DOCSLIB.ORG

Mcnary-John Day Transmission Line Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mcnary-John Day Transmission Line Project McNary-John Day Transmission Line Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Bonneville Power Administration February 2002 McNary-John Day Transmission Line Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0332) Responsible Agency: Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Department of Interior: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Bureau of Indian Affairs. Department of Army: Corps of Engineers. States Involved: Oregon and Washington Abstract: Bonneville is proposing to construct, operate, and maintain a 79-mile-long 500-kilovolt- transmission line in Benton and Klickitat Counties, Washington, and Umatilla and Sherman counties, Oregon. The new line would start at Bonneville’s McNary Substation in Oregon and would cross the Columbia River just north of the substation into Washington. The line would then proceed west for about 70 miles along the Columbia River. At the John Day Dam, the line would again cross the Columbia River into Oregon and terminate at Bonneville’s John Day Substation. The new line would parallel existing transmission lines for the entire length; mostly within existing available right-of-way. Presently, the existing transmission lines in the area are operating at capacity. These lines help move power from the east side of the Cascades to the west side, where there is a high need for electricity (cities along the I-5 corridor). Because the Northwest has only recently recovered from a shortfall in electric energy supply and a volatile wholesale power market in which prices reached record highs, there are many new proposals for facilities to generate new power. Some of these facilities are in the vicinity of the McNary- John Day project; the proposed line would help insure that existing and newly generated power could move through the system. Bonneville is also considering the No Action Alternative and several short-line routing alternatives. The short routing alternatives include three half-mile-long routes for getting from the McNary Substation to the Columbia River crossing; three two-mile-long routes where the Hanford- John Day transmission line joins the existing corridor; two 1,000-foot-long routes at corridor mile 32; and two 500-foot-long routes at corridor mile 35. Public comments are being accepted through April 23, 2002. For additional information: Please mail comments to: Stacy Mason Bonneville Power Administration Bonneville Power Administration Communications Office-KC-7 P.O. Box 3621-KEC P.O. Box 12999 Portland OR 97208-3621 Portland OR 97212 (503) 230-5455 [email protected] [email protected] To receive additional copies of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Summary, call Bonneville’s document request line at 1-800-622-4520. You may access the Draft EIS on our web site at http://www.bpa.gov, look for environmental analysis, Active Projects. For information on DOE National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) activities, please contact: Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, EH-42, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington D.C. 20585, 1-800-472-2756; or visit the DOE NEPA Web at www.eh.doe.gov/nepa Table of Contents Table of Contents SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. S-1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ S-1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ............................................................................ S-1 Purposes ......................................................................................................... S-2 Alternatives...................................................................................................... S-5 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study ........................... S-7 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION .................... S-8 Land Use and Recreation ................................................................................ S-8 Geology, Soils, and Seismicity....................................................................... S-10 Streams, Rivers, and Fish.............................................................................. S-11 Wetlands and Groundwater ........................................................................... S-14 Vegetation ..................................................................................................... S-17 Wildlife........................................................................................................... S-19 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................ S-23 Visual Resources........................................................................................... S-25 Socioeconomics, Public Services, and Utilities .............................................. S-27 Transportation ............................................................................................... S-29 Air Quality...................................................................................................... S-30 Noise ............................................................................................................. S-32 Public Health and Safety................................................................................ S-33 CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ..............................................1-1 NEED FOR ACTION ...................................................................................................1-1 DECISIONS TO BE SUPPORTED BY THE EIS ................................................................1-3 PURPOSES ..............................................................................................................1-3 COOPERATING AGENCIES .........................................................................................1-4 SCOPING AND MAJOR ISSUES ...................................................................................1-4 OTHER PROJECTS OR DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THIS PROJECT .................................1-5 HOW THIS EIS IS ORGANIZED ...................................................................................1-7 CHAPTER 2 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES.........................................2-1 PROPOSED ACTION ..................................................................................................2-1 Location............................................................................................................2-1 Existing Corridor ...............................................................................................2-1 New Easements ...............................................................................................2-4 Towers..............................................................................................................2-4 Tower Footings.................................................................................................2-4 Conductors .......................................................................................................2-5 Tree Clearing....................................................................................................2-6 Access Roads...................................................................................................2-7 Staging Areas...................................................................................................2-8 Substation Work ...............................................................................................2-8 Line Planning and Construction ........................................................................2-9 Construction Schedule and Work Crews.........................................................2-10 BPA McNary-John Day Transmission Project i Draft EIS February 2002 Maintenance...................................................................................................2-10 Estimated Project Cost ...................................................................................2-11 SHORT-LINE ROUTING ALTERNATIVES .....................................................................2-11 McNary Substation Alternatives......................................................................2-11 Hanford-John Day Junction Alternatives .........................................................2-12 Corridor Miles 32 and 35 Alternatives .............................................................2-13 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE .......................................................................................2-14 COMPARISON OF THE ALTERNATIVES AND SUMMARY OF IMPACTS .............................2-14 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED STUDY......................2-16 Oregon Route Alternative ...............................................................................2-17 McNary Substation Southeast Alternative.......................................................2-17 Increased Capacity Line Alternative................................................................2-17 Underground Transmission Line Alternative ...................................................2-18 Double Circuit Alternative ...............................................................................2-18 CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES, AND MITIGATION..................................................................3-1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A History of Resource Use and Disturbance in Riverine Basins Of
    Robert C. Wissmar,'Jeanetle E, Smith,'Bruce A. Mclntosh,,HiramW. Li,. Gordon H. Reeves.and James R. Sedell' A Historyof ResourceUse and Disturbancein RiverineBasins of Eastern Oregonand Washington(Early 1800s-1990s) Abstract Rj\( r n.rsr, rr Cds.lde u rl|alrlo|ogicso1c\|n|Slhalshrpedthepresent'dailalrlsraprlsrn l.ii\||sl'rn|e!nroddriParianecosrstctnsllllldr'li!l's|oi'L|!7jrgand anllril,rri!ndl.es.|edi1iiculttonanagebtaull]itl]cis|no{nlboU|holtheseecosrelnsfu dele|pprorrrlrrrr's|ortrl.rtingthesrInptonlsofd {ith pluns lbr resoliirg t h$itatscontinuetodeclile'Altlrrratjrrl|r.nrrrbusin\!jelnan!genentst' hoPel'orinlp|ornlgthee.os}sl.jn]h;odjl('tsi|\anrlpopuationlelelsoffshaldirj1d]jn''PrioIili(jsi|r(|ullc|hePf Nrtersheds (e.g.. roarll+: a Introduction to$,ards"natur-al conditions" that nleetLhe hislr)ri- tal requirernentsoffish and t'ildlile. Some rnajor As a resull of PresidentClirrton's ! orcst Summit qucstions that need to be ansrererl arc. "How hale in PortlandOrcgon cluring Spring 19913.consider- hisloricalccosvstcms iunctionecl and ho* nale ntr ablc attention is heing licusecl on thc inllucnccs man a( lions changcd them'/'' of hre-t .rn,l,'tlrr'r r, -urrrr. mJnlrepmpntl,f;r.ti, c- orr lhe health of l'acific No|th$'esLecosystems. This drrcumcntrcvict's the environmentalhis- l\{anagcrncnt recornmendations of an inLer-agr:ncv torr ol theinfl.r-n, '-,,f h',rrrunJ, ti\'ti, - in cJ-l tcanrol scicntistspoint to the urgenLneed frrr irn- ern O|cgon and Waslington over lhe pasl l\\o in ccosvstemm:uagement (Foresl lic- lr|1^emcnts centurie-s.The
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Below and the Shoreline Analysis Report];
    C U M U L A T I V E I M P A C T S A NALYSIS Klickitat County’s Shoreline Master Plan Prepared for: Klickitat County 228 W Main Street Goldendale, WA 98620 Prepared by: April 2019 The Watershed Company Reference Number: 121201 Cite this document as: The Watershed Company. April 2019. Cumulative Impacts Analysis of Klickitat County’s Shoreline Master Plan. Prepared for Klickitat County, WA. The Watershed Company April 2019 T A B L E O F C ONTENTS Page # 1 Introduction ......................................................... 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Document Approach and Overview ................................................................. 3 2 Summary of Existing Conditions ...................... 4 2.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) ................................................................................ 5 2.1.1 Environment .......................................................................................................... 5 2.1.2 Land Use ............................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) ............................................................................................ 6 2.2.1 Environment .......................................................................................................... 6 2.2.2 Land Use ............................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Rock
    [Show full text]
  • INDC TR-2018-02, "Exterior Lighting for Navigation Locks and Dams
    03 - 2018 - INDC TR Standardization and Sustainability Initiative Renewable Energy Applications for Locks and Dams Standardization and Sustainability Charlie Allen, Nicholas M. Josefik, Edith Martinez-Guerra, March 2018 and Stefan Miller Center McNary Dam, Oregon Inland Navigation Design Design Navigation Inland Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. The Inland Navigation Design Center (INDC) develops solutions to complex en- gineering problems for the nation’s inland waterways to serve the Army, the Depart- ment of Defense, Federal Agencies and the Nation. To find out more about the Inland Navigation Design Center please visit: https://apps.usace.army.mil/sites/TEN/IND/Pages/default.aspx Standardization and Sustainability Initiative INDC TR-2018-03 March 2018 Renewable Energy Applications for Locks and Dams Standardization and Sustainability Gerald C. Allen Hydroelectric Design Center U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Portland District 333 SW 1st Ave Portland, OR 97204-1290 Nicholas M. Josefik U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL) 72 Lyme Road Hanover, NH 03755-1290 Edith Martinez-Guerra U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) Environmental Laboratory (EL) Waterways Experiment Station, 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199 Stefan M. Miller U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mississippi Valley Division New Orleans District 7400 Leake Ave. New Orleans, LA 70118-3651 Final Report Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Washington, DC 20314-1000 Monitored by USACE Inland Navigation Design Center INDC TR-2018-03 ii Abstract This report provides a standardized approach for gauging the feasibility of potential solar, wind, and hydropower projects for application at U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Umatilla Ped-Bike Plan
    U m a t i l l a Pedestrian & Bicycle MASTER PLAN June 3, 2003 David Evans and Associates, Inc. Umatilla Pedestrian & Bicycle Master Plan 1 (UMAT0001) This project is partially funded by the Transportation and Growth Management Program (TGM), a joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land Development and Conservation. This TGM grant is fi nanced, in part, by federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), local government, and the State of Oregon Funds. Neither the City of Umatilla nor ODOT guarantee funding to complete any project described in this document. Historic Umatilla River bridge David Evans and Associates, Inc. Umatilla Pedestrian & Bicycle Master Plan 2 (UMAT0001) Contents Chapter 1 — Scope . 5 Chapter 2 — Background Research . 6 2.1 Sources . 6 2.2 Area Description . 6 2.3 Jurisdictions . 6 2.4 Nonmotorized Traffi c Generators . 7 2.5 Implementation Plan . 9 Chapter 3 — Inventory . 10 3.1 Street System . 10 3.2 Pedestrian Facilities . 11 3.3 Bicycle Facilities . 12 Chapter 4 — Systemwide Factors . 14 4.1 Natural and Manmade Barriers . 14 4.2 Development Pattern . 14 4.3 Street Standards and Development Codes . 15 4.4 Funding . 17 Chapter 5 — Neighborhood Analysis . 23 5.1 Project Evaluation Criteria . 23 5.2 South Hill Projects . 26 5.3 Downtown Umatilla Projects . 36 5.4 Central Area Projects . 41 5.5 McNary Projects . 45 Chapter 6 — Capital Improvement Program . 49 Appendix A — Glossary . A-1 Appendix B — Pedestrian & Bicycle System Maps . B-1 Appendix C — Transportation SDC Example . C-1 Appendix D — General Plan and Code Amendments D-1 Appendix E — Inter-Jurisdictional Agreements .
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Blade-Strike Modelsfor Estimating the Biological Performance Large Ofkaplan Hydro Turbines 3.3
    DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Printed in the United States of America Available to DOE and DOE contactors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062; ph: (865) 576-8401 fax: (865) 576-5728 email: [email protected] Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161 ph: (800) 553-6847 fax: (703) 605-6900 email: [email protected] online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm This document was printed on recycled paper. (9/2003) PNNL-15370 Evaluation of Blade-Strike Models for Estimating the Biological Performance of Large Kaplan Hydro Turbines Z.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Passage Structures at Bonneville and John Day Dams by Pacific Lamprey, 2013 and 2014
    Technical Report 2015-11-DRAFT USE OF PASSAGE STRUCTURES AT BONNEVILLE AND JOHN DAY DAMS BY PACIFIC LAMPREY, 2013 AND 2014 by M.A. Kirk, C.C. Caudill, C.J. Noyes, E.L. Johnson, S.R. Lee, and M.L. Keefer Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-1136 and H. Zobott, J.C. Syms, R. Budwig, and D. Tonina Center for Ecohydraulics Research University of Idaho Boise, ID 83702 for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Portland District 2015 Technical Report 2015-11-DRAFT USE OF PASSAGE STRUCTURES AT BONNEVILLE AND JOHN DAY DAMS BY PACIFIC LAMPREY, 2013 AND 2014 by M.A. Kirk, C.C. Caudill, C.J. Noyes, E.L. Johnson, S.R. Lee, and M.L. Keefer Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-1136 and H. Zobott, J.C. Syms, R. Budwig, and D. Tonina Center for Ecohydraulics Research University of Idaho Boise, ID 83702 for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Portland District 2015 i Acknowledgements This project was financed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District and was facilitated by Sean Tackley. We would like to thank Andy Traylor, Brian Bissell, Ida Royer, Ben Hausman, Miro Zyndol, Dale Klindt and the additional project biologists at Bonneville and John Day dams who provided on-site support. We would like to thank Dan Joosten, Kaan Oral, Inga Aprans, Noah Hubbard, Mike Turner, Robert Escobar, Kate Abbott, Matt Dunkle, Chuck Boggs, Les Layng, and Jeff Garnett from the University of Idaho for assisting with the construction, maintenance, and field sampling associated with both Lamprey Passage Structures (LPSs).
    [Show full text]
  • Hydropower Technologies Program — Harnessing America’S Abundant Natural Resources for Clean Power Generation
    U.S. Department of Energy — Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Wind & Hydropower Technologies Program — Harnessing America’s abundant natural resources for clean power generation. Contents Hydropower Today ......................................... 1 Enhancing Generation and Environmental Performance ......... 6 Large Turbine Field-Testing ............................... 9 Providing Safe Passage for Fish ........................... 9 Improving Mitigation Practices .......................... 11 From the Laboratories to the Hydropower Communities ..... 12 Hydropower Tomorrow .................................... 14 Developing the Next Generation of Hydropower ............ 15 Integrating Wind and Hydropower Technologies ............ 16 Optimizing Project Operations ........................... 17 The Federal Wind and Hydropower Technologies Program ..... 19 Mission and Goals ...................................... 20 2003 Hydropower Research Highlights Alden Research Center completes prototype turbine tests at their facility in Holden, MA . 9 Laboratories form partnerships to develop and test new sensor arrays and computer models . 10 DOE hosts Workshop on Turbulence at Hydroelectric Power Plants in Atlanta . 11 New retrofit aeration system designed to increase the dissolved oxygen content of water discharged from the turbines of the Osage Project in Missouri . 11 Low head/low power resource assessments completed for conventional turbines, unconventional systems, and micro hydropower . 15 Wind and hydropower integration activities in 2003 aim to identify potential sites and partners . 17 Cover photo: To harness undeveloped hydropower resources without using a dam as part of the system that produces electricity, researchers are developing technologies that extract energy from free flowing water sources like this stream in West Virginia. ii HYDROPOWER TODAY Water power — it can cut deep canyons, chisel majestic mountains, quench parched lands, and transport tons — and it can generate enough electricity to light up millions of homes and businesses around the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson 1 the Columbia River, a River of Power
    Lesson 1 The Columbia River, a River of Power Overview RIVER OF POWER BIG IDEA: The Columbia River System was initially changed and engineered for human benefit Disciplinary Core Ideas in the 20th Century, but now balance is being sought between human needs and restoration of habitat. Science 4-ESS3-1 – Obtain and combine Lesson 1 introduces students to the River of Power information to describe that energy curriculum unit and the main ideas that they will investigate and fuels are derived from natural resources and their uses affect the during the eleven lessons that make up the unit. This lesson environment. (Clarification Statement: focuses students on the topics of the Columbia River, dams, Examples of renewable energy and stakeholders. Through an initial brain storming session resources could include wind energy, students record and share their current understanding of the water behind dams, and sunlight; main ideas of the unit. This serves as a pre-unit assessment nonrenewable energy resources are fossil fuels and fissile materials. of their understanding and an opportunity to identify student Examples of environmental effects misconceptions. Students are also introduced to the main could include loss of habitat to dams, ideas of the unit by viewing the DVD selection Rivers to loss of habitat from surface mining, Power. Their understanding of the Columbia River and the and air pollution from burning of fossil fuels.) stakeholders who depend on the river is deepened through the initial reading selection in the student book Voyage to the Social Studies Pacific. Economics 2.4.1 Understands how geography, natural resources, Students set up their science notebook, which they will climate, and available labor use to record ideas and observations throughout the unit.
    [Show full text]
  • Dams and Hydroelectricity in the Columbia
    COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN: DAMS AND HYDROELECTRICITY The power of falling water can be converted to hydroelectricity A Powerful River Major mountain ranges and large volumes of river flows into the Pacific—make the Columbia precipitation are the foundation for the Columbia one of the most powerful rivers in North America. River Basin. The large volumes of annual runoff, The entire Columbia River on both sides of combined with changes in elevation—from the the border is one of the most hydroelectrically river’s headwaters at Canal Flats in BC’s Rocky developed river systems in the world, with more Mountain Trench, to Astoria, Oregon, where the than 470 dams on the main stem and tributaries. Two Countries: One River Changing Water Levels Most dams on the Columbia River system were built between Deciding how to release and store water in the Canadian the 1940s and 1980s. They are part of a coordinated water Columbia River system is a complex process. Decision-makers management system guided by the 1964 Columbia River Treaty must balance obligations under the CRT (flood control and (CRT) between Canada and the United States. The CRT: power generation) with regional and provincial concerns such as ecosystems, recreation and cultural values. 1. coordinates flood control 2. optimizes hydroelectricity generation on both sides of the STORING AND RELEASING WATER border. The ability to store water in reservoirs behind dams means water can be released when it’s needed for fisheries, flood control, hydroelectricity, irrigation, recreation and transportation. Managing the River Releasing water to meet these needs influences water levels throughout the year and explains why water levels The Columbia River system includes creeks, glaciers, lakes, change frequently.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 22 Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit—Mainstem Upper Columbia River Critical Habitat Unit
    Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification: Rationale for Why Habitat is Essential, and Documentation of Occupancy Chapter 22 Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit—Mainstem Upper Columbia River Critical Habitat Unit 575 Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification Chapter 22 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service September 2010 Chapter 22. Mainstem Upper Columbia River Critical Habitat Unit The Mainstem Upper Columbia River CHU is essential for maintaining bull trout distribution within this unique geographic region of the Mid-Columbia RU and conserving the fluvial migratory life history types exhibited by many of the populations from adjacent core areas. It is essential for conservation by maintaining broad distribution within the Mid-Columbia RU across Washington, Idaho, and Oregon. Its location between Chief Joseph Dam in the most northern geographical area and John Day Dam in the most southern area provides key connectivity for the Mid-Columbia River RU. It is essential for maintaining distribution and genetic contributions to the Lower Columbia and Snake River Mainstems and 13 CHUs. Bull trout are known to reside year-round as sub-adults and adults, but spawning adults may utilize the mainstem Columbia River for up to at least 9 months as well. Several studies in the upper Columbia and lower Snake Rivers indicate migration between the Mainstem Upper Columbia River CHU and core areas, generally during periods of cooler water temperatures. FMO habitat provided by the mainstem Columbia River is essential for conservation because it supports the expression of the fluvial migratory life history forms for multiple core areas. In addition, there are several accounts of amphidromous life history forms present between Yakima and John Day Rivers that may still have the potential to express anadromy (see Appendix 1 for more detailed information).
    [Show full text]
  • Final Umatilla Basin Water Supply Study for the Confederated Tribes
    FINAL UMATILLA BASIN WATER SUPPLY STUDY for the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Prepared by: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Boise, Idaho January 2012 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Protecting America's Great Outdoors and Powering Our Future The U.S. Department of the Interior protects America's natural resources and heritage, honors our cultures and tribal communities, and supplies the energy to power our future. MISSION OF THE 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. General location map. CONTENTS Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1 Study Background ..................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................. 2 History ................................................................................................................... 3 Appraisal-Level Water Supply Alternatives .................................................................. 4 Hydrology Baseline .................................................................................................... 5 WID Full Exchange ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cover Black White
    r.'Z"r.1 ~ Teacher’s Guide to US Army Corps of Engineers® Bonneville Dam Portland District Teacher’s Guide To Bonneville Dam Packet #2 Initial Concepts and Pre-Draft: Patrick Barry Becky Bernson Deanne Converse Katie Kinney Kathy Peck Jim Runkles Dan Troglin Bill Wiley 1984 Summer Visitor Center Staff. Thanks to: George Wilson, Stevenson High School Bev McKinnon, Carson Elementary Final Edition Writers and Editors: Anna Bates and Shelley Gimbal Final Edition Review Team: Patrick Barry Jim Runkles 1988 Summer Visitor Center Staff i Table of Contents Page Goals of the Teacher’s Guide To Bonneville Dam ................................................................................................. v Objectives of the Teacher’s Guide To Bonneville Dam.......................................................................................... v Introduction To Teachers Guide: How this Guide is organized ................................................................................................................................1 Planning a visit to Bonneville Dam. .....................................................................................................................1 Facilities at Bonneville Dam................................................................................................................................ 2 Project Map......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Teacher’s Checklist ...............................................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]