I would offer up that while the power plant within the Oroville dam might be considered Critical Energy Infrastructure, the spillway is not. In my opinion, of course.
They’re painting the complex with a very wide brush.
I agree. I believe it will come back to haunt them, big time. How?
Let me give a theoretical scenario- call it "flubber failure".
(1) Dam Flood control Inspections for 2014/2015/2016 stated "satisfactory" for "flubber failure" as it was inspected, tested, analyzed and noted (including photos). FERC even noted to look for a related "flubber failure" in a Part 12 Category 1 recommendation. DWR said "done - is satisfactory".
(2) After 3 years of doing, what they say, is competent "flubber failure analysis" and thorough inspections, we arrive in 2017 with the blowout crisis of the spillway chute & the crisis of the Emergency Spillway disaster (both non "flubber failure" related).
(3) FERC orders independent experts into the mix.
(4) Experts find very damaging information on the spillway (flaws & operational maintenance info which with any competency would have been fixed or raised as a serious problem - but never was).
(5) DWR say's to press "flat tires happen".
(6) Experts destroy "flat tires happen" meme.
(7) DWR is roasted in the press by articles quoting the early findings of experts.
(8) DWR performs another "flubber inspection" - and lo and behold they find "flat tires" waiting to happen (that can be vulnerable in a scenario to DHS security standards). Never mind all of their prior "flubber inspections" testing and analysis found anything wrong. It was "satisfactory".
(9) DWR is about to be roasted thoroughly in the next fully data augmented ground penetrating radar report from the Experts (i.e. report: "flat tires" everywhere on the remaining spillway waiting to happen at any moment). [which could panic the public - and while DWR's engineering crisis is already in the world spotlight]. DWR sees this coming.
(10) DWR beats the expert's report timing release by a letter notifying FERC of findings from their "flubber failure inspection" that could be deemed a security risk. DWR specifically denotes a "Critical Energy Infrastructure Information" (CEII) in their cover letter (which if granted would seal subsequent reports as all reports include all findings in the spillway including the experts' reports).
(11) FERC grants DWR a CEII status. All reports to "flubber failure" are tied to the expert's new spillway findings. Thus ALL spillway reports are "secret" to the press and the public.
= = The next shoe(s) to drop:
(12) The press is going to put 2+2 together on the "flubber failure" maneuver. How? The information is there if they look at the FERC document date sequence, structural failure inspection "flubber location" description, and apply a little mechanical engineering design knowledge of the "flubber failure" scenario (to "bad guy" tactics).
(13) The press is then going to figure out that this "flubber failure" security measure is a very remote scenario.
(14) Politicians are going to find out what this "flubber failure" security scenario is as they will hold hearings to get information. They may be under gag orders to not speak of such a scenario as this would be a DHS matter (classified as a security matter & to be kept confidential).
(15) Politicians will be fuming as this "flubber failure" as to why this scenario was submitted 2 days before the new expert's report was to be published.
(16) The press will be fuming as they likely will perceive it as a "dodge" by DWR on taking heat - besides the fact that DWR gave the OK for so many years, completely missing this "flubber failure" scenario - compounding a look of "incompetence". Deceit will be on the minds of the press, fully warranted or not.