DOCSLIB.ORG

Lower Colorado River Geographic Response Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lower Colorado River Geographic Response Plan LOWER COLORADO RIVER GEOGRAPHIC RESPONSE PLAN LOWER COLORADO RIVER CORRIDOR AREA 3 SAN BERNARDINO, RIVERSIDE, AND IMPERIAL COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA LA PAZ AND YUMA COUNTIES, ARIZONA FEBRUARY 2014 PREPARED BY: LOWER COLORADO RIVER AREA COMMITTEE (LCRAC) This page intentionally left blank. Lower Colorado River Geographic Response Plan February 2014 If this is an Emergency… …Involving a release or threatened release of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other contaminants impacting public health and/or the environment Most important – Protect yourself and others! Then: 1) Turn to the Immediate Action Guide (Yellow Tab) for initial steps taken in a hazardous material, petroleum product, or other contaminant emergency. 2) Make the initial notification to Dispatch by dialing 911. Dispatch will make operational notifications that will prompt formation of Incident Command. 3) Incident Command will make the following Mandatory Notifications: National Response Center (800) 424-8802 California Office of Emergency Services (800) 852-7550 or (916) 845-8911 Arizona Division of Emergency (800) 411-2336 Management 4) After the Mandatory Notifications are made, use Notification (Red Tab) to implement the notification procedures described in the Immediate Action Guide. 5) Use the Lower Colorado River Corridor Maps (Green Tab) to pin point the location and surrounding geography of the incident site. 6) Use the Emergency Response Site Strategies (Blue Tab) to develop a mitigation plan. 7) Review the Supporting Documentation (White Tabs) for additional information needed during the response. i This page intentionally left blank. Lower Colorado River Geographic Response Plan February 2014 Lower Colorado River Geographic Response Plan – Area 3 Table of Contents Page Number If this is an Emergency.............................................................................................................. i Table of Contents..................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................ vii Color Tabs – Time Critical Information for use in an Emergency Response Plan Overview (Purple Tab).................................................................................................. P-1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. P-1 Purpose....................................................................................................................... P-2 Plan Objectives ........................................................................................................... P-2 Incident Objectives ...................................................................................................... P-3 Immediate Action Guide (Yellow Tab) ................................................................................. Y-1 How to Use the Immediate Action Guide ..................................................................... Y-1 Make Immediate Notifications...................................................................................... Y-2 Review General Information Regarding HazMat Response......................................... Y-3 Identify Railroad, Pipeline, Roadway, and Fixed Facility Incidents............................... Y-4 Abandoned/Unknown Containers and WMD................................................................ Y-5 Public Information/Press Release................................................................................ Y-6 Notification (Red Tab)...........................................................................................................R-1 Notification Overview...................................................................................................R-1 Federal Mandatory Spill Notification Requirements .....................................................R-3 List of Dispatch Centers ..............................................................................................R-5 Emergency Notification Guide .....................................................................................R-6 Contact Number List....................................................................................................R-7 NRC Incident Report Form ........................................................................................R-11 Radio Frequencies (Aqua Tab).............................................................................................A-1 Incident Radio Communications Plan .......................................................................... A-2 Resources (Orange Tab) ......................................................................................................O-1 Spill Response Resources...........................................................................................O-1 Hazardous Materials Teams........................................................................................O-3 Specialized Teams ......................................................................................................O-4 LCR Water Operations Control Center ........................................................................O-5 24 Hour Communication Center ..................................................................................O-6 Spill Response and Vessel Salvage Contractors.......................................................O-12 Significant Response Equipment Inventory ...............................................................O-12 Maps (Green Tab)..................................................................................................................G-1 Area 3 Map Overview..................................................................................................G-1 Lake and River Response Strategies (Blue Tab) ................................................................B-1 Historical Mean Monthly Stream Flows........................................................................ B-2 Locations of Stream Gages along the Colorado River ................................................. B-3 iii Lower Colorado River Geographic Response Plan February 2014 Lower Colorado River Geographic Response Plan – Area 3 Table of Contents (continued) Page Number White Tabs – Supporting Documentation for use in an Emergency Response Concept of Operations (White Tab #1) ............................................................................. W1-1 Roles and Responsibilities (White Tab #2) ...................................................................... W2-1 Arizona ...................................................................................................................... W2-1 Local Government .............................................................................................. W2-1 State Government............................................................................................... W2-2 California ................................................................................................................... W2-3 Local Government .............................................................................................. W2-3 State Government............................................................................................... W2-8 Nevada.................................................................................................................... W2-16 Local Government ............................................................................................ W2-16 State Government............................................................................................. W2-17 Tribal Government Entities ...................................................................................... W2-19 Federal Government................................................................................................ W2-19 Private/Public Organizations.................................................................................... W2-24 Cost Recovery/Funding/Reimbursement (White Tab #3) ................................................ W3-1 Local Government Funding........................................................................................ W3-1 Arizona Funding/Reimbursement............................................................................... W3-2 California Funding/Reimbursement............................................................................ W3-2 Nevada Funding/Reimbursement .............................................................................. W3-7 Federal Funding/Reimbursement............................................................................... W3-9 Relationship to Other Plans (White Tab #4) ..................................................................... W4-1 Sensitive Populations (White Tab #5)............................................................................... W5-1 Hospitals and Nursing Homes ................................................................................... W5-1 Schools...................................................................................................................... W5-3 Childcare Centers.................................................................................................... W5-10 Potential Hazards (White Tab #6).....................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • La Paz Transportation Planning Study
    LaLa PazPaz TTransportationransportation PlanningPlanning StudyStudy ExecutiveExecutive SummarySummary June 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PURPOSE .................................................................................................... 1 STUDY PROCESS.......................................................................................... 1 AGENCY COORDINATION AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ................................... 3 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (TITLE VI) POPULATIONS...................................... 5 FUTURE GROWTH AREAS ............................................................................. 5 FUTURE ROAD AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS .................................................... 8 FUTURE MULTIMODAL CONDITIONS............................................................12 FUTURE FREIGHT CONDITIONS....................................................................12 MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN .......................................................12 TRANSPORTATION VISION...........................................................................13 ALTERNATIVE ROAD NETWORK ANALYSIS...................................................13 RECOMMENDED ROAD PLAN ......................................................................21 RECOMMENDED MULTIMODAL ELEMENT....................................................27 RECOMMENDED FREIGHT ELEMENT............................................................30 IMPLEMENTATION .....................................................................................33 FUNDING SOURCES
    [Show full text]
  • Brenda SEZ Analysis: Draft PEIS
    1 8 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR 2 PROPOSED SOLAR ENERGY ZONES IN ARIZONA 3 4 5 8.1 BRENDA 6 7 8 8.1.1 Background and Summary of Impacts 9 10 11 8.1.1.1 General Information 12 13 The proposed Brenda Solar Energy Zone (SEZ) is located in La Paz County in west- 14 central Arizona (Figure 8.1.1.1-1), 32 mi (52 km) east of the California border. The SEZ has a 15 total area of 3,878 acres (16 km2). In 2008, the county population was 20,005, while adjacent 16 Riverside County to the west in California had a population of 2,087,917. The towns of 17 Quartzsite and Salome in La Paz County are about 18 mi (29 km) west of, and 18 mi (29 km) 18 east of, the SEZ respectively. The Phoenix metropolitan area is approximately 100 mi (161 km) 19 to the east of the SEZ, and Los Angeles is approximately 230 mi (370 km) to the west. 20 21 The nearest major road access to the SEZ is via U.S. 60, which runs southwest to 22 northeast, along the southeast border of the Brenda SEZ. The nearest railroad stop is 11 mi 23 (18 km) away. The nearest airports serving the area are the Blythe and Parker (Avi Suquilla) 24 Airports, both approximately 50 mi (80 km) from the SEZ, and neither of which have scheduled 25 commercial passenger service. The Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix is 125 mi (201 km) to the 26 east, and Yuma International Airport in Yuma is 104 mi (167 km) to the south, of the SEZ.
    [Show full text]
  • November 17, 2017 David Beaver & Karen Summitt 8226 S Evergreen Dr Mohave Valley, AZ 86440 Re: Purchase and Sale Agreement F
    From: Karen Summitt To: Thomas Buschatzke; Sharon Scantlebury Subject: Fw: Objections to the MVIDD Water Transfer Date: Thursday, November 16, 2017 6:24:42 PM Attachments: ADWR Letter.docx November 17, 2017 David Beaver & Karen Summitt 8226 S Evergreen Dr Mohave Valley, AZ 86440 Re: Purchase and Sale Agreement for CAWCD to Acquire Water Rights and Land in Mohave Valley Irrigation and Drainage District, Mohave County, Arizona Dear Thomas Buschatzkle, I write to advise you that I am opposed to the proposed Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD) land and water purchase to move Colorado River water, prudently set aside for rural Arizona Colorado River mainstream users, to central Arizona for replenishment. As you may recall, the Mohave County Board of Supervisors passed two resolutions opposing the permanent transfer of any Colorado River Water Rights and Allocations to the Central Arizona Water Conservation District for use in the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District – first as to the Quartzsite transfer and second as to the WPI-WAN transfer in the Mohave Valley Irrigation and Drainage District. Here is why I oppose this purchase and transfer of our water: First, as a matter of public policy, 4th Priority Colorado River water allocated to the users on the mainstream of the River, such as Mohave Valley Irrigation and Drainage District (“MVIDD”) in this case, should not be transferred away from mainstream of the River. This is part of the water that the State of Arizona requested be reserved for municipal and industrial uses along the River. Except for that small reservation of 4th Priority Colorado River water to the users on the mainstream, CAWCD received all of Arizona’s Colorado River entitlement remaining at the time that CAWCD and the United States entered into their initial agreement in 1972.
    [Show full text]
  • LEGAL MEMORANDUM No
    LEGAL MEMORANDUM No. 208 | JULY 12, 2017 Reorganizing the Federal Administrative State: The Disutility of Criminal Investigative Programs at Federal Regulatory Agencies Paul J. Larkin, Jr. Abstract President Donald Trump has directed federal agencies and has in- Key Points vited the public to suggest ways to reorganize the federal government to make it more effective and efficient. One possibility is to reorganize n Today, more than 30 federal at least part of federal law enforcement. Numerous federal regula- agencies are authorized to inves- tory agencies have criminal investigative divisions. Congress and the tigate crimes, execute search warrants, serve subpoenas, make President should consider consolidating those programs and transfer- arrests, and carry firearms. ring them to a traditional federal law enforcement agency. The FBI is n a possible home for those agents, but the U.S. Marshals Service may Each agency has a criminal investigative division with sworn have certain advantages that the FBI does not possess, including the federal law enforcement officers possibility of a less costly transition. Either agency would make a more even though the parent agency’s suitable home for investigative programs currently housed in admin- principal function is to regulate istrative agencies. some aspect of the economy or contemporary life. That assign- Introduction ment creates a problem. Large American cities—such as New York City, Chicago, and n The law enforcement and regula- Los Angeles—have municipal police departments as their principal tory cultures are markedly differ- criminal investigative authorities. The federal government, by con- ent, and attempting to cram the trast, does not have a national police force.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Building and Facility Security: Frequently Asked Questions Name Redacted Analyst in Emergency Management and Homeland Security Policy
    Federal Building and Facility Security: Frequently Asked Questions name redacted Analyst in Emergency Management and Homeland Security Policy June 17, 2014 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R43570 Federal Building and Facility Security: Frequently Asked Questions Summary The security of federal government buildings and facilities affects not only the daily operations of the federal government but also the health, well-being, and safety of federal employees and the public. Federal building and facility security is decentralized and disparate in approach, as numerous federal entities are involved and some buildings or facilities are occupied by multiple federal agencies. The federal government is tasked with securing over 446,000 buildings or facilities daily. The September 2001 terrorist attacks, the September 2013 Washington Navy Yard shootings, and the April 2014 Fort Hood shootings have refocused the federal government’s attention on building security activities. There has been an increase in the security operations at federal facilities and more intense scrutiny of how the federal government secures and protects federal facilities, employees, and the visiting public. This renewed attention has generated a number of frequently asked questions. This report answers several common questions regarding federal building and facility security, including • What is federal facility security? • Who is responsible for federal facility security? • Is there a national standard for federal facility security? • What are the types of threats to federal facilities, employees, and the visiting public? • How is threat information communicated among federal facility security stakeholders? • What are the potential congressional issues associated with federal facility security? There has been congressional interest concerning federal facility security in the 113th Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Enforcement Programs
    December 22, 2020 Department of the Interior (DOI) Law Enforcement Programs Overview DOI defines law enforcement officer as a “person who has As of November 2020, the Department of the Interior (DOI) entered the Federal service through established selection employed nearly 3,400 law enforcement officers (LEOs) criteria, has received professional training according to assigned to seven distinct organizational units within five published standards and has been commissioned or sworn DOI bureaus (see Figure 1). These seven units are the to perform law enforcement duties” (DOI Departmental Bureau of Land Management (BLM); Bureau of Indian Manual Part 446 Ch. 1). Generally, LEOs include Affairs (BIA); Bureau of Reclamation (BOR); U.S. Fish employees who are authorized to carry firearms, execute and Wildlife Service’s (FWS’s) Office of Law Enforcement and serve warrants, search for and seize evidence, make (OLE) and Division of Refuge Law Enforcement (REF); arrests, and perform such duties as authorized by law. The National Park Service (NPS); and U.S. Park Police (USPP) category broadly includes uniformed police officers, within NPS. DOI’s law enforcement contingent is the investigative agents, correctional officers, and various other fourth-largest among executive branch departments, after positions within DOI. It does not include DOI employees the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and classified under the security guard job series title, as these Veterans Affairs. positions generally do not have authority to take the enforcement-related actions listed above. Law enforcement on lands owned and administered by the federal government is of perennial interest to Congress. The specific duties of DOI LEOs can vary considerably This includes issues related to funding, jurisdictional based on the type (e.g., investigative agent vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Mohave County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
    Mohave County Multi‐Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Background and Scope ................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Assurances ....................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Plan Organization ........................................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 2: COMMUNITY PROFILES ................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Mohave County ............................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Bullhead City ................................................................................................................................. 14 2.3 Colorado City ................................................................................................................................ 19 2.4 Kingman ........................................................................................................................................ 21 2.5 Lake
    [Show full text]
  • GAO-07-815 Federal Law Enforcement Mandatory Basic Training
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters GAO August 2007 FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT Survey of Federal Civilian Law Enforcement Mandatory Basic Training GAO-07-815 August 2007 FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT Accountability Integrity Reliability Highlights Survey of Federal Civilian Law Highlights of GAO-07-815, a report to Enforcement Mandatory Basic Training congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found Federal law enforcement officers Based on the responses of the 105 federal civilian law enforcement (LEO) are required to complete components surveyed, GAO identified 76 unique mandatory basic training mandatory basic training in order programs. Among these, four programs in particular were cited by the to exercise their law enforcement components more often than others as mandatory for their LEOs (see table). authorities. Of the remaining 72 unique basic training programs, each was common to GAO was asked to identify federal just one to three components. Some of these basic training programs are mandatory law enforcement basic required for job series classifications representing large portions of the training programs. This report overall LEO population. For example, newly hired employees at the Federal builds on GAO’s prior work Bureau of Prisons encompass 159 different job series classifications. This surveying federal civilian law large number of job series classifications is required to take the same two enforcement components regarding unique basic training programs. their functions and authorities (see GAO-07-121, December 2006). GAO defined an LEO as an individual Of the 105 components surveyed, 37 components reported exclusively using authorized to perform any of four the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC)—the largest single functions: conduct criminal provider of law enforcement training for the federal government.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Law Enforcement Officers, 2000
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin July 2001, NCJ 187231 Federal Law Enforcement Officers, 2000 By Brian A. Reaves, Ph.D. and Timothy C. Hart Highlights BJS Statisticians Number As of June 2000, Federal agencies of officers, 2000 employed more than 88,000 full-time Drug Enforcement Administration 4,161 personnel authorized to make arrests Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms 1,967 and carry firearms, according to a U.S. Secret Service 4,039 survey conducted by the Bureau of Federal Bureau of Prisons Justice Statistics (BJS). Compared 13,557 with June 1998, employment of such Immigration and Naturalization Service 17,654 personnel increased by about 5%. Federal Bureau of Investigation 11,523 U.S. Marshals Service 2,735 The BJS count of Federal law enforce- U.S. Customs Service 10,522 ment officers includes personnel with U.S. Postal Inspection Service 3,412 Federal arrest authority who were also Internal Revenue Service 2,726 authorized (but not necessarily required) -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% to carry firearms in the performance of Percent change in the number of Federal officers their official duties. Nearly all Federal with arrest and firearm authority, 1998-2000 officers are armed while on duty; Federal Bureau of Prisons correctional • Duties for Federal officers included $ Twenty-one States and the District officers are the largest group who do criminal investigation (41%), police of Columbia had more than 1,000 full- not carry firearms during normal duty. response and patrol (19%), corrections time Federal officers. Texas (12,225) (18%), noncriminal investigation and and California (12,074) had the largest All counts include both nonsupervisory inspection (13%), court operations number.
    [Show full text]
  • River Cities VISITOR & RELOCATION GUIDE
    DINING REAL ESTATE RECREATION EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT HEALTH Relocating to the River Cities VISITOR & RELOCATION GUIDE Bullhead City | Laughlin | Fort Mohave | Mohave Valley | Needles Relocating to the EXPERIENCE River Cities AWARD-WINNING EXCITEMENT! Best Casino PLAY – Casino Player Magazine Best Hotel Best Overall Gaming Resort STAY – Casino Player Magazine Best Overall Dining DINE – Casino Player Magazine CALL TODAY TO MAKE YOUR RESERVATION AND WE’LL WELCOME YOU TO THE RIVER 800.950.7700 GOLDENNUGGET.COM Relocating to the River Cities VISITOR & RELOCATION GUIDE CONTENTS DINING 4 REAL ESTATE 8 RECREATION 12 EDUCATION 22 DEVELOPMENT 28 HEALTH 32 Relocating to the River Cities VISITOR & RELOCATION GUIDE Relocating to the River Cities LARRY KENDRICK General Manager | WELLS ANDREWS Sales/Circulation Director BILL MCMILLEN Editorial | ERIC FRAKES Operations Manager | JASON LORD Layout & Design ADVERTISING: Jody Bristyan, CAREY FEARING, JAMIE MCCORKLE, NANCY Novak, LU WEISS PRODUCTION: BEN KANE Prepress Manager, MICHAEL KENITZER Relocating to the River Cities is published and distributed annually. The Bullhead Area Chamber of Commerce contributed to this magazine and will make the guide available online and at their local office. Call the chamber at (928) 754-4121 to request by mail. Although every attempt is to be as accurate as possible, News West Publishing is not responsible for any errors, misprints, omissions, or accuracy of the stories in this publication. ©2019 News West Publishing, Inc News West Publishing | 2435 Miracle Mile, P.O. Box 21209, Bullhead City, AZ 86442 | 928.763.2505 | www.MohaveDailyNews.com 3 DINING The River Cities are home to a wide variety of fantastic restaurants suited for any taste.
    [Show full text]
  • Ca-Lower-Colorado-River-Valley-Pkwy
    I • I I I ) I I A REPORT TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES ---1 I 'I I I I THE LOWER I COLORADO I RIVER I VALLEY • PARKWAY I I D- '°'le> F; 1-e. ·• NFS- ' f\CAc:.+... \ V"C. , ~ P,of>oseol I ~~~~=-'~c f~l~~c~~w I THE LOWER COLORADO I filVERVALLEYPARKWAY I I I A proposal for a National Parkway and Scenic Recreation Road System along the Lower Colorado River Valley in 'I California, Arizona, and Nevada. I NATIONAL PARK .i DENVER SEfiViC I ·-.-:. a.t ..1flkllb""ll.--';,.i. n II"~ r.· " •· \..' ;: · I ;:~::::.;.;:;.:J I I I U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service I in cooperation with Lower Colorado River Office Bureau of Land Management • PLE~\SE RtTUR?j TO: I February 1969 I , lJnited States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY I WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 I I Dear Mr. President: We are pleased to transmit herewith. a report on the feasibility anc;l desirability of developing a nation~l p;;i.rkwa,y and sc;enic recreation I road system within. the Lower C9l9rado River· Vaiiey in Arizona, Califo~nia, and Nevada, from the Lake Mead National Recreation I Area and Davis Dam on the north to the International Boup.d:;i.ry ~ith Mexico on the south in: the vicinity of San Luis, Arizqna arid Mexic.o.· . ·. ' .. ·.' . ·. I This :i;eport is based on ci. study 11,'lade by the Lower Col<;>rado River Office ap.d the NatiQnal :Par~ Service pf this Depa.rtmep.t with engineerin.g assistance by the Buqlau of Public Roads of the Departmep.t of .
    [Show full text]
  • Hoover Powerplant Modification Feasibility Report
    HOOVER POWERPLANT MODIFICATION FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C HYDROLOGY MAY 1981 PREPARED BY BUREAU OF RECLAMATION LOWER COLORADO REGION APPENDIX C - HYDROLOGY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION .....C-1 A. Purpose .....C-1 B. Background .....C-1 C. Location .....C-1 D. Climate .....C-1 E. Alternatives Considered .....C-1 1. Surface .......... C-1 2. Underground Powerhouse .....C-1 3. Replacement of Units A8 and A9 .... C-2 4. Pumped-Back Storage .....C-2 II. WATER SUPPLY AND RESERVOIR OPERATION .....C-3 A. Present Condition .....C-3 1. Water Supply .....C-3 a. Runoff .....C-3 b. Demands .....C-3 2. Reservoir Operation .....C-5 a. Control of River Operations .....C-5 b. Forecasted Water Supply .....C-6 c. Scheduled Annual Water Requirements . C-7 d. Daily Water Requirements .....C-8 e. Daily Operations .....C-8 f. Water Scheduling - Power Generation Relationship .....C-9 g. Historic Operational Data .....C-10 h. Weekly Release Patterns .....C-12 B. Future Conditions .....C-13 1. Water Supply .....C-13 a. Runoff .....C-13 b. Demands .....C-17 2. Reservoir Operation .....C-17 3. Lake Mohave Operation Study .....C-27 a. Study Results .....C-29 b. Study Evaluation and Conclusions . C-30 C-i TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page III. TAILWATER STUDIES .................................. C-32 A. Introduction .................................. C-32 B. Design Discharges C-32 C. Water Surface Profiles ........................ C-34 1. Cross Sections ............................ C-34 2. Steady Flow Tailwater Study ................. C-35 3. Calibration of Unsteady Flow Model ......... C-35 4. Calibration of 1979 Steady Flow Model ....... C-38 5. Projections for Additional 500-MW Powerhouse ...............................
    [Show full text]