GLUE Report 11-14-2011

Good morning Grand Lakers!! A quick status report on where things stand:

Good News Category

As you probably know by now, FERC claims they really didn’t require the removal of some 4000 structures deemed to be within the project boundary at Lake of the Ozarks. In their words, their order was misinterpreted. And if you believe that…

FERC has now agreed to a two day conference in Washington to address the concerns at Smith Mountain Lake in Virginia. It’s called mediation. More information is available at www.curb-ferc-aep.com.

Bad News Category

GRDA General Council Gretchen Zumwalt-Smith has been asked to resign by new (Non-political appointed) GRDA CEO Dan Sullivan. Gretchen and I clashed on a couple of occasions, but certainly professional and approachable with respect to Grand Lake issues. Also a resident of Monkey Island and understands our concerns….couldn’t always support them, but definitely understood. If the rumored possible replacement comes to fruition, a Tulsa city reject, we’ll all sigh in unison, “You’ve got to be shitting me?”

Senator McCaskill’s news conference following the clarification from FERC on Lake of the Ozarks sounded as though she might think this fight is over. Hopefully her constituents won’t allow that to happen. I’ll copy an e-mail below which is from a stakeholder at Lake of the Ozarks which demonstrates how absurd the FERC explanation really is and points out additional concerns not addressed.

We’ll have more on Grand Lake News Online later this week.

 

We all saw the headlines last week that said we "misunderstood" the FERC order.  I actually got to sit on a conference call hosted by Senator McCaskill and the FERC officials who also tried to convince us that we misunderstood what they meant, and they boldly pointed the finger back at Ameren.  WHAT???  After that phone call I can say that I am more convinced than ever that they totally meant every word that the order says.  Hanging up from that phone call I understood that FERC is not on the same page when interpreting what a "valid deed" or an "easement" means to you and I.  They are pompous and arrogant and feel that they can interpret the rules as they see fit....or rewrite them when it serves there cause just because they can.  They are WAY out in left field and their back peddling is only a smoke screen to call off the hounds.   Does the FERC think that us dumb bunch of hillbillies can't read?  Do they really think we believe that this is all Ameren's fault?  If nothing else after reading the order it should be crystal clear that the FERC is guilty.  There is no way you can read the order and not see it.  Ameren has NO authority to act without the FERC endowing them with the power to carry out their wishes.  AND, if Ameren fails to carry out the orders that you are about to read...there will be no license to operate the dam.  Don't drink the FERC's cool aide.  Don't do it..  They are not innocent in this process.  Not by a long shot.  And this fight has only just begun.

Understanding the order issued by FERC in July of this year is important. If ordering the removal of 4200 structures is not enough...the "order" is concerning in many ways. This is to illustrate some of the most alarming parts of the FERC Order and how it will impact our lake.

To check out the order in full go to : http://www.ameren.com/sites/aue/lakeoftheozarks/Documents/FERCOrderModifyingApprovingOsageSMP.pdf

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 136 FERC ¶ 62,070

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Union Electric Company, dba AmerenUE Project No. 459-212

ORDER MODIFYING AND APPROVING SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN

(Issued July 26, 2011)

 

Page 12. #36 Non Conforming Structures:

According to the FERC the definition of a non conforming structure that we hear so much about is:

 

Examples of such non-conforming structures include, but are not limited to, floating habitable enclosures, dwellings partially or wholly within the project boundary, decks extending more than three feet over seawalls, and floating commercial businesses.

 

 

Understanding the above definition of how the FERC views what non conforming means, let us read on as to what they think should be done to the "non conforming" structures that are found on their "project lands".

 

39. Lands that are included in the project boundary are needed for particular project purposes. Non-conforming structures located on lands in the project boundary can have adverse affects on project purposes and the project’s scenic, recreational, and environmental values and are inconsistent with the licensee’s obligations and responsibilities under standard article 5. Some of the provisions of AmerenUE’s nonconforming structure policy in the proposed SMP are inconsistent with standard article 5. Further, it should be noted that the Commission does not condone residential development and occupancy of project lands, since such residential use is inconsistent with the Commission’s policy of maximizing public recreational development.

 

40. As such, AmerenUE should be required to develop a plan and schedule to inspect and identify all lands within the project boundary; identify existing non-conforming structures and encroachments; identify the project purposes being served by the underlying lands, and take appropriate actions to resolve such non-conforming structures and encroachments with the goal of removing them from the project boundary. In the majority of cases, the existing non-conforming structure/encroachment should be removed in a timely manner and the site restored to pre-existing conditions.

 

We all know the FERC tried to convince the public that we misunderstood their order....I implore you to read it. It says it all right there in black and white. We get it. We get it loud and clear.

 

46. If allowed in the project boundary, decks, gazebos, patios, and walkways along the shoreline, including but not limited to boardwalks, could potentially restrict a significant area of project lands and waters from public access. As a general policy, the Commission does not allow the interests of private property owners to override the public’s use and enjoyment of project lands and waters. 16 Such structures have the potential to impede public access to the project if they are located in the project boundary. This prohibition would protect public access to and recreational use of project lands and waters.

 

Did you get that? If your deck could interfere with public access to the project boundary (which is your easement) in your back yard then you may have to take it out because the "Commission" does not allow the interests of private property owners to override the public's use and enjoyment of the "project lands and waters". Does it sound like the public use is put above your private property rights?  That is because it clearly is.

 

Lake of the Ozarks Resource Protection Guidelines

52. The proposed SMP includes resource protection guidelines to provide an additional level of protection for undeveloped shoreline with the following resources present: wetlands, historic properties, heads of coves, and areas of woody debris. Within these areas, an increased level of assessment, consultation, and/or protection would be required, as appropriate, to avoid adverse impacts. Development may occur in these areas as long as there is a plan that contains measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate impacts on important environmental features within the area.

 

Confused? You should be. We all are. Very ambiguous definitions of wetlands, historic properties, heads of coves, and areas of wood debris make this definition VERY broad and scary. Heads of coves is a term used over, and over, and over again about the extreme measures that must be exercised to protect these lands. We do know that there could be literally thousands of heads of coves at the lake and THOUSANDS of homes that could face very extreme and serious consequences for having a dock or seawall in these lands. However, the ambiguity in the order is alarming.  Take a look at what is happening at Smith Mountain Lake if you want to understand the scope of what this could mean to you.  You will not like what you find.  Guaranteed. 

 

It is called pulling a Pelosi....we won't know how bad it is until they have time to implement it and then we face the consequences.

 

Fees

71. We note that article 419 of AmerenUE’s project license allows AmerenUE to establish fees to cover the cost of administering a permit program. Further, the Commission has authority to allow licensees to issue permits for the use of project lands and waters and to charge reasonable fees to recover its expenses. 19 AmerenUE’s proposed enforcement fees would serve as a deterrent for non-compliance with the SMP and its Permit Requirements. We have reviewed the processing fees, user fees, and enforcement fees proposed by AmerenUE in its SMP at Appendix B, Section 4.0 Fees and Fee Schedule, and find that they are reasonable.

 

Did you get that??? The Commission has authority to allow Ameren to charge us for the use of the "project land" which is your easement according to your deed...and the WATERS! This could mean whether you are using a pump to clean your fish...or needing a sticker for your boat on a yearly basis, Ameren now has the authority to charge you for the use of the "project waters".

 

Page 27. Second paragraph:

All GIS data must be positionally accurate to ±40 feet in order to comply with National Map Accuracy Standards for maps at a 1:24,000 scale.

 

What does this mean you ask? When showing what their take on what their project boundary is...your easement...the FERC has given Ameren a margin of error of plus or minus 40 feet. That means within an 80 foot margin they may or may not get the project boundary right. IF you think the project boundary is NOT right according to Ameren, the burden and full cost is dropped into your lap to prove them wrong. It becomes your burden to prove that you are not within their project boundary.

 

17.

Prior to any ground-disturbing activity, or the installation or construction of any structure on or affecting project lands, a permit application must be approved by, and a permit issued by, AmerenUE.

What does that mean? Affecting project lands? Let your mind run wild. That is up to Ameren's interpretation of what that means.  It would appear that this order potentially reaches FAR beyond the scope fo just lake front.  Oh...and remember those fees we just went over? Processing fees, user fees, and ENFORCEMENT FEES could be yours if you accidentally misinterpret this rule of the order.

 

Know this...this is just the tip of the ice berg. There are 27 full pages to this order. I encourage you to read it all and understand how this will impact our entire community. Educate yourself. This is scary stuff and nothing to be taken lightly.

Hope you come to the Town Hall Meeting on November 19 at the Camdenton Middle School to learn more about where we go from here.