OROVILLE DAM UPDATE

The Federal Emergency Management Agency has approved paying $205 million, but denied an additional $306 million to reconstruct the damƒ??s main spillway. The agency said that the project doesnƒ??t meet federal eligibility rules because the spillway failed mostly due to poor construction in the 1960s and inadequate maintenance, rather than heavy storms.

ƒ??Two separate independent engineering reviews indicate that a variety of problems existed at the dam prior to the February 2017 floods,ƒ? said Brandi Richards, a FEMA spokeswoman. ƒ??FEMAƒ??s Public Assistance can only fund work directly linked to the declared disaster, and so the grant assistance request of $306.4 million was not approved for the upper gated spillway.ƒ?

Earlier, FEMA reimbursed the state $128 million for debris removal and other costs directly related the emergency response in the days during and after the crisis.

Under federal law, FEMA can reimburse states up to 75 percent of the costs of recovering and rebuilding from natural disasters after a president issues a disaster declaration.

But in?ÿan investigation?ÿdone after the main spillway failed at Oroville ƒ?? the nationƒ??s tallest dam ƒ?? in February 2017, causing the evacuation of 188,000 people, an independent team of experts concluded that state water officials were ƒ??overconfident and complacentƒ? and gave ƒ??inadequate priority for dam safety,ƒ? at Oroville for decades.

The main concrete spillway at the 770-foot tall dam in Butte County was built on poor quality rock, the investigation concluded. The spillway designer ƒ??had no prior experience professionally designing spillways,ƒ? the?ÿ584-page report?ÿnoted. The spillway, only seven inches thick in some areas and not adequately anchored, cracked in multiple places in the following years, allowing water to flow underneath. On Feb. 7, 2017, water from powerful winter storms rushed under the massive spillway, which forced up its giant slabs and ripped a huge hole in the structure.

An extensive construction project to rebuild and strengthen the main spillway finished in November. Construction work continues on a project to rebuild and strengthen the emergency spillway.

So the US has covered more than 52%, $333 million out of $639 million expenses for a California Government disaster and not a Natural Disaster.

Currently excess rainfall is rushing to the Pacific Ocean rather that being stored. One solution was raising the 602' high Sashta Dam which the US offered to do, but was declined.

In the 1990s, with skyrocketing water shortages in the Central Valley and some of California's largest agricultural coalitions including the?ÿWestlands Water District?ÿcalling for a more dependable water supply, the Bureau of Reclamation suggested the expansion of Shasta Dam.^[51]?ÿThe expansion is considered feasible because the dam's foundations were originally built to carry the weight of a 800-foot (240?ÿm) structure, but resources shortages at the onset of World War II prevented completing it to its final height.^[22]

Reclamation has suggested three options for the dam raise, ranging from less than 20 feet (6.1?ÿm) to more than 200 feet (61?ÿm).^[52]?ÿThe "low option", which simply comprises adding a vertical concrete dike to the top of the dam, would provide maximum additional storage while minimizing requirements for reconstruction of buildings and facilities around Shasta Lake. The "intermediate option" would require adding more than 100 feet (30?ÿm) to the crest and replacing the elevator towers on the front of the dam, and the?ÿPit River Bridge?ÿand small towns around the lake, if not modified or moved, would be inundated. Finally, the "high option" would raise the dam over 200 feet (61?ÿm), tripling the volume and doubling the surface area of the reservoir. Both the intermediate and high options would require?ÿsaddle dams?ÿconstructed at key points along the lake to keep it from overflowing.^[52]

Meanwhile CA continues to suffer under other self made water disasters.

Paul in PA