Comment #. '1iP 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Jonathan Walburger [jonathan@walburger.com] 

Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1 148 PM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Subject: Folsom Lake Point Closure 

Page I of l 

This would be a terrible idea. One of the benefits to living in Folsom is the easy Lake Access. My family and I 

love being able to ride our bikes to Lake. Please don't take this away. 

-Jonathan Walburger 

I I 2 201J 7 
Closing Folsom Point 

Comment A'OI 1-''fPorter, Stacy 

From: Lockwood. Dawn - MGH [Dawn.Lockwood@chw.edu) 

Sent: Friday, January 12. 2007 8:41 AM 

To: 'soliver@mp.usbr.gov' 

Subject: Closing Folsom Point 

Mr. Oliver, 

Page I o1·· I 

As a long time Folsom resident, I am writing to urge you to reconsider closing Folsom Point. We value that area 

for our "warm weather" recreation; we moved to Folsom for this beautiful lake. Closing Folsom Point would not 

only impact businesses inFfolsom but also the way of life for many of our residents. 

Thank you for your time, 

Dawn Lockwood 

1 009 Pintail Circle 

Folsom, CA 95630 

") 13 21ll)7 
Commenl #..,.

 '1 � ""'q f 

Officer> 

llni"Vcy .-1. Duller. !'<aid.:JII 

Jonn � hlllcr. /'1 l'u:'-' ./)r.:.vid�·/11 

Ulll l1arcison, yJ fl1c� /'rc:.wiL•w 

SnnUy \\'IUnnl Ocnn. ;.. Vtci! 

}Jr. .. �tdcnl 

T,·tl Slu.:dy, T)\'ncurcr 

rl.uhcr1 Stncl,hoLJsc. l!xccui1\'C Director 

13oord of Dir��lors 

Nonflt:rtr Ztwc 

Loner Doyd 

l'rttlt.'�1!tJIJ·Cttt.lttrnGI!o!IUl lrngumm Dtstru:t 

Sondy Willnrol Ot1n 

1l:homo-Calll.(a CmJnf .. rmlutritp 

,\lil'c ,\lvcs 

t:nmrwlta & Glith: Wotc:r Dulrtru 

Oo,•id Catcy 

IJdla Fi.sln WcH'-'r Di.w·rcl 

Ccnfrnl Zom: 

\\':�Iter J. Dis hop 

Cwura CoJlcJ ll'ot�o.·r Dt.urict 

T•d Cosoo 

Scm lrtlUI H'urcr lJHtrrt.'f 

Suz.;mnc Dullodicld 

Solotw lrn�utum Dl.,ltu:t 

Jnnn J\lnhcr 

Jf ·�stcrtJ lone 

Dill H:�rrison 

Dcl/'uL'rtU H'rm:r (Jr.Unt:l 

Morvin 1\Jcycr:'i 

Sau Luis Wtm:r DJ.'ilrrC:l 

Dermis Folnschi 

/'.:modtL' ll'tJIL'r /Ji.'t:friCI 

Ted Sheely 

1:-"'-·;c;tlnJJJ.r U'uJI!r lJI.'HrtCI 

Santb,·ru ltJuc 

Ho rvcy .-1. Dailey 

OraiiJ.:r.! Cm·c !rrJgntldtl D1.WI'IC'I 

llowartl !'rich 

.·ln•m-Erli.\011 H'ulcr Str.r�•!-:1' {Jp·tric! 

rlnnnl<l D . .lacobsmo 

Fr.am :1·:1f�·r .t!:nlwru.r 

Kcnncoh E. P:tul 

15�1 ·'t"Srrccl 

S:tcrnmcnlo, C..\ 9581� 

Tdc: 916-��S-1638 

F:1.c 91 Co-·1�6-1 U63 

Em :til: 

Hohcrr: rslncf;.,l·cvn"'akr.IJrf! 

It us!\: rll'' a·.;\'pwntl·r.or� 

Sl'r�c: �eru::l,irh:.-ri:,ca rhanu.J.nrl 

Shawn Oliver 

Bureau of Reclamation 

7794 folsom Dam Road 

Folsom, CA 95630 

Dear Mr. Oliver and Ms. Victorine 

January 12, 2007 

U.S Army Engineer District, Sacramento 

Attn: Ms. Rebecca Victorine 

1325 J Street 

Sacramento, CA 95 814<�922 

Attached are the Central Valley Project (CVP) Water Association's comments 

regarding both the Folsom Dam Safety and Flood Da111age Reductio11 Draft 

E11vironmentallmpact Study I En11ironmemal Impact Report and the Post 

Authorization Change Report for the Folsom Dam Modification and Folsom Dam 

Raise Projects within the American River Watershed Project. Tf any of the attached 

comments are unclear, please let Russ Harrington of my staff know as soon as 

possible. Please note that some of our members may be sending their own, 

independent comments directly to you by lhe indicated January 22"d comment 

deadline. Specific comments from our members that we have already received are as 

follows: 

1. Use of the 400,000/670,000 Acre-Foot rule as a key assumption in the No 

Action Alternative is flawed due to the uncertainty on continuation of that rule 

for Folsom reservoir operation over the design life of the Proposed Project 

Firstly, although the 400,000/670,000 rule is embodied in the 2004 agreement 

between Reclamation and the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency 

(SAFCA), that agreement terminates in10 18 or earlier and nothing compels 

SAFCA to enter into a new agreement with Reclamation with the same rule to 

span the design I ife of the Proposed Project. Secondly, the Water Resources 

Development Act of 1996 (WRDA) characterized the 400,000/670,000 rule as 

an interim rule until such time as a flood damage reduction plan for the 

American River has been implemented. The pre-1993 400,000 Acre-Foot rule 

presents the most plausible default for incorporation in the No Action 

Alternative_ 

1. The Proposed Project enables and cotHemplates studying a wider range of 

operations rules for flood control and other purposes than those in use today, 

and any changed rules resulting from those studies will have various impacts. 

both positive and negative, (111 water users and the environment. fn :tddition. 

the rnnge of nlternatives for flood control does not address ilie range of 

possible alternatives involving downstream levees. Simply adopting existing 

plans for levee strengthening and upgrades falls i.:tr shorl of the reali5ric ran��: 

ol' a!ternatives thar should be addressed. For inst<mce, the WRDA of 19<16 
omment# .. 

contemplates development and implementation of a flood damage reduction plan for the 

American River. No such plan is incorporated in the Draft Environmental Jmpact Study (DEIS). 

As such, the alternatives and their impacts are too narrowly described in the current DEIS to 

meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The studies must be 

completed and described in a more comprehensive set of alternatives before a revised DEIS is 

issued. 

3. Extension of the prior comment: there are no estimates of the economic/financial impact to CVP 

water contractors, power customers of the Western Area Power Administration (W APA), or 

otJJer water users, of plausible or likely changes to operation of Folsom reservoir as a result of 

the Proposed Project or other alternatives. No remedies are identified to compensate CVP water 

contractors, power customers of WAY A, or other users, due to reduced water or power supply 

caused by plausible or likely changes to Folsom reservoir operation as a result of the Proposed 

Project or other alternatives. In short, the document fails to consider fully the indirect and 

cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project. 

We would also like to reiterate our general understanding that there cannot be an allocation to CVP 

Contractors for costs for projects that do not meet an authorized CVP Project Purpose and/or are not 

designated as a Financially and Operationally Integrated part of the CVP. This general understanding is 

consistent with Reclamation Law. Neither document provides the background calculations from which 

the cost allocations were derived. In addition, neither document specifies cost shares to specific entities. 

We are very interested in this information. 

We also believe that any Safety of Dams allocation for any of these costs would be of sufficient 

significance to warrant a separate repayment period beyond the 2030 repayment deadline for pre-existing 

CVP Plant-[n-Service costs as of 1980. Because these projects are not expected to be completed until 

time periods ranging from 2010 (at the very earliest) to 2020 (if there ue scheduling delays), a 2030 

repayment period would considerably compress the repayment period for these costs relative to the useful 

life of the project. Moreover, the CVP rateselting policies incorporate a 50-year repayment period for 

capital costs, which was used as the basis for detem1ining a 2036 repayment date for the San Felipe Unit 

out-of-basin facilities costs. 

We look forward to your responses to the attached comments. We will also be awaiting responses to the 

numbered questions within this letter and our question regarding the repayment period for these costs. 

Please address these responses in writing to me prior to finalization of the EIS/EIR document. 

Robert F. Stackhouse 

Executive Director, C'{P Water Association 

Attachment 
Comment��-- 1i - q i 

CVP Water Association Comments 

December 2006 Folsom Dam Safety �nd Flood Damage 

Reduction EIS/EIR 

January 12, 2007 

Page ES-2: Within the last paragraph, elements that Reclamation and the Corps of 

Engineers would implement separately are mentioned, and a list "as summarized in the 

following paragraphs" is referenced. On what page is this list provided? 

Page ES-3: Regarding the top paragraph, was separate authorizing legislation provided 

for the Folsom Outlet Modifications Project, which was morphed by the Corps of 

Engineers into the AtLxiliary Spillway Project? What was the PL nwnber for tllis 

authorizing legislation for the Folsom Outlet Modifications Project? 

Page ES-9: Will the referenced fuseplug in the top paragraph be built prior to the 

completion of the auxiliary spi II way? 

Page ES-11: In the top paragraph, why is there a reference to secllity activities? Have 

security activities been defined as part of the Joint Federal Project and either the Flood 

Damage Reduction or Safety of Dams program? 

Page ES-11: Did the authorizing legislation for the Folsom Outlet ModLficatioos project 

(which was subsequently revan1ped as the Auxiliary Spillway) specify a 100% flood 

control allocation? 

Pages ES-13, ES-14, and ES-15: What incremental acre-foot storage capacities would be 

provided by 3'lj foot, 7 foot, and l 7 foot raise levels to the Folsom Storage facility? How 

does this compare to the acre-foot capacities that are expected to be generated tlu·ough a 

Probable Ma'<.mum Flood? 

Page 1-1: Are there specific (non-securit)' reluted) safety requirements for the Folsom 

facility on the basis that it is designated as a National Critical In.fi·astructw-e facility? 

Page l-20: Wily is the aulhorizing legislation tor the Folsom Outlet Modifications 

project not included in lhe legislative citations? 

Page 2-73: [s sire security being incorporated into this project? [f so. under ,;.·bat 

authorization is th.is being done? 

Page 2-85: Vl1ly is alrenwli'.·.; l designated as '.!purely Safety of Dams al(crnar.i ve? 
Comment #/(l

 r � -Cf 'f 

Page 3.2-4: Would any of the proposed projects impact water deliveries wllile 

construction is i.n progress? 

Page 3.2-5: Would deli veries to the City of Roseville, San Juan Water District, and 

Suburban Water District be significantly impacted during construction of any of the: 

Corps' Folsom Dam Modifications projects? 
Comment#lfl

 1�.,. t{'f 

CVP Water Association Comments 

December 2006 Folsom Dam Modifications and Folsom Dam 

Raise Projects 

Post Authorization Change Report 

January 12, 2007 

Page ES-4: The no action plan should be based on the fixed 400 thousand acre-feet 

storage space that has only been superseded on an interim basis. 

Page ES-4: Why does the No-Action Plan include the implementation of several projects 

that will affect the Folsom Dam's flood capacity and one project (the folsom Bridge) U1at 

will not have any bearing on the safety or flood capacity of the Folsom Dam. 

Page ES-9: It is om tU1derstanding that there \viii be no cost allocation to CVP 

Contractors on the basis that the LL Anderson facility is not an integrated component of 

tbe CVP and is not owned by the Federnl Government. Our understanding is furU1er 

reinforced by tbe statement that the Placer County Water Agency will independently 

implement tl.us project. 

Page ES-1 0: In figure ES-2, how do we get access to the back-up calculations that were 

used to derive the $172.8 nullion Dam Safety allocation in the section titled "6 STG 

Element"? 

Page ES-1 0: In figme ES-2, how was tbe Non-Federal Share [or the Temporary Bridge 

of$9.6 million dcterm.ioed? Why is there an additional $28.0 million in non-Federal cost 

estimated for "Added Features"? What are these additional featw·es, and who \.viii pay 

1hese costs? 

Page ES-15: In table ES-6, why does the Authorized Folsom Modification Project have 

no Safety of Dams allocation, while the "6 STG Element" includes $172.8 million in 

Safety of Dams costs? 
Comment if,. q 5 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Jim Bayless [baylessjim@mindspring.com] 

Sent: Sunday, January 14. 2007 7:46PM 

To: SOiiver@mp.usbr.gov 

Cc: annalena@water.ca.gov 

Subject: Folsom Dam EIR 

ShawnPage 1 of I 

I have reviewed the EIR and have a few questions. I apologize that the answers may lie in the document, but I 

could not put my fingers on them. 

1 . The alternatives include raising the reservoir's containment level by 3.5' to 1 T. Would that additional 

capacity be considered merely as freeboard, or would the facility be operated with the water storage goal 

of filling the facility to a higher level than the current capability? 

2. Would each alternative include relocating or rebuilding all roads, parking lots and facilities above the new 

high-water line? 

.3. Would the existing trees on the shoreline be cleared to above the new high-water line? 

4. Would all impacted hiking and biking trails also be relocated above the high-water line? 

5. Presumably at least alternative 5 would impact some county roads. Would it also impact the Salmon Fall 

bridge, or any EID water intake facilities? 

6. Is there any consideration of alternative strategies that have less impact on Folsom Point park operations? 

7. Should official comments be sent to you? 

Thanks. 

Jim Bayless 

I 1 5 2007 
Comment #.

� . 

Porter, Stacy 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Su bject: 

Smith. Lyndsay A [sac54566@saclink.csus.eduJ 

Monday. January 15. 2007 12:02 PM 

sol iver@mp. usbr. gov: Rebecca. a. victori ne@ us ace. army. mil 

Possible closure of Folsom Point 

I :;::. :: z•q).:n- :: =.::�··m"'�- .3;::-.: ;n! il� ::�.J�-.J:::- - : ::::..s::G. :•·-� ju::;':. l:B-=n �:-;:c!:m':r! 

e,-.r,: .. -�e: r.:.4 .. • .. : ''_-:--:• .�l - � , , r _. r.-:

1._ l1j-1,•.'a.�:t..:_ :•-: _ '/;;:&.:.

� t;�,_:_:��Jse 

:: r;r�- F:: -t: +: f � ?: .. : J1 :l'l, ·�· -· I al. t --:r1--:j·

:.. .!:) ' r. i ::

� _l rt-.t: �':9j -3�:..:! 

e1..:�ur--�e :.�·.e; f=.t .. .:.-o5c:, b�.-: ·.-:-.,._J _i:-= c· .:_r·:.-:1�' �nl -J. i.-3.:_.:· u �r- ·.:�E: �.-- .. s_:f�:..-s�.:.:. .... :.: 

-� r�GL tt.Ci� v:oulj �rt- i:- .. 1 ,__;!! -:.:.

:.3:_:1-=J t7::.s:.m ?:J:_n=. � ::::� 5.n :;··i:: W3..:-: t:ca=:Je: :tr.d USE: -:.t: 

t:'-�r -:

L"r.-� 1t :- '"'"�rr. r lnt: f-:-�::- l--.. >1-!�-:1 t . • :--u3n �:---�m:J�=-- I .Li'l€: ..:. . ..:.3 ..

 ::··e .cri�'liJtc.: 

r- ·· = --= n f ..,.J.,-:. �i l t.·:_ .-�J J L-� J. ':-� · �- ., - �-'--: .. �.cfl t�.:.:··_ - u�:""�� L : ..:-=:r�r :._ -�L.J.

-.:"."1 

�� �� �·, '-�.:::. :.: .. I . .:: . ..J�·: u ;;.:.J .. �:'l ·-· ·":- _-:·. i� .:1:. ·: .!r:· J r:.-=r:t.-::...: -��t. -:-._� · ... -�_t..;_j .:

::,. • .;t 33 

(;1. _: ::-.<:::<; is �:1 .n.r.er: :: :.::�. ;:;,o·; :h _ J�l: _; L.,: lrnpl=m--=-n • .;·:! -:: ore•;e:. ·: r:::-:, ::

.1 ::sur� 

�." :r F-!.!"!: f-,.. j'"F-"i.:'"3, i- 'A''1t:.! t.-e ;;:-�.::�:.:,: 31:�r�=.:.3:::-: b-_.- :.h:: <::1-:�·e -ct-�t::-:i:·/. 

:: .• G[ .• -,: .J· IJ f :_ 

:_ ;r..isa '/ Smi U. 

�a�: =3� j·: 

c: r l::; . .,'-! . ;j · �-' 

·c:." i :-=-.;. ,·· · ' � I 
Comment 11

 q 1' 

Porter, S tacy 

From: nicoleden@aol.com 

Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 11 :36 AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov: Rebecca.a.victorine@usace.army.mil 

Subject: Don't close Folsom Point1 

Dear Friends, 

Tltc pr�icct ror Folsout D;un S;di:l\' illHI Flood Damage n.:duCLinn is \'Cry impori;JII(� 

Page I of I 

\\'e would howc\.lT like Lo requesl a more supporl.in· ;IJ>proach where rcneali<Ht is collct:rncd and other 

soluLions are oiTcrc d. 

This project is proposed into 20 I 2 (or lnttgcr) Closure of Folsom Poi ttl willllq.\"ali,Tiy ;ukct Eunilies, 

boater$ <llld .\qu;tlic Ce11Ler dictlts who access Ll1c Lake though Folsom. 

During Ute husy season folsom I .a.k.c Launchitlg Hamps will a('[ually dose due to lack or SJlilCC (parking). 

lkowlls \hritta and Granite Bay <�rc the other optio11s. wltidt will be hcot\·il�· i11tpactcd. witlt early closures 

clue 

tu limited space. Tit is ('OilllllUnit�· is special because or IJte opportunities LO recreate! 

. \n·css to 1J1e water is critical! Please cottsider Ute other options lc1r debris storil);e i!nd rock. crusl!iti,I.{. 

KEP FOLSOM POINT OPEi'J!!! 

.\ny cottsideralion l(,r !'uture recreation in this commu11i1y i� hi�hl�· \alucd. 

Please look al Lhc ltllislJcd producl. 

IS TI-!UU� BIKJ-: TR:\IL'i:1:1 I-Lt,·c the c:-:i�ti11g trails hce11 replaced:> 

H.\ \'L THE 1-IOHSL TR;\ll.S l�LE� l{LPL.\CLD :\.\1[) l�EP.\1U·:D:1 

1-1.\ \'1·: TlU:Ls BEL\ PI.:\.Vl'l::l) FOI� PIC:'-<'ICS (\\'TTH PIC\IC T.\BU:SJ:> 

Chccl� out the fiCW AOL. Most comprehens ive set of free safety and security tools. free access to 

millions of high-quality videos from across the web. free AOL Mail and more. 
Comment#'* �l' 

Porter. Stacy 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

·-1 r. _ 

. ..

 ) .. �, 

;)o2; Jrfl \"-::·� _:l._:;·. 

Jim Lehman (jdlehman@comcast.net] 

Monday, January 1 5, 2007 8:29AM 

themayor@folsom.ca.us: ericking@folsom.ca.us: smiklos@folsom.ca.us: 

jstarsky@folsom .ca. us: soliver@mp.usbr.gov: corrprincess@ardennet. com 

closure of Folsom Point for dam construction 

: :.s ' 

J� �h� ���j 0� :1. 

s�j �-� 1 ?' -� -- . ·: ::

m t.;.-.. r .. '3- -.- 1: .... · - :- . �-J c-! -=- -, __ - � -: -:- i:: 

1:�!1\_,.,,i:-�:: 5: ··.:.==: ;:rc:: .:1: :'1'= C-:=r--=:::..:'1 .. I - -�-ii-:i· � fJ_ �n -:Y��i._:_�j �::i. :·_:-, ._n.-�. �:.-� 

t-'" �n"'=:�·-i r� -:-:.� "'�":.,.3- ::r- :. l · r. .. �l�= - :;,. :. 1.·.1_..:-! t-=: :. =, r . .;J .:.� ::i :�:: t..-.:; .:.�.:.!.-� i,J(:: s�·--=::. 

::r··= .r· .s. Th L_ .-! i :_: .:

:���.l�t t h a '"= .1: ::' � ·· :;:. : L:; � :::.« : �:: . .:. .:� •.·

! __ l :1· .. .: t: b� _;:c:-:i!:'I.:J o.I� ::_!. :.::::-3.£::. _; 

--: ::. r- )3 ._0:. e am ,--:-� ··:i� n-�w ·::;=· 1..: �--�. , ��r.-.: �,-: r-.e�1l·-�-..

 -;.ff-3-·: .... ,:- -:=2i ;: ";r .,.·= � 

:1C'= -- ':.r.·-=> ':.r::lff_:_r; 3nrl. r . -:

. i"J� ·-:an no- b� i-:"'� <!1.;�• rJ-e:r" c . . =- n·-: 1 - H'� -·!-;.:·"l!= __ , -,··"': 

t-1�.::: :1 ::-:-: -- :.� .= _j:: :. t.:.h:= �.3rn :.�.::. _· r:uc ·.:. ";_- Lt.:;C'J [".£ tt. _ ., r -.: • LL ·�-/ J�. 

i �.. :-.\- 't . v.)G.:i .�::·.r;;:. ": � 5.J-.::. 3. _

· __ :: ;::.� pa...3._ .:, e.:-_ , -=-=.

:. J

· ..

 u t ti ·-.= .:E ::! .:t. � :r:-.J 

.!:l� .A�- J.r.:J t�;l.t!t. wi 1 __ :: �. _;i. .rel � .2::.:�c� .:3 .:::::- :!-.e n-::<': z-�·--::-: �:2::1r2? ::.��= � ::e::::-1: �;�-� 

�' .. 1Jr E'"'-"S3j :--i: � � S�. 

r!::;.:1k3, 

T,:;r.rJ ::mi .. ir:. L::h::ta:l 
Comment tt4lt 

Porter, Stacy 

From: 

Se nt: 

To: 

Subject: 

.� · ...

. 

.. · ··-· ····( 

Austerman. Brian M (ba86@saclink.csus.edu] 

Saturday, January 13, 2007 5:02 PM 

soliver@mp. usbr.gov 

Folsom Lake Proposal 

."1 ·:�:- • ..:··��� ::-... :ltBr :::-:.:i �i·/= n . ..:._�:·--=-=·= ::1· ... 1=:.: :.:_err � .. ,.:-·;- r.ak·=. "-lJ f::-= ., .::

 

.::-:! I :-=:.:;: <' _:;�:= rr.o.:;: :: • � �·-:

::· ?.:L; r'-:·- l;:_Jn� · r- �h.; 1-d n--·r. _ .=s;s 'i' _ -'-_..,. c: .::

;:ing 

:_,'-'!·-.-- �e,r.-:�tr1_L.j :o�SV.., :�}:·? _:!:'":..; - (·_�-_?= .= ::l-:: - ".. -.":.":

 :. ..-:�t-�,.

-+-_l_1[, 

f.: - : .Sr.ti.:l. 

J."1f::::.t·.lr.at-=lJ, I _;�·�:.:! n :t:t;o:.J the 1::.;:�-'>t m-.=::;:.:.n•.: ·r:u: l L-:=:..:.e-�'= tr ..:;-: ":.� :oc.::;.::·:::L.::r. 

?:.::r: f:)_c :he n::::e-::;.sa:::,r :1:.cd p::.;t.::·.L-:'>n :mp c··-=rr . .;r:r!' r.=:-e:-::=: -c :_:-;.::_u::-= :::- .:r.· -:.:L:n ::::::ess 

��-:1t r- r:ne t"i,:� b£:::""J::e mo·:::c; ::;::r-.-.•ar•' •.-1:. h 'h':' r-!::n .. n: ti:;k"' �:ois.:.r:1 ;::-"'""::C. 

�-i1,; r. .tHll:·�r 1r - :"J1te "l-Si ':f?r.s has be�n ln:-::::.:=ln'] a 1 r � �-� ·-i� -;�p �r .. � .. ���-= i= .. p1 -2.- i ·r. 0.7,.":;r.-; 

i'2�-: -:.: � -:� :1�1" 't i:1r:�rim .:r:::e�:J p:Jln:. ;�e;:,ds :c bF aol; :·? dr.:..omL.:.t::c tr.� ;: .r::.:::-.staj 

;: :: ::n-11: L . 

• 'Jr.-je::--=:-�n-: ':::7.--: �'.fi:!"j:lli': r.-:-::J-5 1:::1 sn=:::'a' t"l\"' ntr·r!pr. [ -)"}(! r:::-pcs<:-:1 :::-r • .:�r:-:•-ii::r. ?(t-:-':3, 

t l": l'ud·1ri·111��Jg �t'"Ct;SS C:J ::;.':.: J.=:k:= is :;� ·:i.�l ' .. rt-:, "]>:; t-·ut: .

. ir- "11 '1 Si''"''.�.J t-'':

 '> l.lJi. 

;:..Ldt.j ?r. r;· _ __ _, r.'?�->r-r .: rn!)e -cr.�:. =.::r�il.! __ :;.;;i..!":-t<:L! n ..: ::' n� -r:r 

.

. ::�t::'::" .Jr .•. tl-:o::H: .:.r tr...: 

pt.:.t:.:.__:, in �r::Jcrd!, w 1l �e Z:djr-=ss�:! ::e:o::-s a p:a:-. is .:sp�:-cv'=d. 

-:-: ar.k J:lU ;::;,:: :3:tEJg <:ne ::.:r.-: r.o :.�at my ott� --:nci �C'na 1".1--:-k •.-1:.t:� JDU:: r::--j-:-:, 

;:;_;_,, --=t .,ly, 

:.:1::: .. -=tt_.�· .. �.:;i-1.:-., =t ·.:>:"'.C�r:;�-:: =�.J p.:. u--: ?.:..:.�c:n r�5l.•::f:nt.. 
Comment t.t .. \<J 0 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Mark D [wakeboarder1 2 1 3@gmail.com] 

Sent: Saturday. January 1 3. 2007 2:03 PM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Subject: Folsom Lake General Plan: Please don't close down the lake. 

Dear Sir. 

Page I of 1 

I have recently read about the plans for shoring up and reinforcing the Folsom Lake Dam. It has come to 

my attention that this process may include the closing down of Folsom Point, Beals Point and parts of 

Granite Bay. My family and I engage in recreational activities such as wakeboarding and waterski ing on 

Folsom Lake every summer and have been doing so for many years and l would hate to see patt of the 

Lake closed off. As you may be aware, the lake is already crowded and l ines for boat launching are long. 

Closing down any pat1 of the lake for the several years it would take to complete this project would only 

add to the crowding on the water and hassle at the marinas and ramps. I realize that work on the dam and 

recreational areas around the lake may be necessaty for the long-term saftey and protection of the lake. 

however 1 would ask you to consider mini rnal izing the amount of the lake that needs to be closed. It 

would be a shame to see such a fine part of Northern Cal ifornia lose its recrational value due to overcrowding and waterway restriction. Thank you for you time. 

Sincerely. 

Mark Duer 

I 16 �007 
Comment II-� I 0 l 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Tim Steele [timothy-steele@sbcglobal.net) 

Sent: Saturday, January 1 3, 2007 1 0:30 AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Subject: Folsom Point 

Pag� I of I 

Please let me know what the rationale is for attempting to close Dyke 8? 1 have heard that it may be 

closed for up to 7 years for a new construction project. That seems a bit excessive to me. 

If this is true. please let me know any specifics you may have so I can address them to the proper staff. 

The Closing of Dyke 8 would significantly impact the daily/weekly and annual recreation of many 

Folsom Citizens. 

Respectfu II y 

-Tim Steele 
Comment t�o.W � � 

Porter, Stacy 

From: BETHCARLSE@aol.com 

Sent: Saturday, January 1 3. 2007 1 0:20 AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Subject: Regarding Closing Folsom Point 

Dear Mr. Oliver: 

Page I of I 

J am a resident of Folsom and specifically of the neighborhood next to the entrance to Folsom Point called 

Briggs Ranch. We use the Folsom Point access no less than once a week during the spring and summer for 

our boat. My husband runs there every single day with his dog. My husband and I are also business owners in 

the City of Folsom and have been residents for over 15 years. We feel very strongly that the City will 

be HARMED GREATLY by the closing of Folsom Point. The City has already been harmed greatly by the 

closing of the Dam Road. I understand that there needs to be a place to stage equipment. etc. but there must 

be another location that would do less harm. Folsom Lake is the jewel of the City. You've already made it 

difficult to get to Seal's Point by the closing of the Dam Road and anyone who know's about the lake access. 

know's the limited space available at Brown's Ravine. WHAT DO YOU EXPECT THE RESIDENTS TO DO 

FOR THE NEXT 7 YEARS? There has got to be another solution. 

Beth and Jim Carlsen 

1 07 Jumper Ct. 

Folsom. CA 95630 

I 16 201)7 
Comment** j 0) 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Lewis Becker [cblostinspace@sbcglobal.net] 

Sent: Saturday. January 13, 2007 2:31AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Subject: closing of Folsom Point 

Dear Sir, 

Page I o�- I 

I am writing to ask for you to not close Folsom Point due its potential use as a staging point. It provides 

much needed access and we would l ike to see an alternative with less public impact considered. Thank 

you. 

Cindy Becker 

Folsom, CA 
Comment #• IVL\' 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Teri or Jim [tmhjlt@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Friday. January 12, 2007 3:05 PM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Subject: closure of Folsom Point 

i'vl r 0 I i ver. 

Page I of I 

Just heard of the possible closing of Folsom Point. I realize the work on the dam requires certain 

inconveniences. My family and I have been in Folsom 18 years and use that access I to 4 t[mes per 

week. Running. mountain biking or just hiking. 

This vvould detract from our comminity in a major way. It would CHANGE our commity. Lets not be 

just another town. There must be another way. 

Thanks For listening. 

Jim Thompson 

127 Bittercreek Dr 

Folsom 

Tl1e Thompsons 

lmi)illtt � uhnn,CUIIJ 

The fish are biting. 

(id more \'hlh'rl'o on your site using j'ulwnLSenn:b ru:k.!il. 

I I(, 2lll J7 
Comment#• l OS 

Porter, Stacy 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Michael Hardoin (hardoin@us.ibm.com] 

Friday, January 1 2, 2007 1 2:10 PM 

soliver@m p. usbr. gov 

terihardoin@comcast. net 

Folsom Point Closer- This is not Acceptable 

Importance: High 

Mr. Oliver. 

Page I of I 

I am a resident of Folsom, Ca and am writing to you today to request that the B ureau of Reclamation 

come up with alternatives to closing Folsom Point for up to 7 years during the Folsom Dam maintenance 

project. 

Folsom Point is the only Folsom Lake access point for Folsom residence and closing this facility would 

be detrimental to Folsom Businesses and would negatively impact our quality of life in Folsom. Closing 

for up to 7 years would be a nightmare. This is simply not acceptable and there are alternatives that 

would be a win win for everyone. 

There are other options. Build a ne'vv access point between Folsom Point and the Dam or at some other 

part of the lake that does not disrupt existing access points. This is a minor cost relative to the budget for 

the total project and would allow the Folsom Dam project to proceed without the significantly negative 

impact closing Folsom Point would have on thousands of people. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Regards. 

MichaelS. Hardoin 

West System P Sales Executive 

IBM Corporation 

"Impossible" only describes the degree of difticulty 

hardoin {Yus.ibm.com 

916.641 .4035 - office 

9 1 6.996.793 1 - cell 

I I I> 2tJu7 
Comment I#• It? (p 

Porter, Stacy 

From: ankhelyi@comcast.net 

Sent: Friday, January 1 2. 2007 11:52 AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Cc: rebecca.a.victorine@usace.army.mil 

Subject: Folsom Bridge Construction 

Dear Sir, 

Page I of I 

I am a resident of Folsom and very concerned \.vith the proposal to close access to Folsom Lake in 

Folsom for 

seven years, during the construction of the new bridge. I ask that you consider the economic 

stress this would place on our city. Folsom's tourism and housing markets are tied into the lake. 

We are a lakefront community. Seven years is an unreasonable time to close this part of 

our community. There are other alternatives. Please seek another solution . 

Respectively, 

Angela Ankhelyi 
Comment #• I 0 1' 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Susan Zaffree [szaffree@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 8:59 AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Subject: Please keep Folsom Point open 

Page I of I 

Please keep our access to Folsom Lake open. We util ize Folsom Point more than any other entrance to 

the lake. 

Chris and Susan Zaffree 

Folsom, CA 

TV dinner still cooling? 

.Ch�ck_Qul "Tonjg!_H's ick '' on Yahoo! TV. 
Comment # ..

 } 0� 

Porter, Stacy 

From: LFLESCAUL T@aol.com 

Sent: Friday, January 12. 2007 8:57 AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Subject: DO NOT CLOSE FOLSOM PO INTI 

Pag� I o1·· I 

Please reconsider taking away such a beautiful park setting and recreation area from our cityl There must be 

another "staging" area closer to the damn, behind the blocked off Damn Road area. 

As a fifteen year Folsom resident residing in Briggs Ranch, we utilize Folsom Point every day as a place to take 

walks, relax. and view the magnificent lake. 

As a professional in the relocation industry who provides "candidate tours" to area firms, this location was always 

a highlight of my tour in my quest to help "sell" the best and brightest candidates select a relocation to Folsom. 

Not many other cities in this state boast a beautiful lake and many professionals from around the country and 

around the world elected to take a relocation and accept their job offer because of this lake and all that it has to 

offer. 

Please, please reconsider this choice. Do not allow this decision to impact our city for seven years - it would be 

such a shame. 

Sincerely, 

Lynda Lescault 

Chamness Relocation Services 

9 1 6-608-8894 

I I I) 2!HJ7 
Comment #liM / 0 'f 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Doug Zezoff, CPA [dougz@szcpas.com) 

Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 8:26 AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Cc: lynette.zezoff@hp.com 

Subject: Don't close Folsom Point 

Page I o t' I 

[ have lived in Folsom for 20 years and one the highl ights is being able to go to Folsom Point. Don 't 

ruin this. You need to find another location to do your work. 

Please call me to discuss. 

Thanks 

Doug Zezoff 

Sense Zezoff & Company 

CerUfted Public Accountants 

(916) 969-1660 

(916) 726-6740 (Fax) 

dougz@szcpa s. com 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: Unauthorized Interception of lhls electronic mail communication could be a violation 

of federal law. The Information contained in this email is intended for the us-e of the lndivldll<'ll or entity to h ch It 

Is addressed and may contain Information that is pnvlleged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under 

applicable law If you have received this transmission in error, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, 

copying, distribution or the laking of any action in reliance on the contents of this informatton is strictly p ohibited, 

and we request that you Immediately notify us by electronic matl or telephone at 916-969-1660, and destroy the 

orlginal message as soon as possible. 

\\'� arc also rcquir�:d by IRS Cm.:ulotr 230 to inform L un less olhen, isc exprcs:dy i1\dic<rred. any federal tm. ad., icc: 

l:Ontuined n lhis �:ommun•cation. includ[ng auuchrnc:m� anJ enchHure-;. is nol inr<:"nd�cl or wrillcn to be u'SI:d. unJ llHty nol l� 

used, for the purpose of(i) avoidin!! t •• x-rdatl!d p�o:nalt 1CS umh:r the l ntcrn.11 Rc\cnuc Cod.: m (iil pro11101 ing. mar�t·ting or 

recommending tn anoth�:r 11Jrty :m) lilX-1 d.llell matter,. adJresscu hcn:au. 

I I (1 �(II J.., 
Porter, Stacy 

Fmmo J•m c.,.,o �'""'@'"''""""'I 

S.nl: Mood•y ''""""! 15, 2007 10 OS PM 

Too .,:.;c·@mp """ gov 

Cc· odm•n<IOP'@'"som "" co, tMm•ym@folscm " "' 

Subjoct: we w.sh to go oo '"'"'" 

Soo"" Ol""'r 

'"'"'" a/ Rectan"""' 

7794 Folsoe> Dam RooJ 

Fc<SCM, CA �IOJ<l 

on """"' of ouc ram"'· "' w Sh to go on '"""" " Fo'"''" '"""""" tO<Il st<ongly "'"'"'any pan by "'' 

"""""il R«Jamat.on to"""' Folwm ''""t to p.Or" '"'�t,onot ""'· 

We ""' "'" t.,tthe """"" """"' '"'""''o"" """ d •t> "'"""""" " a powt"9" ••·d ""' ' "''"· ""'

""''. ""'''! 

F-m "'"'"""' ""'""" "" """'' tu Fol;om Poml !luc muw>g to G<an•t• "''· ""'''' Pcxot •"" """""" Rdw., 

wwto """' Lwc "'"''""'" one, tho"""""" ""'9' or the "''"' '�'"" Lioko o:es ,,. """" num"""' 

ec.uoomentat '"""" P<Oble>ls, ono two, t"" coaos tllccugh Clid To"" Fc<soM ond onto Gron to Bay ar.o """"' 

"""' "'" oe •mp>t!OO r rum tOe '"'"" t<o'f>c. A tr.cd p<oblern wco� be ""' ""'""'"" offoct on otn"' ""' otos, 

""'"'' as """ Natoma. rccm the '"""' "'"""'away (,""' G"" to"''' """'"' Pc.rt and ""'""''""�no'"""' 

"'"" """'" capa�t, 

We WCYiil SU!i!IOS\ lhOt Oil {l/ tilCSC ]>01<:1'1�11 J'<O!liO;'I; ' C.OO l>O OVO!tl<>l l>r ilt:v.ong a �· '""" piO" 10 wh<i1 

"''"'m P<Hnt "m""' """ fur "'"'"' '""""'"'""' ""' 

s"'"'"'· 

·J•� C>SS o � """""' M"'ona 

Fol'"'m ""'""""' 

198 W•llcw Cceok Dm<• 

Folwm CA 91630 

(916) 00<·961< 
Comment II-* fH 

Porter, Stacy 

From: jme530@netzero.com 

Sent: Tuesday, January 1 6. 2007 9:47 AM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Cc: todddrybread@yahoo.com 

Subject: Closure of Folsom Point 

Dear S ir, 

Page I of I 

It was brought to my attention that you are considering closing Folsom Point to utll ize the space for 

storage. I have serious concerns about this decision. I have been the manager at a local health club 

since 1 995 and many of my members util ize that access to the lake. They train for triathlons. walk their 

dogs, enjoy time with their children. and gather with friends among other activities It would sadden me 

to think that you would be l imiting local residents to the lake access. Please reconsider the dec ision to 

use Folsom Point as a staging area. There has got to be an alternative place to store the materials need 

for the repairs. 1 would appreciate a response to my concern. If I can assist in any way please do not 

hesitate to ask. I also know of several other individuals ·who are passionate about saving our gathering 

place and they would be interested in helping find an alternative as well. Thank you for taking the time 

to read my email. 

.lam ie Ellsworth 

PEAK Health & F itness (Formerly M ue l ler Fitness) 

2222 Francisco Drive #290 

El Dorado Hil ls. CA 95762 

( 9 1 6)933-9448 

l I 7 �007 
Comment I#. /I� 

Porter, Stacy 

From: darcie eichner [d.eichner@sbcglobal.net] 

Sent: Tuesday. January 1 6. 2007 8:24 PM 

To: sofiver@mp.usbr.gov 

Cc: rebecca. a. victorine@usace.army.mil 

Subject: folsom point 

Page I of I 

This is a concern regarding convienent access to Folsom Lake. Please do not close the lake entrance at 

Folsom Point. 

S incerely. 

Darcie Eichner (a Folsom resident) 

l I' 201)7 
Comment #161 } /3 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Vicky Cackler (vkytkytovy@comcast.net] 

Sent: Wednesday, January 1 7, 2007 9:55 AM 

To: Rebecca. a. victorine@usace.army. mil; soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

S ubject: FW: Folsom Point closing 

Dear ivlr. Oiver and Mrs. V ictorine. 

Page I of 2 

A ttached is the e-mail that J just sent to you regarding the closing of Folsom Point. While messages 

are making the rounds in our neighborhood encouraging us to voice our displeasure at the closing of 

Folsom Point, my understanding was that the closure was due to the building of the planned bridge. 

A fter reading another e-mail which l received just shortly after the one I sent you. I see my mistake and 

that the closure is due to the retrofit of the dam. 

However, my comments remain the same as this is yet, as I said below, another slap in the face for the 

residents of Briggs Ranch. Ho ..

 v many ways can The City and the Bureau of Reclaimation choose to 

affect one neighborhood? 

My request is that another location for the staging area be chosen. The residents of Briggs Ranch stand 

to loose prope1ty value, have increased traffic pouring through, and the noise levels caused by the 

construction of the bridge followed by it's use, will be unpleasant to deal with to say the least. To add to 

that the closure of Folsom Point, is just not right. Not to mention the mess. traffic i ssues and noise due 

to the construction of the retrofit. 

Thank you for I isteni ng. Vicky 

-------------- Forwarded Message: -------------­

From: vkytkytovy·ZU.comcast.net (Vicky Cackler) 

To: Rebecca.a. victorine@usace.army .m i I. soli ver'll.mp. usbr.gov 

Subject: Folsom Point closing 

Date: Wed. 17 Jan 2007 17:28:53 +0000 

Dear 1'vlr. Oliver and Ms. V ictorine. 

tvly husband and I are Briggs Ranch residents and understand that you plan to close Folsom 

Point to use as a staging area for the building of the new bridge. 

I want to express my concern for several reasons. For the residents of Briggs Ranch (there are 

over 600 homes in this neighborhood). who have already been hit hard by the closi ng ot' the dam 

road in the first place. and wi II be dramatically effected by the increase in traff-ic once the ne\v 

bridge opens due to building up of the Empire Ranch and El Dorado Hills areas in the years 

since the darn \vas closed. this is just another slap in the face. 

The building of the bridge stands to cause huge noise levds. i ncreased traffic poming through 

and behind our neighborhood. and thus. a decrease in our property values. Closing Folsom 

Point. H·hich is one of the features that dra\\ s people to live in Briggs Ranch. will funhcr cause 0 

decline ro the value of our neighborhood speci tica lly. 

I 17 �IH)7 
Page 2 of 2 

Comment # .. \ \4t J 

My second area of concern is for the residents of Folsom in general. Folsom Point serves as an 

entrance for many in the area of recreation. People bike. walk and boat from this point. and 

while yes. there are other areas to begin your day of fun. this is a convenient place for so many 

and again a reason ro have chosen to live in the immediate area. 

I think I detinitely speak for the residents of Briggs Ranch when I say - we have had 

enough. While building a bridge is necessary due to the increased population - we are already 

being hurt by it's determined placement when there were other o ptions. It is time to spread some 

of the pain and find another location to work from. 

Sincerely, 

Vicky Cackler 

I 08 Strouse Ct. 

Folsom, CA 95630 

I I 7 �007 
Comment #. II f!f 

Chan, Allison 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

ckel@comcast. net 

Wednesday, January 1 7. 2007 7:21 PM 

soliver@mp. usbr.gov; mfinnegan@mp .usbr.gov 

themayor@folsom.ca.usericking@folsom .ca. us; corrprincess@ardennet. com; 

smiklos@folsom.ca.us: jstarsky@folsom.ca.us 

DONT COSE FOLSOM POINT 

: ::· •.. jl .10 , .,. ;: -:::; •.h"' � "' "' -: F: ""'..:;_ :rr. ;: _:-.-: ! : Jo.: r ;: ,-, L - .,. • .. : - r ·< �leE i.:. ::� !:-3 :1;:

:.,;: ·;.: 

lrnr;.::"':�e ad e nh.,.:!"l . e lhe J�·\1:-.:; -,:·.j .:icl.:n. ?G::

 : tc .:. s , I ·..::>.rer.t! � - :.c :: :'f _ : · .. s. [:;· .. ,e·:-2::,? ::. 31Jl: 

?::: :·. t :s :,� ::i s=::es3 ': .. ? 3"":n a�� r •• :.: r�.::: --:tE: r.:.��- ::: :=-�-=� 3!1·:1 .. : � :3::�e i - -· t 

r-:s .:."l�n -.:; .an� · · : ::_ r. ..:J :s us-: �n.:.s 3-�:::.s::. � r: ·.�·.:-:- r ts..: .1.

- �lmosr: ·"

·."'i:t:.J-' :fa"/. �··=·-(�:- � -7-:n 

''· "'L �inJ :ii'J J:-g, _·unn ... nJ, .. �; -l .. !'!g, ::a .. .:;:_j:., r - -r:_ l r.:, t· i!' . , J, � ��/ ' ··. � '"� r�! ;r;; ::�. J.. l. ir':!:-. , 

..: � :.:.:itl :l .J 01 mooc: _ � .j '" Jr soJ :·. o;.:. r , tr.Ls ::�::,_;�::!3 :..:; lr.·:a l uat. .. o: t - ?_::..:Lm r�'l Ji::. ::s "':::! ·;i :;i :: .::s . 

r .::ron';)J. y app0S2 :l-:e : lvs .tr-: _f f l s-.;ru =c-� :.-

. Sta·:.? i- ·=c::-ee:

::i::-: _n_ [·c.: J. 1: :.-: ::s-=: :" �i ..

 - :-. .:::-

_: _ '- �rn3 -: i·.;� s �: t C-:.:.3 pr�pozal , as :.:t .. :=-in'] thi .: ::em 1s ��r-.e.c�e � : a�:-1-: . 
Comment #Ml l l' � 

Porter, Stacy 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Chris Storz [chrisstorz@hotmail.com] 

Wednesday. January 1 7, 2007 6:53 PM 

soliver@mp. usbr.gov; mfinnegan@mp.usbr.gov 

Folsom Point Closure - UNACCEPTABLE 

I 3� .: ! .. · ,_u1 =· ·- ::; = p .:. ..J�G.se j _:� ..

 .=; Jr � :: I:: _ ::.:Jr.. .J l !": ::: ?.. � .. ;..� ::3.. ·

.::

· 

r.:.::·� :c· .. L .. br. l 3 U t;)CGef--�t�..;, �0 'h::, 0. ·?.� : 1 �· . :: :C::1 .3':H; 'lr. .i .5UC.� .!!'I J · ;, l : . JT,::.L! :� _ ::i '"'2 · ?.�. c''�:' 

:· -. t .:...5' us�-.. ti :::s:-: :2 -: : ::�:n::tL.:1 i ·- ,. :fl-::'Pr� :--3 : :� _: _:,u J · ��'' : n� �-.. �== :"::. -:-�·=t- . i r: '} , ·c.:.�-:-� �-� , 

:: tnn_:�g, b 5 - _ 1'3 , - ::.L : ":" , -:t_r. ·i �::57 ..:.1 .: =: _.:.:� ·.

·

:�.�.. �-:) b� -:n ::- s ? . .:

5!:.-: : r.� i.:ic:::­

.!l !:err.i!i- 1 -_;-:- sc_,._ J - _;_ ::r:s, -:;:..3 ..:l .:: .3 i 7i. � ,.

-=-: rr; :1 :: :.3 :- _ -: ; ::.. ... 

;;_ n :: ' s _;:; i - - S:1::1� L:: r. f. :. ;; -. :':.5·· . .:; ::. -.:.:.1 : - )-V-::- ::: :-�.:;:: pp _; 

'·I :Ci=' : /I she;: � .:.na . ::.sn . .:.::�,·:: ::1 ::or.: 3'1 ::. . -: .:·_ : ::=o3 .3: 3, I= ·� nr:.:. .:=.:, �,;;. ·: �.:d.a:::.':=: l: 9�: : ::od.:: .. l:n::� ..: l i n:= 
Comment #Mifr \ 11 (j 

Porter, Stacy 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Lesley [ mslesd s@mac. com] 

Wednesday, January 17. 2007 6:51 PM 

soliver@mp. usbr.gov: mfinnegan@mp.usbr. gov 

Folsom Point Closure - An OUTRAGE I 

I .:o:� - ::]-i ::-l:j ::·.;: :::J :.1�-: t=· :·'"�> ;; •. :;=, :: -! - �· : ·-= -� ;;-.. _ .�._.r.: ?-:i::r. :::.a.-:.e ?- �c:-= � - .. r: .'-. - -1! T ... 

� --;�r - "" i ": ' ""�n .. s '1:1 :.-:: i:J th= .)- ;J .. - -� F . l s..Jr - ;:.. s• :r:--t.r:.:i� nq =�rr.r.. _ · 1=2 . F-- .:

 .. n 

� L ·: 1.:; ' : .;.:.' �1 t:; i..o'l.sT1i.3 .,-= : ·mrn· . n_ - ., !1"·1L.t.o? :.: _:-. :.c1J.;Jtl'- v ·· :,- �-::,� : ::- ·.-1-'l .

. : i ·.':J, i:J_ .. : r.q, 

::-t.:nning, boa :. ln .J , p i.;:� l ::.:nr:, .:c! i -.3 ::1-s �.:o '.·mulj be an ou:.::-ag-= . r:ee;.:;: '� r..:; :. :;;::­

� l ':·:or :-. :: t :r· s:>l t :. : :Ht ;; , as ::;J;:>s L �� J · .

l 

ro � :�r is .:;bs-lut.el:.r ur. a:·:::'!r- _ .:; ::< ? . 
Comment I#. 

Porter, Stacy 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

\ \1 

dgentry [donnarae@softcom.net] 

Wednesday, January 1 7, 2007 7:40 PM 

soliver@mp.usbr.gov: mfinnegan@mp.usbr.gov 

Folsom Point Closure 

s:rorJ::��.· jec� � - t:-:c ::. r:1� :s2:: :-� ::-3 1 �:-� :: : .S p 

.. 

j F'.) � .. -. ? 

• 

.: .:;. ;:_� -- � --11 .:

. 

__ ::; _� : 

�hi::; ;: :""'pcsi - :. :. on · - · . ::17! ept -H�t "" �h"' ,� ,,

� ; -= :;" t':1ts_m =t :; _l �u �t:• ::.J .:.r. �: - _::ur:.:.- l �s . 

t:' _ , � _ iil l•r. ih ..

.. s ta5- J Cj "-�, t _.L�:,.i . �.;> _ ;: _; • ..-.rrn.·J:-- !:':' mc.tr.;-=..-..: �: +- h.t� .• Jn - . - � _ �-r'":;,;t. : •. r h' \; · � , 

't'· :c i:· . .j, .CUMil.:_:�C), 1: , � Ll. �' r1 .:r.l. .:.:-. j, .3 nj �:.s = -'-.:;.3 .::-� ·,,• 'l .. J. �- , .� .. � _;... !" - , _;;: ;. ,.,.r. ::.!. •- : 

�1 :.:.-: : :--�a ti'/e s .. l � .:. ..;LS , ::3 ..:l �3i;1g n ..t? :. :. :r :: i � -1b3�l 1 :-.:. _/ _.:�_:C':-�·- t·j:.. : � . 

Oan�a ��n - :�, :rEe �si i� : = : �� . r-:3-� 
Comment II� 

Porter, Stacy 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Joanna Diaz Uojodorian@hotmail.com] 

Wednesday. January 1 7. 2007 7:52 PM 

soliver@mp. usbr.gov 

Folsom Point Closure 

.:· ··..-.:li:fl / vb., e� !:. ':.., rt·- t--: �- s-:.i - " ;;u ··-· c: rc .. s-·:-� � lJ1': �· 1-.:�o -9'-: t l :Hl -�-=e� ! �i-: is 

l:"- -'� · _:; - ,.:i.-n :; :.n.:.:.:;:p:.:;.::l� c..; th-2 re : c: fcl .::::. ;�r-j sT, :r-.un ::.:. ..

. 

� ..:::mnt. �. i. ': h:.3 . F-.l�;:

:n 

?_� r.:. _..; C�sej J' !':> :o ,n::.: o: comr:-. .:. :�· m-:rrce-r.= rh.r?ugh?ut ct-: "f·=a � t' :· �.·::l '<· OIJ, o 'i k ' :cJ, 

rJnn.:.nq, .ooa � : :: :;, pi :"n i -' n ;: , 1:-:d i:s rs .:

e �lot:_:J be :n � �t r::.!-:. ? ::. ::::.= ..: ::" • .= :. J.:r 

: 1 � ·-=-·l�I'.1t:" i·.;e. s� __ . : :...�r:.: , �� :� _ ,:ji:.y � : - s m �ci;-;· _s ::�-=�� u .:-.. r· · t..: .. -- -eF--aJ:_ c . 

-:-:-• • ;:k 1' -· �' 

;,,..: :JI: ::l ..Ji .:;.. 
Comment #ll

 \11 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Bob Jones [rmjones@softcom.net] 

Sent: Wednesday, January 1 7. 2007 7:25 PM 

To: soliver@mp.usbr.gov 

Page I o r' I 

Hello I want you to know I strongly object to the proposed closure of Folsom Point State Recreation 

Area! This proposition is unacceptable to me. the citizens of Folsom and surrounding communi ti es. 

Folsom Point is used by thousands of community members throughout the year for walking, biking, 

running. boating and picnicing. its closure would be an outrage. 

My childrens' school take the second graders on a walking field trip their yearly. Some years this is the 

only outside eductational activity the school could a fford. 

Folsom Point is the only access to Folsom Lake in the C ity of Folsom. Why would you want to c lose 

the only access. 

Please consider alternative solutions. as closing Folsom Poinr is absolutely unacceptable. 

Thank-you 

Kimberlee Jones 

I 1 8. 21Jt)7 
Comment #� l �0 

Porter, Stacy 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Mike Finnegan (MFINNEGAN@mp.usbr.gov] 

Thursday. January 25, 2007 7:28 AM 

Shawn Oliver 

Fwd: Closure of folsom point 

�,. �.�1 ;05 JA? .:._ . ...... :r · . � �� l :._ : ! � =�·l 

_ �t. m �� �aj c�� ·orn : 

'<� '.! l b� i-"·ns':.:; :i::� c::> -h.: :i_t·; :f 2::.:.s"'1:1 o::"' �'�r�· un"a..!. ::- l tts .r-:

:- i. ;:y-- -, ;.;;·. · _i;.· _ ·:1'..:::--=. 

�·.r-=: '•.;,.: .�.:.3 -a,� ·c;.ss 9'J��- ' :; n1r r 5: .-.: =:::-.:. ..:.r.a.'i.�..:-.e ':�1e . · . a t:.i3 ·.-;3 · 1 .. "'t>�- 1� �! ?.!. a=:s-� 

::::tr'.;( :.:-·J 

:.: :�n:i :,:-. :i:::e•.v 9i"!: 

.. -: -1 �·J" ' .. � � - ; l � -

� Jl2 __.n., · :..

 

.. c1 5 6�r) 

o- 2o�· 
Comment lt)IOr l�\ 

Porter, Stacy 

From: Chris Jennings [trg94@comcast.net] 

Sent: Thursday. January 25, 2007 7:23 PM 

To: Rebecca Victorine; Shawn Oliver 

Subject: Folsom Point 

Page I o�· I 

I understand that the Bureau of Reclamation proposes to close the Folsom Point recreation area for seven years 

to retrofit the Folsom Dam. I seemed to have missed the public hearings and the EIR. When were they and 

where do I get a copy? Surely there's a better, less disruptive, alternative. I visit the park nearly every other day 

to run. I bought my house. for among other reasons, because it's near Folsom Point. Put me down as being 

opposed. not only to the proposal, but also to the process by which this idea was hatched. Bad idea. Realty bad 

idea. Thank you. 

Chris Jennings 

1 26 Chambersburg Way 

Folsom. CA 95630 

91 6-983-9366 

PS: Aren't there burrowing owls out there? 

l 26. 2007