DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Environmental Assessment, Grand Coulee G1 Through G18

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Environmental Assessment, Grand Coulee G1 Through G18 Draft Environmental Assessment Grand Coulee G1 through G18 Generating Units Modernization and Overhaul U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Office Boise, Idaho April 2017 This page intentionally left blank U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The mission of the U.S. Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to tribes. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. This page intentionally left blank Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations .............................................................................................. vii Chapter 1. Purpose and Need ................................................................................................1 1.1 Background ..............................................................................................................1 1.2 Purpose and Need for the Action .............................................................................3 1.3 Location and General Description of Affected Area ...............................................3 1.4 Authority ..................................................................................................................3 1.5 Scoping and Issues ...................................................................................................4 1.6 Regulatory Compliance ...........................................................................................5 1.6.1 National Environmental Policy Act ...................................................................5 1.6.2 Endangered Species Act (1973) .........................................................................5 1.6.3 National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 .......................................................5 1.6.4 Executive Order 13007: Indian Sacred Sites .....................................................5 1.6.5 Secretarial Order 3175: U.S. Department of the Interior Responsibilities for Indian Trust Assets ........................................................................................................6 1.6.6 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice ................................................6 1.7 Other Related Actions and Activities ......................................................................6 1.7.1 Third Powerplant Overhaul................................................................................6 1.7.2 John W. Keys III Pump-Generating Plant Modernization Project ....................7 1.7.3 New Fire Station ................................................................................................7 Chapter 2. Description of Alternatives .................................................................................9 2.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................9 2.2 Alternative A – No Action .....................................................................................10 2.3 Alternative B – Grand Coulee G1 through G18 Modernization and Overhaul – Work on Two Units at a Time – Preferred Alternative .........................................10 2.4 Alternative C – Grand Coulee G1 through G18 Modernization and Overhaul – Work on One Unit at a time ...................................................................................12 Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ............................13 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................13 3.1.1 Resource Areas Not Discussed in Detail .........................................................14 3.2 Hazardous or Toxic Wastes ...................................................................................16 3.2.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................16 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................17 3.2.3 Mitigation .........................................................................................................19 3.2.4 Cumulative Impacts .........................................................................................20 3.3 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................20 3.3.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................21 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................27 3.3.3 Mitigation .........................................................................................................31 3.3.4 Cumulative Impacts .........................................................................................31 3.4 Environmental Justice ............................................................................................32 3.4.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................32 April 2017 – Draft Environmental Assessment iii TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................33 3.4.3 Mitigation .........................................................................................................37 3.4.4 Cumulative Impacts .........................................................................................37 3.5 Indian Sacred Sites .................................................................................................37 3.5.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................38 3.5.2 Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................38 3.5.3 Mitigation .........................................................................................................39 3.5.4 Cumulative Impacts .........................................................................................39 3.6 Indian Trust Assets ................................................................................................39 3.6.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................39 3.6.2 Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................40 3.6.3 Mitigation .........................................................................................................40 3.6.4 Cumulative Impacts .........................................................................................40 3.7 Transportation ........................................................................................................40 3.7.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................40 3.7.2 Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................44 3.7.3 Mitigation .........................................................................................................47 3.7.4 Cumulative Impacts .........................................................................................48 3.8 Socioeconomics .....................................................................................................49 3.8.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................49 3.8.2 Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................52 3.8.3 Mitigation .........................................................................................................58 3.8.4 Cumulative Impacts .........................................................................................58 3.9 Climate Change ......................................................................................................58 3.9.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................59 3.9.2 Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................60 3.9.3 Mitigation .........................................................................................................65 3.9.4 Cumulative Impacts .........................................................................................66 Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination ........................................................................67 4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................67 4.2 Public Scoping .......................................................................................................67 4.2.1 Agency Consultations ......................................................................................67 4.2.2 Comment Solicitation and Informational Activities ........................................68 4.2.3 Mailings ...........................................................................................................68 4.2.4 Internet Postings...............................................................................................68 4.2.5 Meetings ...........................................................................................................69
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Top 26 Trails in Grant County 2020
    and 12 Watchable Wildlife Units For more information, please contact: Grant County Tourism Commission P.O. Box 37, Ephrata, WA 98823 509.765.7888 • 800.992.6234 In Grant County, Washington TourGrantCounty.com TOP TRAILS Grant County has some of the most scenic and pristine vistas, hiking trails and outdoor 26 recreational opportunities in Washington State. and 12 Watchable Wildlife Units Grant County is known for its varied landscapes on a high desert plateau with coulees, lakes, in Grant County Washington reservoirs, sand dunes, canals, rivers, creeks, and other waterways. These diverse ecosystems Grant County Tourism Commission For Additional copies please contact: support a remarkable variety of fish and PO Box 37 Jerry T. Gingrich wildlife species that contribute to the economic, Ephrata, Washington 98837 Grant County Tourism Commission recreational and cultural life of the County. www.tourgrantcounty.com Grant County Courthouse PO Box 37 Ephrata, WA 98837 No part of this book may be reproduced in (509) 754-2011, Ext. 2931 any form, or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, without permission in For more information on writing from the Grant County Tourism Grant County accommodations Commission. www.tourgrantcounty.com © 2019, Grant County Tourism Commission Second printing, 10m Trails copy and photographs Book, map and cover design by: provided by: Denise Adam Graphic Design Cameron Smith, Lisa Laughlin, J. Kemble, Veradale, WA 99037 Shawn Cardwell, Mark Amara, (509) 891-0873 Emry Dinman, Harley Price, [email protected] Sebastian Moraga and Madison White Printed by: Rewriting and editing by: Mark Amara Pressworks 2717 N. Perry Street Watchable Wildlife copy and Spokane, Washington 99207 photographs provided by: (509) 462-7627 Washington Department of [email protected] Fish and Wildlife Photograph by Lisa Laughlin CONTENTS CONTENTS Grant County Trails and Hiking Grant County Watchable Wildlife Viewing Upper Grand Coulee Area 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Appraisal-Level Investigation Summary of Findings
    Appraisal-Level Investigation Summary of Findings Odessa Subarea Special Study Columbia Basin Project, Washington U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Regional Office, Boise, Idaho Upper Columbia Area Office,Yakima, Washington Technical Service Center, Denver, Colorado March 2008 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Appraisal-Level Investigation Summary of Findings Odessa Subarea Special Study Columbia Basin Project, Washington Prepared by U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Regional Office, Boise, Idaho Upper Columbia Area Office, Yakima, Washington Technical Service Center, Denver, Colorado March 2008 Appraisal-Level Investigation Summary of Findings Acronyms and Abbreviations BC benefit/cost BiOp biological opinion BPA Bonneville Power Administration CBP Columbia Basin Project CCT Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation CFR Comprehensive Facility Review cfs cubic feet per second CNWR Columbia National Wildlife Refuge CRI MOU Columbia River Initiative Memorandum of Understanding DEIS draft environmental impact statement DPS Definite Population Segments ECBID East Columbia Basin Irrigation District Ecology Washington Department of Ecology ESA Endangered Species Act ESU Evolutionarily Significant Units FCCD Franklin County Conservation District FCRPS Federal Columbia River Power System FEIS final environmental impact statement ft/s feet per second FWCA Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWS U.S Fish and Wildlife Service GIS Geographic Information System gpm gallons per minute GWMA Ground Water Management Area H.
    [Show full text]
  • Banks Lake Drawdown Environmental Impact Statement
    Banks Lake Drawdown Final Environmental Impact Statement U.S. Department of the Interior Upper Columbia Area Office Bureau of Reclamation Ephrata Field Office Pacific Northwest Region Ephrata, Washington Boise, Idaho May 2004 MISSION STATEMENTS The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Final Environmental Impact Statement Banks Lake Drawdown Douglas and Grant Counties, Washington Lead Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation For further information contact: Jim Blanchard Special Projects Officer Ephrata Field Office Bureau of Reclamation Box 815 Ephrata, WA 98823 (509) 754-0226 The Action Alternative describes the resource conditions that would occur with Banks Lake water surface elevations between 1570 feet and 1560 feet, while the No Action Alternative describes the conditions that would occur without the action, with water surface elevation between 1570 feet and 1565 feet. Both the No Action and Action Alternatives include four potential operational scenarios that could occur annually within their respective ranges, depending upon the hydrology of any given year. Both alternatives include refilling the reservoir to elevation 1570 feet by September 22. The No Action Alternative is the preferred alternative. The draft environmental impact statement provided Reclamation’s determination that the Action Alternative “may affect but is not likely to adversely affect” the federally listed bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and would have no effect on the federally listed pygmy rabbit (Brachylagus idahoensis) or Ute ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis).
    [Show full text]
  • Currents and Undercurrents: an Administrative History of Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 476 001 SO 034 781 AUTHOR McKay, Kathryn L.; Renk, Nancy F. TITLE Currents and Undercurrents: An Administrative History of Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. INSTITUTION National Park Service (Dept. of Interior), Washington, DC. PUB DATE 2002-01-00 NOTE 589p. AVAILABLE FROM Lake Roosevelt Recreation Area, 1008 Crest Drive, Coulee Dam, WA 99116. Tel: 509-633-9441; Fax: 509-633-9332; Web site: http://www.nps.gov/ laro/adhi/adhi.htm. PUB TYPE Books (010) Historical Materials (060) Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF03/PC24 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS --- *Government Role; Higher Education; *Land Use; *Parks; Physical Geography; *Recreational Facilities; Rivers; Social Studies; United States History IDENTIFIERS Cultural Resources; Management Practices; National Park Service; Reservoirs ABSTRACT The 1,259-mile Columbia River flows out of Canada andacross eastern Washington state, forming the border between Washington andOregon. In 1941 the federal government dammed the Columbia River at the north endof Grand Coulee, creating a man-made reservoir named Lake Roosevelt that inundated homes, farms, and businesses, and disrupted the lives ofmany. Although Congress never enacted specific authorization to createa park, it passed generic legislation that gave the Park Service authorityat the National Recreation Area (NRA). Lake Roosevelt's shoreline totalsmore than 500 miles of cliffs and gentle slopes. The Lake Roosevelt NationalRecreation Area (LARO) was officially created in 1946. This historical study documents
    [Show full text]
  • Pleistocene Megaflood Landscapes of the Channeled Scabland
    The Geological Society of America Field Guide 41 Pleistocene megaflood landscapes of the Channeled Scabland Victor R. Baker* Department of Hydrology and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0011, USA Bruce N. Bjornstad Ice Age Floodscapes, Richland, Washington 99354, USA David R. Gaylord School of the Environment, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington 99164-2812, USA Gary A. Smith Organization, Information, and Learning Sciences, MSC05 3020, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA Scott E. Meyer Office of Water Programs, California State University Sacramento, Sacramento, California 95819-6025, USA Petteri Alho Department of Geography, Turku University, Turku, Fl-20014, Finland Roy M. Breckenridge Idaho Geological Survey, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho 83843, USA Mark R. Sweeney Earth Sciences Department, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, South Dakota 57069, USA Marek Zreda Department of Hydrology and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0011, USA ABSTRACT The Channeled Scabland of east-central Washington comprises a complex of anas- tomosing fluvial channels that were eroded by Pleistocene megaflooding into the basalt bedrock and overlying sediments of the Columbia Plateau and Columbia Basin regions of eastern Washington State, U.S.A. The cataclysmic flooding produced huge coulees (dry river courses), cataracts, streamlined loess hills, rock basins, butte-and-basin scab- land, potholes, inner channels, broad gravel deposits,
    [Show full text]
  • Crab Creek Subbasin Plan
    Crab Creek Subbasin Plan 5/26/2004 Prepared for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Lincoln County Conservation District Prepared by KWA Ecological Sciences Inc. Subbasin Contributors Subbasin Team Leader Patrick Verhey, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Contributors (in alphabetical order): Juli Anderson, WDFW Paul Ashley, WDFW Jim Blanchard, United States Bureau of Reclamation Dennis Bly Mike Clement, Grant County PUD Bobby Cummins, Yakama Nation Don Derifield, East Columbia Basin Irrigation District Tom Dresser, Grant County PUD Greg Fitzgerald, WDFW Robert Flores, US Fish and Wildlife Service Keith Franklin, Quincy Irrigation District Crayton Guhlke Anita Harman Betsy Jordan, Quincy Irrigation District Oscar Kuch John Larson, Upper Grant Conservation District Tracy Lloyd, WDFW David Lundgren, Lincoln County Conservation District Shannon McDaniel, South Columbia Basin Irrigation District Mike LaPlant Moses Lake Irrigation Reclamation District Randy Hill, US Fish and Wildlife Service Jeff Korth, WDFW Dan Roseburg, Moses Lake Conservation District Richard Stevens Kate Terrell, US Fish and Wildlife Service Todd Thompson, Bureau of Land Management Bill White, Yakama Nation Dean White, Lincoln County Conservation District Coordinators Paul Wagner, KWA Ecological Sciences, Inc. Sammi Buzzard, KWA Ecological Sciences, Inc. Crab Creek Subbasin Plan Approach and Public Involvement Outreach The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Lincoln County Conservation District partnered to coordinate Subbasin Planning for the Crab Creek Subbasin. Lincoln County Conservation District has been responsible for outreach and public involvement. The timeline established by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) has necessitated a very compressed process that has allowed little flexibility in stakeholder involvement. The rigorous schedule and limited budget have restricted the time available for outreach.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Shoreline Characterization, City of Grand Coulee
    APPENDIX E SHORELINE CHARACTERIZATION, CITY OF GRAND COULEE Appendix E The City of Grand Coulee Shoreline Master Program Update Shoreline Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization Report 1 SHORELINE INVENTORY Appendix E contains the Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization results for the City of Grand Coulee (City). Section 1 describes the land use patterns of the City, specifically detailing: Existing land use Planned land use based on the City’s Comprehensive Plan Preferred use for shoreline areas based on the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) Existing shoreline environment designations based on the City’s current Shoreline Master Program (SMP), if one exists Section 2 summarizes the land-capacity analysis results. Section 3 summarizes the characterization of each shoreline reach within Grand Coulee. The following reaches are included: Banks Lake Crescent Bay Lake Roosevelt 1.1 Land Use Patterns 1.1.1 Existing Land Use The City and the Urban Growth Area (UGA) have about 81 acres of shoreline along Banks Lake, Crescent Bay, and Lake Roosevelt. Most of the shoreline is open space and owned by federal, state, or local governments. Public ownership includes the following: National Parks Service (NPS) U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) Existing uses include roads, single-family residences, and trail and recreational activities in open spaces. Final Draft Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report June 2013 Grant County Shoreline Master Program Update 1 110827-01.01 Appendix E 1.1.2 Planned Land Use The City's Comprehensive Plan (plan) provides a 20-year growth plan for the City. It guides the growth and development of the community. The Land Use Element of the plan is intended to provide land for planned growth of the community.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydroacoustic and Gill Net Assessment: Banks Lake, Washington
    Hydroacoustic and Gill Net Assessment Banks Lake, Washington Annual Report 2001 - 2002 February 2007 DOE/BP-00005860-3 This Document should be cited as follows: Baldwin, Casey, Matt Polacek, "Hydroacoustic and Gill Net Assessment; Banks Lake, Washington", 2001-2002 Annual Report, Project No. 200102800, 34 electronic pages, (BPA Report DOE/BP-00005860-3) Bonneville Power Administration P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The views in this report are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. Hydroacoustic and Gill Net Assessment of Banks Lake, Washington 2002 By Casey Baldwin and Matt Polacek Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Science Division Ecological Investigations Unit Banks Lake Fishery Evaluation Project A Supplemental Technical Report to the 2001-2002 Banks Lake Annual Report; (DOE/BP-00005860-1). Project # 2001-02800 Contract # 00005860 July 2004 Abstract The Banks Lake Fishery Evaluation Project (BLFEP) was created in 2001 with funds from the Bonneville Power Administration. The overall objective of the project was to maximize the Banks Lake fishery by determining the factors that limit the recruitment of hatchery-stocked kokanee, rainbow trout, and panfish. A series of objectives were identified to test hypotheses related to the decline of the kokanee and panfish fisheries in Banks Lake. The methodologies selected for monitoring the populations and determining limiting factors included surveys of both the littoral and limnetic zones of the reservoir, where species composition can vary dramatically.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resourew 1849 0 Street, N.W., Roomnc 300 Washington,DC
    COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT, BANKS LAKE, DRY FALLS DAM AND MAIN CANAL HEADWORKS HAER No. WA-139-F At south end of Banks Lake, 1/2 mile northwest of Coulee City OM*D Coulee-eity U Al^ n> Grant County r'/TfelC Washington W^Sfj IF- BLACK & WHITE PHOTOGRAPHY HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD National Park Service i) -S. Dfiparuiieiit of the Interior National Park Sendee Cultural Resourew 1849 0 Street, N.W., RoomNC 300 Washington,DC. 20240 ADDENDUM TO: HAER WA-139-F COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT, BANKS LAKE DRY FALLS DAM & HAER WASH,13-GRACO,1F- MAIN CANAL HEADWORKS South end of Banks Lake, 1/2 mile northwest of Coulee City Grand Coulee Grant County Washington WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD PACIFIC WEST REGIONAL OFFICE National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 333 Bush Street San Francisco, CA 94104 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT, BANKS LAKE DRY FALLS DAM AND MAIN CANAL HEADWORKS HAER No. WA-139-F Location: At south end of Banks Lake, ½ mile northwest of Coulee City Grand Coulee Grant County Washington The northwest end of the Banks Lake Dry Falls Dam and Main Canal Headworks is located at latitude: 47.6266; longitude: -119.3302. The southeast end is located at latitude: 47.61535, longitude: -119.2943. The latitude and longitude coordinates were converted from the UTMs via Montana State University and Yellowstone National Park RCN Utilities and Tools web site on November 18, 2013. Dates of Construction: 1946-50 Engineers: Bureau of Reclamation Original Owner: Bureau of Reclamation Original Use: Dam and main canal headworks Present Owner: Bureau of Reclamation Present Use: Dam and main canal headworks Significance: The development potential of the Grand Coulee, a gorge carved out by the Columbia River before that waterway shifted its course, was a deciding factor in Reclamation’s choice for the location of a massive irrigation project served by the waters of the Columbia River.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Roosevelt NRA: the Story of the Columbia Basin Project
    LAKE ROOSEVELT The Story of the Columbia Basin Project THE STORY OF THE COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT 1964 United States Printing Office Washington, D.C. TABLE OF CONTENTS columbia_basin/index.htm Last Updated: 01- Feb- 2008 LAKE ROOSEVELT The Story of the Columbia Basin Project TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Foreword Introduction The Dam The Irrigation System Why Pick This Location? The Settler Recreation in the Basin What It Means How It Started How It Developed Touring the Columbia Basin Project Data on the Dam and Project UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary BUREAU OF RECLAMATION FLOYD E. DOMINY, Commissioner LAKE ROOSEVELT The Story of the Columbia Basin Project FOREWORD This is the story of the Columbia Basin Federal Reclamation Project, of Grand Coulee Dam and Powerplant, and of the 1-million-acre-plus irrigation development. Though often thought of as separate works, these two monuments of man's ingenuity and engineering ability are part of an overall plan to harness the power of a great river and reclaim a desert wasteland. Neither the dam nor the irrigation features of the project can be considered separately—they are interrelated in too many ways. Benefits to the economy of the Pacific Northwest, the increase in population, increased production of foodstuffs and manufactured articles, the increase in trade and commerce with Eastern States, all are joint products of the dam, powerplant, and the irrigation development of the project. Information gained through the planning, building, and operation of Grand Coulee Dam and the Columbia Basin Project irrigation works is another product of this vast development and still serves as source material for students in many fields, since building a dam and irrigation works of this size went beyond existing experience and information.
    [Show full text]
  • Appraisal Evaluation of Columbia River Mainstem Off-Channel Storage Options Volume I of II
    Appraisal Evaluation of Columbia River Mainstem Off-Channel Storage Options Volume I of II U.S. Department of the Interior Washington State Department of Ecology Bureau of Reclamation Pacifi c Northwest Region May 2007 Cover Photos: Left to right: Crab Creek, Sand Hollow, Foster Creek, and Hawk Creek RECLAMATION Managing Water in the West Appraisal Evaluation of Columbia River Mainstem Off-Channel Storage Options Volume I of II U.S. Department of the Interior Washington State Department of Ecology Bureau of Reclamation Pacifi c Northwest Region Prepared by the following contractors under Contract No. 03CA10150B Washington Group International John Petrovsky Associates ESA Adolfson Larry Von Thun, Consulting Engineering Kim de Rubertis, Consulting Geologist May 2007 Printed on 30% recycled content paper Preface The Columbia River Water Management The State of Washington, the U.S. Bureau Program, an ongoing effort by the State of of Reclamation (Reclamation), and the Washington to work with Tribal, federal, three Columbia Basin Project irrigation state, and local governments, and other districts signed a Memorandum of stakeholders, desires to develop a long- Understanding (MOU) in December 2004 term approach to water allocation from the to provide a framework for the parties to mainstem Columbia River. Allocation and work together to support projects designed development of water supplies was to optimize existing water management addressed by the Washington State and to explore options for new storage that Legislature and Governor Gregoire in would provide additional water for priority February 2006, with the addition of uses at key times. Title 90, Section 90.020 to the Revised The primary purpose of the current Code of Washington (RCW).
    [Show full text]
  • Washington Geology, December 1999
    WASHINGTON VOL. 27, NO. 2/3/4 DECEMBER 1999 RESOURCES GEOLOGY NATURAL IN THIS ISSUE z Geology of Steamboat Rock, Grand Coulee, Washington, p. 3 z Observations of glacial, geomorphic, biologic, and mineralogic developments in the crater of Mount St. Helens, Washington, p. 9 z Augite crystals from Doty Hills, Lewis County, Washington, p. 20 z Some notable finds of Columbian Mammoths from Washington State, p. 23 z July 2, 1999, Satsop earthquake, p. 28 z Do we really need another wake-up call?, p. 29 z Earth Connections, p. 30 The Future of Washington Geology WASHINGTON We apologize for our sporadic publication schedule over the GEOLOGY last two years. Budget cuts and understaffing have taken their Vol. 27, No. 2/3/4 toll. Starting with the year 2000, we plan to issue Washington December 1999 Geology three times a year—in March, July, and November. Is- sues will be smaller, but we plan to keep the same high stan- dards. We will still be looking for articles on various facets of Washington Geology (ISSN 1058-2134) is published four times each year by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, the geology of Washington that appeal to both the professional Division of Geology and Earth Resources. This publication is free upon geologist and the interested amateur. We do not charge for pub- request. The Division also publishes bulletins, information circulars, lication, but neither do we pay the author. Instead, authors re- reports of investigations, geologic maps, and open-file reports. A list of ceive 20 complimentary copies of the issue containing their these publications will be sent upon request.
    [Show full text]