What I hear the Corps saying during a drought is they have no latitude on release rates. They have to hold to a drought plan that allows the lakes to drop over 10ft before they get serious about trying to hold lake levels. I find it inconceivable that they have full latitude when the lakes are high and none when the lakes are low.
When I look at the list of items the Corps is responsible for concerning the Savannah River Basin it seems to me that all of them can be satisfied without the lakes dropping more than 8 to 10ft in a drought matching the one that occurred in 2008. If the Corps will use the same logic in a drought they are currently using in flood conditions while at the same time following the limits on flow rates dictated by environmental concerns, they should be able to hold levels within 8ft of full pool while satisfying all their responsibilities. All the changes required have been adequately demonstrated to be safe from the experience gained in recent droughts and the current flood situation.
At the risk of being too technical all the Corps would need to do is vary release rates to hold lake levels within 5 foot above full pool / 8 foot below full pool as necessary without exceeding the following limits:
- To stay within demonstrated safe range for minimum down stream flows observe a limit of 3600cfs from Thurmond during drought conditions. This release rate has been demonstrated repeatedly during recent droughts with no unacceptable environmental impact.
- To avoid downstream flooding, drop the lake levels as practiced now in October but only drop the lakes 2' instead of 4'. The recent flooding situation demonstrated that a 2' drop is sufficient in a 100yr rain event.
I refer you to my comments a couple of months ago. It is "conceivable" that lake is dropped for the generation of megawatts. Again, I urge you to use FIA to get copies of contracts with SEPA. When these reveal that there is no flexibility, you know that the CORPS has no power to be flexible in drought to maintain higher lake levels. The CO is a good, accomplished officer who has to fall on his sword. He is not empowered to change policy. Ask him.
ReplyDelete