.a,. ".".!!_,.~_......:_:"..,; ~ q~< (!!." '\:10'., . .f ..... .)-/t, LJ...] 0_. I ° • l.-t- ! . \" • \' '" 0 I o i tVcNoiAKE RESEARCHI.JBf?AAY o 0 P.O"BOX 29 0 • UE~.V.NING. CA 93,041 IDSTORIC OVERVIEW OF THE RUSH CREEK AND LEE VINlNG CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS Project Managers 'Dorothea 1 Theodoratus Clinton M. Blount by Valerie H. Diamond Robert A. Hicks ..\ ..;' "0t- , f v.' fJ Submitted to Southern California' Edison Company Rosemead, California Theodoratus Cultural Research, Inc. Fair Oaks, California August 1988 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research o~ "the Rush Creek and Lee Vining hydroelectric systems was aided by many generous people. We are i~debte.d to.Dr. David White of the Environmental Affairs Division of" Southern California Edison Company (SCE) for his guidance throughout the planning and execution of the. work. Others at SCE's R~semead headquarters who were most helpful were William Myers, Bob Brown, and Gene " Griffith. Our work in the project areas was made Possible by SCE employees Tony Capitato, Don Clarkson, Dennis Osborn, and Stan Lloyd. We are also indebted to Mrs. Jenny Edwards for her kind assistance, .nd to Melodi Anderson for her f~ci1itation of imPortant work at the California State Archives. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Chapter fa= . INTRODUCTION 1 _ Location and Geography .1 Research Goals .. ~'- 1 Personnel ·.4 1 PURPOSES AND METHODS S 2 MOTIVES, PLANS, AND DEVELOPMENT: 1890s-1917 '7 James Stuart Cain 7 Delos Allen Chappell 9 Pacific Power Company 9 ~ RUSH CREEK. DEVELOPMENT: THREE STAGES, 1915-1917 13 Stage One: Transportation and Initial Construction 13 Stage Two: Dams and Powerhouse 19 Stage Three: Second Flowline and Generating Unit 20 4 A NEW MARKET, IMPROVEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION: 1917-1924 22 Rush Creek and Nevada-California and Southern Sierras Power Companies 22 Lee Vining Creek Developments . 2S Initial Development Under Nevada-California Power Company 26 Second Phase of Development Under . Sout~ern Sierras Power Company 28 S REFINEMENTS, CONTROVERSY, AND THE LOST MARKET: 1925-1943 33 System Refinements 33 Los Angeles Controversy 34 Loss of Imperial and Coachella Valleys Markets 3S 6 CONSOLIDATION AND MERGER: 1943-PRESENT 39 Conclusion 40 REFERENCES CITED 42 MAPS 1 SCE Hydroelectric Projects . 2 2 Lee Vining Creek and Rush Creek Hydroelectric Projects 3 iii TABLES 1 California's Highest Head Hydroelectric'Plants-1919 14 2 Largest Average Horsepower for Individual Impulse Water Wheels, California Hydroelectric Plants-1919 15 3 California's Highest Head Hydroelectric Plants-1929 16 4 ,International' Commission on Large Dams Register, ," Major California Multi-Arch Dams~1909-1926 17 FIGURES 1 'The Nevada-California Electric Corporation 23 iv ·' .' INTRODUCTION The Rush Creek and Lee Vining Creek hydroelectric systems are early expressions of hydroelectric generation technology in California. Now owned and operated by Southern California Edison Company (SC~), these systems are sufficiently old. to warrant consideration. as historic properties. SCE, .as a requirement for project relicensing by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, is currently evaluating' these systems to determine their historical significance ~nd potential eligibility for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The results of the evaluation process will also aidSCE and regulatory agencies in future management of the systems.">:;> Location and Geography . The Rush Creek and Lee Vining Creek hydroelectric systems, along with two other SCE systems, Bishop Creek and Lundy, are located on the steep eastern slope of the central and southern Sierra Nevada Range (Map 1). The Sierra Nevada creates a vast rain shadow, with most of the precipitation falling as rain and snow on its more gentle western slope. However, at high elevations there is sufficient snowfall on the eastern side of the crest to create permanent, easterly flowing streams. This hydrologic regime, combined with the precipitous mountain slope, provided the basis for early and successful development of hydroelectric generation. The Lundy, Rush Creek and Lee Vining Creek systems are approximately 270 air miles north of 'Los Angeles and directly east of Tioga Pass and Yosemite National Park. The Lundy Project has been previously assessed and recommended as ineligible for NRHP (National Register of Historic Places) listing by White (1985). The neighboring Bishop Creek Hydroelectric System has been recommended asa historic district, and is currently being evaluated by the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) for NRHP eligibility (TCR 1988). The Lee Vining Creek System consists of three reservoirs (Saddlebag, Rhinedollar [Ellery], and Tioga) and a single powerhouse (Poole) along the upper reaches of Lee Vining Creek, and a substation in the town of Lee Vining. The Rush Creek System is comprised of three reservoirs (Rush Meadows [Waugh], Gem, and. Agnew) and one powerhouse (Rush Creek) (Map 2). Research Goals The purpose of overview research on Rush Creek and Lee Vining Creek systems was' to document the development·of these systems. This historical background will be used to evaluate the architectural and other potentially historic elements of the systems and, if appropriate, the National Register eligibility of one or both of the systems. I MAP 1 Southern ca'Ifornia Edison C"mpany .... HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS- Lundy 1 -N- • Loa AnoeI- o7 TCR J9I8 2 J,' \ -,~>\~";,...: .. 1... .\ "'( .~ . ~ '., ~\:?\:'- "I.- ............... ~ - \. .... , :. ::V-' .... ; ~,,~ ... ~'\ . ~ "~::' r1 0 .... _ I POOLE POWERHOUSE LEE VINING .... --' _. SUBSTATION ~, ... ",..,..."", ~- ..... ':" \ ' ~ "L_(£''-''1' " •••. -. \._ ...... n.. ~ .. ...-taO ~\. ........ -~~ ~. , I' "r__ , Q.~:'" _.~~ t,J u.. C',.;; i ::~ .... ". "'­ .......I"'··,", .' , - I ,"" ' ~I c..~. \ . ~.,. , I' C\). 0 ..' l ,." ....... -." I''( ,. I I .-1' .. '/ '~-'~ ... ... " I' \. MAP 2 .. \ ~c:.w... , ../, .....c:....., '" /( LEE VINING CREEK \ :,,,. ... _ .._} 1 RUSH CREEK "-'"I\"'" ·HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS ,... '; ~ , , '-'.... ~ "(- ~ .~ .,.. ,J . , , I I \ ,,, l J 1 l f I!J r...... ·....~·_J I .I ....I, " , ,../ ,..,,/ , ,) I ~ , lIILI \ : !I TCIt .,. 3 Personnel - Tpis research was conducted -during the fall and winter months of 1987-1988. Researcp for the study was conducted by historian Valerie Diamond, who also -authored the report. Robert Hicks contributed to the research and produced the maps. Mildred Kolander was. in charge of ·technical editing and report production. Project managers were Dorothea J Theodoratus and Clinton Blount. 4 CHAPTER 1 PURPOSES AND METHODS This report is a historic overview of the Rush Creek' and Lee Vining Creek hydroelectric systems located in Mono County. The overview provides background information on the plants and describes their historic significance in ~hec::ontextof local and regional history.>i-;:/1i',>/%1".: .,_ . "'",""".'- 5~::-~~~:.r(':"' In September 1987, while at Bishop Creek conducting research for'an architectural evaluation of the Bishop Creek Hydroelectric System (TCR 1988), research began on the history of the power plants at Rush and Lee Vining creeks~ For this study, a broader vanety of printed and documentary resources had to be examined to provide information necessary for the historical overview.]"lle Division Office's files contain drawings, maps, plans, brief'historical summaries,'and other materials which were helpful in this phase of study. One. of the rnost"lmportant finds located in these files was the Agreement. of Sale' and Pm:'chase'~between Southern Sierras Power Company and the City of Los Angeles' Departmentaf Water and Power, which would later prove the key to understanding the controversy over w4ter rights in the Mono Basin area. ., At the Division Office, discussions were held with many Southern California Edison employees, several of whom had also worked for California Electric Power Company. Through these communications, valuable details were obtained regarding the system's' operation and repairs and changes made over the years. Additionally, the spouse of one of Southern California Edison Company's Bishop Creek employees, who is currently compiling a history of the Bishop Hydro Division, was interviewed, and a draft copy of her work was obtained for future study. Also during the September visit, local repositories in Inyo County were explored for both published and unpublished documents and records. The Inyo County Free Library in Bishop possesses numerous newspaper articles, pamphlets, and local and regional histories containing information about Inyo and Mono counties' hydroelectric power history. Of importance in this collection was W. A. Chalfant's The Story of Inyo (1933), a county history of considerable detail. Following the trip to Bishop Creek, a visit was made to the Corporate Offices of Southern California Edison Company in Rosemead. In the Hydro Generation Office, current files on the Rush and Lee Vining power plants were canvassed for possible historical details. (The office's historic files stored in a different repository were unavailable for study due to earthquake damage at the archive.) At' the Corporate Library, Nevada-California Electric. Corporation and Sierras Service bulletins were found rich in detail on both the corporate and construction history of the various plants. William Myers of Southern California Edison Company's Corporate Communications was also consulted for his insight into the printed, documentary, and photographic resources available for study. Mr. Myers .volunteered the use