DOCSLIB.ORG

A&B Irrigation District

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A&B Irrigation District Draft Environmental Assessment A&B Irrigation District – Unit A Pumping Plant #2 Minidoka County, Idaho U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Department of Agriculture Bureau of Reclamation Natural Resource Conservation Service Rural Development Pacific Northwest Region Idaho State Office Idaho State Office Middle Snake Field Office Boise, Idaho Boise, Idaho Boise, Idaho May 2014 Acronyms and Abbreviations A&B or District A&B Irrigation District ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AIRFA American Indian Religious Freedom Act APE Area of potential effect APLIC Avian Power Lines Interaction Committee B.P. Before present BLM Bureau of Land Management BMP Best Management Practice CEQ Council on Environmental Quality cfs cubic feet per second CGP Construction General Permit Comprehensive Plan Minidoka County’s Comprehensive Plan CWA Clean Water Act DPS distinct population segment EA Environmental Assessment EIRR Eastern Idaho Railroad EO Executive Order EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ESPA Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Development IDEQ Idaho Department of Environmental Quality IDFG Idaho Department of Fish and Game ITA Indian Trust Assets MBT Migratory Bird Treaties MOU Memorandum of Understanding NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NOAA Fisheries National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWR National Wildlife Refuge PEM palustrine emergent marsh Project Unit A Pumping Plant EA Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation RM river mile RMP Resource Management Plan ROW right-of-way SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TCP Traditional cultural properties TMP Transportation Management Plan USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations Chapter 1 Purpose and Need.......................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Location and Background ........................................................................... 1 1.2 Proposed Action ...................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action .................................................................................. 3 1.4 Authority ................................................................................................................. 5 1.5 Scoping of Issues and Concerns ............................................................................. 5 1.6 Regulatory Compliance .......................................................................................... 6 1.6.1 National Environmental Policy Act .......................................................... 6 1.6.2 Endangered Species Act (1973) ............................................................... 6 1.6.3 Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) ................................................ 6 1.6.4 National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 ............................................. 7 1.6.5 Executive Order 13007: Indian Sacred Sites ........................................... 7 1.6.6 Secretarial Order 3175: Department Responsibilities for Indian Trust Assets ........................................................................................................ 8 1.6.7 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice ...................................... 8 1.6.8 Executive Order 13514: Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performances ....................................................... 8 Chapter 2 Alternatives ................................................................................... 9 2.1 Alternative Development ........................................................................................ 9 2.2 Description of Alternatives ..................................................................................... 9 2.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ...................................................................... 12 2.2.2 Action Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 ............................................................... 12 Pumping Plant and Pipeline to the Common Point ................................ 15 Corridor from the Common Point to Delivery points ............................ 16 Staging Areas and Transmission Corridor(s) ......................................... 16 Construction of In-river Facilities .......................................................... 17 2.2.3 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ............................................................ 18 2.2.4 Alternative 3 ........................................................................................... 18 2.2.5 Alternative 4 ........................................................................................... 19 2.2.6 Summary of Action Alternatives ............................................................ 20 2.3 Alternatives Eliminated from Consideration ........................................................ 20 A&B Irrigation District – Unit A Pumping Plant #2 Draft Environmental Assessment i CONTENTS (CONTINUED) 2.4 Other Actions Considered for Cumulative Impact ............................................... 22 2.5 Summary Comparison of the Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives ........... 23 Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ......... 35 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 35 3.2 Land Use and Ownership ...................................................................................... 35 3.2.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................ 36 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................ 37 Alternative 1 – No Action ...................................................................... 38 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ............................................................ 39 Alternative 3 ........................................................................................... 40 Alternative 4 ........................................................................................... 41 3.3 Water Rights ......................................................................................................... 42 3.3.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................ 42 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................ 43 Alternative 1 – No Action ...................................................................... 43 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ............................................................ 43 Alternative 3 ........................................................................................... 44 Alternative 4 ........................................................................................... 44 3.4 Water Quantity ...................................................................................................... 44 3.4.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................ 44 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................ 45 Alternative 1 – No Action ...................................................................... 46 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ............................................................ 46 Alternative 3 ........................................................................................... 47 Alternative 4 ........................................................................................... 47 3.5 Water Quality ........................................................................................................ 47 3.5.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................ 48 3.5.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................ 48 Alternative 1 – No Action ...................................................................... 49 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ............................................................ 49 Alternative 3 ........................................................................................... 50 Alternative 4 ........................................................................................... 50 3.6 Noise ..................................................................................................................... 50 ii A&B Irrigation District – Unit A Pumping Plant #2 Draft Environmental Assessment CONTENTS (CONTINUED) 3.6.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................ 51 3.6.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................ 51 Alternative 1 – No Action ...................................................................... 53 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ............................................................ 53 Alternative 3 ..........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Records Relating to Railroads in the Cartographic Section of the National Archives
    REFERENCE INFORMATION PAPER 116 Records Relating to Railroads in the Cartographic Section of the national archives 1 Records Relating to Railroads in the Cartographic Section of the National Archives REFERENCE INFORMATION PAPER 116 National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC Compiled by Peter F. Brauer 2010 United States. National Archives and Records Administration. Records relating to railroads in the cartographic section of the National Archives / compiled by Peter F. Brauer.— Washington, DC : National Archives and Records Administration, 2010. p. ; cm.— (Reference information paper ; no 116) includes index. 1. United States. National Archives and Records Administration. Cartographic and Architectural Branch — Catalogs. 2. Railroads — United States — Armed Forces — History —Sources. 3. United States — Maps — Bibliography — Catalogs. I. Brauer, Peter F. II. Title. Cover: A section of a topographic quadrangle map produced by the U.S. Geological Survey showing the Union Pacific Railroad’s Bailey Yard in North Platte, Nebraska, 1983. The Bailey Yard is the largest railroad classification yard in the world. Maps like this one are useful in identifying the locations and names of railroads throughout the United States from the late 19th into the 21st century. (Topographic Quadrangle Maps—1:24,000, NE-North Platte West, 1983, Record Group 57) table of contents Preface vii PART I INTRODUCTION ix Origins of Railroad Records ix Selection Criteria xii Using This Guide xiii Researching the Records xiii Guides to Records xiv Related
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River Flow Augmentation Impact Analysis Appendix
    SNAKE RIVER FLOW AUGMENTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla District’s Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Boise, Idaho February 1999 Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) 1427i A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with large drawdown of Reclamation reservoirs. 1427r A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with reservoir elevations maintained near current levels. BA Biological assessment BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis (U.S. Department of Commerce) BETTER Box Exchange Transport Temperature Ecology Reservoir (a water quality model) BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs BID Burley Irrigation District BIOP Biological opinion BLM Bureau of Land Management B.P. Before present BPA Bonneville Power Administration CES Conservation Extension Service cfs Cubic feet per second Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CRFMP Columbia River Fish Mitigation Program CRP Conservation Reserve Program CVPIA Central Valley Project Improvement Act CWA Clean Water Act DO Dissolved Oxygen Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) DREW Drawdown Regional Economic Workgroup DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane EIS Environmental Impact Statement EP Effective Precipitation EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ETAW Evapotranspiration of Applied Water FCRPS Federal Columbia River Power System FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FIRE Finance, investment, and real estate HCNRA Hells Canyon National Recreation Area HUC Hydrologic unit code I.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Results of Spirit Leveling in Idaho
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR BULLETIN 487 RESULTS OF SPIRIT LEVELING IN IDAHO 1896 TO 1909, INCLUSIVE R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1911 CONTENTS. Pago. Introduction.............................................................. 5 Scope of the work.................................................... 5 Personnel............................................................. 5 Classification.......................................................... 5 Bench marks......................................................... (5 Datum............................................................... 6 Topographic maps................................ v .................. 7 Precise leveling........................................................... 7 Birch Creek and Weiser quadrangles (Canyon and AVashington counties)... 7 Primary leveling........................................................... 8 Cambridge, Meadows, Squaw Creek, and Weiser quadrangles (Boise and Washington counties)............................................... 8 St. Anthony and Victor quadrangles (Bingham and Fremont counties)... 15 Montpelier, Pocatello, Soda Springs, and Wayan quadrangles (Bannock and Bear Lake counties)................................................. 1C Hailey, Picabo, Sawtooth, and Soldier quadrangles (Blaine County)...... 20 Chatcolet Station, Kendrick, and Pullman quadrangles (Kootenai and Latah counties) .....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • All Hazard Mitigation Plan Twin Falls County, Idaho
    2008 TWIN FALLS COUNTY ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN OCTOBER 15, 2008 Preface The Twin Falls County All Hazard Mitigation Plan was developed in late fall of 2006 through the spring of 2008. It contains information pertaining to the hazards and hazard vulnerabilities faced by Twin Falls County. This Plan is designed to interface with the State of Idaho Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan published in November 2004 and updated in November 2007. This Plan has been developed as the Twin Falls County All Hazards Mitigation Plan (AHMP) however; the Plan was developed by an integrated effort from representatives from many of the jurisdictions in Twin Falls County. Each City will therefore be asked to endorse the AHMP and in turn participate in implementation of the Plan as it applies to the hazards in their respective jurisdictions. Further updates of this Plan will seek to increase multi-jurisdiction involvement. Twin Falls 1 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October 15, 2008 This Page Intentionally Blank Twin Falls 2 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October 15, 2008 Twin Falls 3 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October 15, 2008 This Page Intentionally Blank Twin Falls 4 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October 15, 2008 Twin Falls 5 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October 15, 2008 This Page Intentionally Blank Twin Falls 6 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October 15, 2008 This Page Intentionally Blank Twin Falls 7 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October 15, 2008 This Page Intentionally Blank Twin Falls 8 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October 15, 2008 Twin Falls 9 All Hazard Mitigation Plan October
    [Show full text]
  • Gateway West Draft SEIS, Executive Summary and Table of Contents
    BLM DRAFT Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Segments 8 and 9 of the Gateway West Transmission Line Project March 2016 Idaho State Ofice The BLM’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on public lands. BLM/ID/PL-15/100 The photograph used for the cover of the Supplemental EIS was taken in western Gooding County, Idaho, facing southeast toward a portion of the Oregon Trail, Key Observation Point C1512 in the National Historic Trails analysis. The transmission lines and towers depicted in this photograph are computer-generated simulations. Gateway West Transmission Line Project Environmental Impact Statement [ X ] Draft [ ] Final [ X ] Supplemental Lead Agency Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior Cooperating U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Ecological Services Division); National Park Service Agencies (National Trails Office, Pacific West Region, Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument); U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Idaho State Historic Preservation Office; Idaho Department of Fish and Game; the Idaho Governor’s Office of Energy Resources; City of Kuna; Twin Falls County, Idaho Responsible Tim Murphy BLM Idaho Officials State Director (Acting) For Information Jim Stobaugh Contact Project Manager 1340 Financial Blvd Reno, NV 89502 (775) 861-6478 Abstract On May 7, 2007, Idaho Power Company and PacifiCorp (doing business as Rocky Mountain Power), collectively known as the Proponents, applied to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for a right-of-way (ROW) grant to use the National System of Public Lands for portions of the Gateway West Transmission Line Project (Gateway West or Project).
    [Show full text]
  • Greater Yellowstone Trail
    Greater YellowstoneTrail CONCEPT PLAN | 2021 UPDATE The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under an award with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The substance and findings of the work are dedicated to the public. The author and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of the statements and interpretations contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government. Greater Yellowstone Trail CONCEPT PLAN | 2021 UPDATE STAKEHOLDER UPDATE MEETING Warm River and historic West Yellowstone Branch Railroad tunnel ACRONYMS BTNF- Bridger-Teton National Forest CDT- Continental Divide Trail CTNF- Caribou-Targhee National Forest CGNF- Custer-Gallatin National Forest FLAP- Federal Lands Access Program HUD- US Department of Housing & Urban Development IDPR-Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation ITD- Idaho Transportation Department NEPA- National Environmental Policy Act NPS- National Park Service OHV- Off-Highway Vehicle TVTAP- Teton Valley Trails & Pathways USFS- United States Forest Service WYDOT- Wyoming Department of Transportation 4 | CONCEPT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Stakeholder Meeting Update ...................................... 7 Executive Summary ........................................................ 19 Overall Trail Corridor Map ...............................................22 ACTIVE PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS: Introduction ......................................................................25 History & Regional Connections ...............................27
    [Show full text]
  • Download This
    NPS Form 10-900 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places NAT. REGlStlR OF HilfORie Registration Form NATIONAL PARK SERVI This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name: Salmon Falls Dam_______________________________ other name/site number: 83-17897_____________________________ 2. Location street & number Three Creek Highway ] not for publication city or town Roqerson X] vicinity state IDAHO code ID county Twin Falls code 083 zip code 83301 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this [ X ] nomination [ ] request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property [ X ] meets [ Jdoes not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant [ ] nationalkf [ ] state\yide [ XJ^CTjally^f ]9/&e continuation sheet for additional comments.] Signature of certifying official/Tim Kenneth C.
    [Show full text]
  • Over the Range
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All USU Press Publications USU Press 2008 Over the Range Richard V. Francaviglia Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/usupress_pubs Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Francaviglia, R. V. (2008). Over the range: A history of the Promontory Summit route of the Pacific ailrr oad. Logan: Utah State University Press. This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the USU Press at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All USU Press Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Over the Range Photo by author Photographed at Promontory, Utah, in 2007, the curving panel toward the rear of Union Pacifi c 119’s tender (coal car) shows the colorful and ornate artwork incorporated into American locomotives in the Victorian era. Over the Range A History of the Promontory Summit Route of the Pacifi c Railroad Richard V. Francaviglia Utah State University Press Logan, Utah Copyright ©2008 Utah State University Press All rights reserved Utah State University Press Logan, Utah 84322-7200 www.usu.edu/usupress Manufactured in the United States of America Printed on recycled, acid-free paper ISBN: 978-0-87421-705-6 (cloth) ISBN: 978-0-87421-706-3 (e-book) Manufactured in China Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Francaviglia, Richard V. Over the range : a history of the Promontory summit route of the Pacifi c / Richard V. Francaviglia. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-87421-705-6 (cloth : alk.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Resource Study: Minidoka Interment Internment National
    Historic Resource Study Minidoka Internment National Monument _____________________________________________________ Prepared for the National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Seattle, Washington Minidoka Internment National Monument Historic Resource Study Amy Lowe Meger History Department Colorado State University National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Seattle, Washington 2005 Table of Contents Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………… i Note on Terminology………………………………………….…………………..…. ii List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………. iii Part One - Before World War II Chapter One - Introduction - Minidoka Internment National Monument …………... 1 Chapter Two - Life on the Margins - History of Early Idaho………………………… 5 Chapter Three - Gardening in a Desert - Settlement and Development……………… 21 Chapter Four - Legalized Discrimination - Nikkei Before World War II……………. 37 Part Two - World War II Chapter Five- Outcry for Relocation - World War II in America ………….…..…… 65 Chapter Six - A Dust Covered Pseudo City - Camp Construction……………………. 87 Chapter Seven - Camp Minidoka - Evacuation, Relocation, and Incarceration ………105 Part Three - After World War II Chapter Eight - Farm in a Day- Settlement and Development Resume……………… 153 Chapter Nine - Conclusion- Commemoration and Memory………………………….. 163 Appendixes ………………………………………………………………………… 173 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………. 181 Cover: Nikkei working on canal drop at Minidoka, date and photographer unknown, circa 1943. (Minidoka Manuscript Collection, Hagerman Fossil
    [Show full text]
  • Minidoka County, Idaho, Wildland-Urban Interface Wildfire Mitigation Plan Mmmaaaiiinnn Dddooocccuuummmeeennnttt Oooccctttooobbbeeerrr 111888,,, 222000000444
    Minidoka County, Idaho, Wildland-Urban Interface Wildfire Mitigation Plan MMMaaaiiinnn DDDooocccuuummmeeennnttt OOOccctttooobbbeeerrr 111888,,, 222000000444 Vision: Institutionalize and promote a countywide wildfire hazard mitigation ethic through leadership, professionalism, and excellence, leading the way to a safe, sustainable Minidoka County. This plan was developed by the Minidoka County Wildland-Urban Interface Wildfire Mitigation Plan Committee in cooperation with Northwest Management, Inc., 233 E. Palouse River Dr. P.O. Box 9748, Moscow, Idaho 83843, Phone: (208) 883-4488, Fax: (208) 883-1098, www.Consulting-Foresters.com Acknowledgments This Wildland-Urban Interface Wildfire Mitigation Plan represents the efforts and cooperation of a number of organizations and agencies, through the commitment of people working together to improve the preparedness for wildfire events while reducing factors of risk. Minidoka County Commissioners Mid-Snake Resource Conservation and and the employees of Minidoka County Development USDI Bureau of Land Management USDA Forest Service Idaho Bureau of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Minidoka County Fire Protection District West End Fire Protection District Rupert Fire Department & Local Businesses and Idaho Department of Lands Citizens of Minidoka County To obtain copies of this plan contact: Minidoka County Commissioners Office Minidoka County Courthouse 715 G Street, P.O. Box 368 Rupert, ID 83350 Phone: 208-436-7111 Fax: 208-436-0737 Table of Contents CHAPTER I: OVERVIEW OF THIS
    [Show full text]
  • Twin Falls County Multi-Jurisdiction All Hazard Mitigation Plan
    TWIN FALLS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AUGUST 2013 Twin Falls Multi-Jurisdiction All Hazard Mitigation Plan August 23, 2013 Executive Summary The Twin Falls County Multi-Jurisdiction All Hazard Mitigation Plan 2013 is a complete revision of the 2008 Twin Falls County All Hazard Mitigation Plan. The entire Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment was updated. The hazard ranking was changed a new format deployed that ranks the hazards according to five indices, 1) historical occurrence, 2) probability, 3) vulnerability, 4) spatial extent, i.e, the extent impact based on geography, and 5) the magnitude which looks specifically at the loss of life, injuries, and economic impact. The Plan format was changed to match the FEMA Local Plan Crosswalk Guidance. The figure below contains the revised risk ranking for Twin Falls County. Historical Spatial Hazard Probability Vulnerability Magnitude Total Rank Occurrence Extent Drought 3 4 4 4 3 18 H Wildfire 3 4 2 3 4 16 H Severe Weather 3 4 3 3 3 16 H Severe Winter Storms 3 4 2 4 2 15 H Communicable 2 3 3 3 3 14 H Diseases Structural Fire 3 4 1 1 4 13 M H5N1 Bird Flu 0 1 4 4 4 13 M West Nile Virus 3 4 1 1 3 12 M Hazardous Materials 3 4 2 1 2 12 M Terrorism 0 1 4 3 4 12 M Vesicular Stomatitis 2 4 1 1 3 11 M Flood 2 4 1 1 3 11 M Flash Flood 2 4 2 1 2 11 M Canal Failure 2 4 1 1 2 10 M Lyme and Other Tick- 1 4 1 1 3 10 M Borne Diseases Nuclear Event 0 1 3 3 3 10 M Burrowing Rodents 1 4 1 1 2 9 L Earthquake 0 2 1 2 2 7 L Landslide 1 2 1 1 1 6 L Dam Failure 0 1 1 1 3 6 L The Twin Falls County Multi-Jurisdiction All Hazard Mitigation Planning Project was led by Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • VALLEYRIDE Rail Corridor Evaluation Study
    VALLEYRIDE Rail Corridor Evaluation Study Volume I Study Report April 2003 Committee Acknowledgement Acknowledgements This is to recognize the hard work and devoted effort of the many individuals and organizations involved in the completion of this project. They are deserving of our thanks and gratitude. Our community has benefited due to their time and energy. Technical Advisory Committee Byron Cochrane, Ada County Kelli Fairless, ValleyRide Brad Hawkins-Clark, City of Meridian Jonathan Hennings, Idaho Transportation Department Ron Kerr, Idaho Transportation Department Gene Kuehn, Canyon County Malcolm MacCoy Jerome Mapp, City of Boise Rena McKean, ValleyRide John Meagher, Nampa Highway District Erv Olen, Community Planning Association of Southern Idaho Paul Raymond, City of Nampa Joe Rosenlund, Ada County Highway District Catherine Sanchez, Ada County Highway District Commuteride Charles Trainor, Community Planning Association of Southern Idaho Janet Weaver, Idaho Transportation Department Stephen West, Division of Environmental Quality Matt Wilde, City of Boise Board Members Matt Beebe, Canyon County Dave Bivens, Ada County Highway District Clair Bowman, Community Planning Association of Southern Idaho (ex-officio) Brent Coles, City of Boise Robert Corrie, City of Meridian Tom Dale, City of Nampa Marje Dean-Ellmaker, City of Notus Ted Ellis, City of Garden City Bob Flowers, City of Parma John Franden, Boise State University Ralph Gant, City of Melba Gail Glasgow, City of Star Rob Hopper, City of Caldwell Grant Kingsford, Ada County Phil Kushlan, Capital City Development Corporation Todd Lakey, Canyon County Ralph Little, Canyon County Highway District Frank McKeever, City of Middleton Garret Nancolas, City of Caldwell Alice Reyes, City of Wilder Roger Simmons, Ada County Gary D.
    [Show full text]