RESERVOIR LEVEL
In July 1998, the Commission received a TBBSA letter asserting that the
minimum reservoir elevation of 162.2 feet m.s.l. greatly limits recreational use of the
project reservoir and results in lost revenue to local communities. TBBSA wants the
Commission to require, under the authority of license article 43, 2 that SRA maintain a
minimum reservoir elevation of 168 feet m.s.l. 3
Commission staff asked SRA to respond to TBBSA's statements. In its reply, SRA
noted that in late 1995 and in 1996 the project reservoir experienced low reservoir levels,
due in part to low rainfall. SRA thereafter retained Brown and Root, a consultant, to
reevaluate the project operating guide and evaluate the feasibility of potential changes in
reservoir operating levels to minimize the impacts of future drought conditions. The
Brown and Root study, completed in July 1998, examined eight scenarios (simulations)
of project operations based on historic operating data from May 1969 through December
1997, identifling the effects of each scenario on power production and reservoir level.
2 License article 43 states:
The Licensees shall install additional capacity or make other changes in the
project as directed by the Commission, to the extent that it is economically
sound and in the public interest to do so, after notice and opportunity for
hearing.
Order Issuing License, 30 FPC 1009, 1014 (1963). License article 37 states (id.):
The reservoir operation schedule shall be adjusted to accommodate the
recreation use of the reservoir area as far as such adjustment is compatible
with the primruv purpose of the project and requirements of downstream
releases.
3 TBBSA also made additional filings in support of its request. The Commission
has also received letters from individual members of the Louisiana and Texas state
legislatures and fiom the Louisiana Attorney General, supporting TBBSAs position on
this matter. Also, the Louisiana State Legislature forwarded to the Commission its
resolution asking the Commission to determine whether the project license or power sales
agreement bars adoption of 168 feet m.s.l. as the minimum reservoir elevation for routine
power generation. As is discussed herein, neither the project license nor the power sales
agreement constitutes a bar thereto.
The study did not address the economic effect of the scenarios on the power companies
and their customers, nor the impact on downstream uses (i.e. recreation, irrigation, and/or
municipal water supply). The study noted that the project is operated for power
production and water conservation an4 to some extent, recreation, and that project
operations also consider the integrity of the dam, contractual obligations, upstream and
downstream floodin& and the protection of the shoreline and shoreline facilities. Brown
and Root made no recommendation for any one operating simulation, and concluded,
given the interrelationships of the above project purposes and considerations, that the
current project operating guide is not deficient.
TBBSA asks the Commission require SRA to adopt Simulation No. 6 of Brown
and Root's study. Simulation No. 6 generally maintains the minimum reservoir elevation
at 168 feet m.s.l., 4 including during periods of primary power production (May through
September). In other words, pnmary power can be generated only when the reservoir
level is 168 feet m.s.l. or higher. Brown and Root concluded that Simulation No. 6
would provide a good balance ~between power production and reservoir levels, but noted
that the risk in adopting this scenario is that during dry periods it may not be possible to
achieve full pool in May or June, resulting in reduced power production.
SRA has continued to investigate historic power production and reservoir levels,
and possible changes to project operations, to address the concerns about minimum
reservoir levels. It states that fequiring it to stop generating at 168 feet m.s.l. would
violate the power sales agreement and could result in financial consequences for SRA. 5
TBBSA replies that Simulation No. 6 would not violate the power sales agreement, would
not result in any overall loss in power production, and would not significantly change the
revenue produced from power production.
4 TBBSA agrees that the elevation level could be dropped below this level if
needed to maintain required minimum flows, prevent an imminent brown-out, and make
Commission-ordered inspections or repairs of the project dam.
5 The terms of a power sales agreement for the sale of power from a licensed
hydropower project cannot defeat a requirement of the license or of Commission orders
thereunder. Ifit is concluded, by a forum of appropriate jurisdiction, that the licensee's
compliance with a license requirement causes a violation of the power sales agreement,
fhen any remedy therefor would lie in the appropriate state forum.
COMMISSION STAFF REVIEW
As you know, we have encouraged SRA to work with TBBSA and the power
companies to address local concerns regarding the minimum project reservoir level and
its impact on recreational use and the local economy. We had been hopeful that a
mutually agreeable solution could be reached. However, it appears that will not be bhe
case. Therefore, based on our review of all the information provided and the
requirements of the project license, we offer our findings in this matter.
We have reviewed historic operation records provided for the project from 1969
through 1997. These records show that during the 28-year period, the project reservoir
elevation varied from a low of 164.77 feet m.s.l. in 1987 to a high of 173.93 feet m.s.l. in
1989. During most years, the highest annual elevation occurred in the spring, and the
lowest occurred in the fall or winter. For 21 of the 28 years of operation, the lowest
elevation was above 166 feet m.s.1.6 Annual elevations during the summer months (May
through September) were well above 166 feet m.s.l. for most years.
It appears that the present concerns regarding low reservoir elevations at the
project occurred largely as a result of lower than normal reservoir elevations in late 1995
and 1996. Annual reservoir elevations in 1996 varied from a high of only 167.98 feet
m.s.l. to a low of 164.79 feet m.s.l. Further, 1996 year represents one of the lowest
annual rainfall years, and by far the year of lowest innow to the reservoir in the project's
28-year history of operation. Further, 1996 had the lowest total generation output of any
year during the 28-year period. In additioa, it is important to note that annual reservoir
elevations the following year, 1997, which represents one of the highest annual rainfall
years of the 28-year period, varied from a high of 173.30 feet m.s.l. to a low of 168 feet
m.s.l.
Commission staff also reviewed monthly U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gage
records from October 1991 through September 1997 for the Toledo Bend reservoir (Gage
No. 08025350, located near Bwrkeville, Texas). The records included a table for
converting storage capacity to reservoir surface elevation. Given that SRA's primary
power production occurs from May through September, which are also popular months
for recreation use, the staff concentrated its review on these five months of the year.
6 SRA reports that the Commission's annual inspection of the project in 1991 and
follow-up repairs to a project embankment in 1993 resulted in low annual elevations
during those years.
The following minimum reservoir elevations (feet m.s.l.) occurred during this time
period:
May June July August September
1992 >170 >170 >170 >168 >168
1993 >170 >168 >168 >167 >165
1994 >170 ,170 >170 >170 >168
1995 >170 >170 >168 >167 >165
1996 >164 >164 >164 >164 >164
1997 >170 >170 >170 >170 >168
The above information indicates that over a period of 30 months, the reservoir
elevation was above 168 feet m.s.l. for 21 months; between 167 and 168 feet m.s.l. for 2
months; between 165 and 166 feet m.s.l. for 2 months; and between 164 (low of 164.79)
and 165 feet m.s.l. for 5 months.
Based on our review of the project's historic operation records, and the above
USGS data, it appears that reservoir elevations below 168 feet m.s.l. , such as
experienced in 1996, occurs relatively infrequently during the summer recreation season.
Regarding recreation, when the Commission licensed the project it required the
licensee to develop plans to provide for the future use and development of the project's
recreational resources. Our records indicate that currently the project receives about 1.5
million visitors a year for recreational purposes. It appears that the project reservoir, as
currently operated by the licensee, has greatly enhanced public recreation opportunities in
the region.
CONCLUSION
Our review of the project's historic operation records and other information in the
Commission record indicates that SRA's mode of operation is in compliance with its
license requirements and consistent with project purposes. Reservoir elevations below
168 feet m.s.l. occur only infrequently during the summer months; 1996 was an
uncommon year in terms of low rainfall and reservoir inflow. Finally, under normal
reservoir conditions, the project's current mode operation greatly enhances public
recreational opportunities in the region.
In light of the above, we do not believe suff~cient evidence exists to warrant a
further investigation, and possible reopener proceeding under article 43, with respect to
whether the project license should be amended to establish a different minimum reservoir
elevation level.
Please provide any comments or additional information you wish in response to
our findings within 45 days from the date of this letter. An original and seven copies of
this submittal should be filed with:
The Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
MailCode: HL-11.2
888 First Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20426
Please provide a courtesy copy of your submittal to SRA. By copy of this letter
we invite SRA to provide comments or additional information on our findings in
accordance with the above schedule. A courtesy copy of any SRA submittal should be
provided to the TBBSA. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact
Mr. Jon Cofrancesco at (202) 219-0079.
Sincerely,
d Mark Robinson
Director
Division of Licensing and Compliance
cc: Mr. Maynard Nelson
Sabine River Authority
P.O. Box 579
Orange, TX 77631-0579
Barton Rumsey
Project Supervisor for Engineering
Sabine River Authority
P.O. Box 579
Orange, Texas 77631-0579
Mr. J. B. Meyers
Rt. 1 Box 1505P
Hemphill, TX 75948
|
