DOCSLIB.ORG

Wasatch Front South Boundary Path Rating Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wasatch Front South Boundary Path Rating Study Wasatch Front South Boundary Path Rating Study This study has been performed to identify Wasatch Front South boundary capacity, transmission constraints and mitigations PacifiCorp 12/18/2015 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 2 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 3 2. Methodology ....................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Study Assumption .................................................................................... 6 2.2 Study Criteria ........................................................................................... 7 2.3 List of Resources ....................................................................................... 8 3. Simulation Setup ................................................................................................ 9 4. Conclusion and Recommendations ................................................................11 Appendix .................................................................................................................13 1 | P a g e C:\Users\p95594\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\M8XSQ745\Wasatch Front South Boundary Capacity_Dec-2015-final.docx Executive Summary The Wasatch Front South (WFS) boundary is a critical transmission path within PacifiCorp’s transmission footprint located in central Utah. The WFS path is primarily used to serve load customers in the Wasatch Front load pocket and to transfer power across the main grid transmission system, from central Utah to northern Utah and onto Idaho and the Pacific Northwest. The study has been performed to identify WFS boundary capacity, transmission constraints and various recommended mitigation as listed in Table 1. These improvements will help to accommodate future transmission obligations across the Wasatch Front South boundary which is currently thermally limited mostly by clearance impacted transmission lines which have been derated. Transmission lines limiting the Wasatch Front South boundary capacity are arranged in Table 1 in the order of most severe to least severe. Table 1 WFS Boundary Flow Limitation and Recommendation Wasatch Front South Flow Limitation/Mitigation 4055 MW Camp Williams – Ninety South #2 345 kV line Recommendation: Fix line clearance issue on Camp Williams – Ninety South #2 345 kV line 4646 MW Camp Williams – Ninety South #1 345 kV Recommendation: Fix line clearance issue on Camp Williams – Ninety #1 345 kV line Camp Williams – Oquirrh #1 and #2 345 kV lines 4840 MW Camp Williams – Steel Mill 345 kV #1 Recommendation: Fix line clearance issue on Camp Williams – Oquirrh #1 & #2 345 kV lines, and Camp Williams - Steel Mill #1 345 kV line 4945 MW Terminal – Oquirrh #1 and #2 345 kV lines Ninety South – Midvalley #1 345 kV line 2 | P a g e C:\Users\p95594\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\M8XSQ745\Wasatch Front South Boundary Capacity_Dec-2015-final.docx 1. Introduction The Wasatch Front South boundary is located in the southern part of Utah Valley and is comprised of seven 345 kV and one 138 kV transmission lines. This boundary is one of the three paths which are used to serve Wasatch Front area load. The other two paths are Path C (Southeast Idaho to Utah) and Evanston West (Southwest Wyoming to Utah). The Wasatch Front South boundary power flow is a function of Wasatch Front load as the total power flowing across this transmission path is primarily used to serve load customers in the Wasatch Front load pocket. The major generating resources supplying Wasatch Front load from south of the boundary are: Huntington (coal), Hunter (coal), Sunnyside (coal/cogeneration), Currant Creek (gas) and new renewable recourses both wind and solar farms. The major transmissions tie lines from the south are: TOT 2B1 (Utah – New Mexico), TOT 2B2 (Utah – Arizona), TOT 2C (Utah – Southern Nevada) and Path 27 (Utah – LADWP, IPP DC line). Other sizeable generating resources located north of the Wasatch Front South boundary are Lake Side I and II, Gadsby, West Valley and Nebo. Figure 1 show the Wasatch Front South boundary. The Wasatch Front load bubble encompasses five smaller regions in Utah: Salt Lake Valley, Utah Valley, Ogden, Tooele Valley, and Park City. Due to the magnitude of the load in this area, it is separated into smaller pockets to better analyze the characteristics of the load and the transmission system for the area. Definition of Wasatch Front South (WFS) boundary: Wasatch Front South (WFS) Metered Point Camp Williams - Mona 345 kV # 1 Camp Williams Camp Williams - Mona 345 kV # 1 Camp Williams Camp Williams - Mona 345 kV # 1 Camp Williams Camp Williams - Mona 345 kV # 1 Camp Williams Spanish Fork - Huntington 345 kV #1 Spanish Fork Spanish Fork - Emery 345 kV #1 Spanish Fork Oquirrh - Clover 345 kV # 1 Oquirrh Dry Creek - Nebo 138 kV #1 Dry Creek 3 | P a g e C:\Users\p95594\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\M8XSQ745\Wasatch Front South Boundary Capacity_Dec-2015-final.docx Utah Transmission Schedule Points NUT extends to Path C To Idaho To Populus To Treasureton MALAD Less than 230 Kv Line Utah 230 kV Line WHEELON/ 345 kV Line CUTLER 500 kV DC Line BEN BIRCH LOMOND CREEK Wyoming Syracuse FLAMING NUT GORGE TERMINAL WAPA Vernal OQUIRRH 90 SOUTH ASHLEY VERNAL CAMP WILLIAMS Wasatch Front UPALCO DGT South Bonanza SPANISH FORK MDGT BONANZA CURRANT MPAC CREEK RANGELY MONA MDWP IPP SUNNYSIDE GON.PAV Clover GONDER Huntington/Sigurd Cutplane o HUNTINGTON d BLACK ROCK a PAVANT r o Path 32 HUNTER/ l Emery Tamarisk o C SIGURD MOAB PACES e in L C D Hatch BLUNDELL PAROWAN PINTO THREE PANGUITCH PEAKS WEST CEDAR HENRIEVILLE RED BUTTE TOT 2B2 ABAJO TOT 2C TOT 2B1 REDB NAVAJO GLEN FOUR CORNERS CANYON POWELL HARRY FourCorne345 ALLEN GlenCanyon2 Figure 1 Wasatch Front South Boundary 4 | P a g e C:\Users\p95594\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\M8XSQ745\Wasatch Front South Boundary Capacity_Dec-2015-final.docx The Wasatch Front is a summer peaking load pocket and the load in this area correlates to the temperature in the region. Figure 2 shows the historical Wasatch Front load for the past five years. Table 2 below shows the historical peak from year 2011 – 2015 and the percentage load growth each year. The Wasatch Front load pocket represents the largest concentration of load in the PacifiCorp system, totaling over 4700 MW. Wasatch Front Historical Load Graph 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 Wasatch Front Load (MW) Load Front Wasatch 500 0 1/2/11 7/21/11 2/6/12 8/24/12 3/12/13 9/28/13 4/16/14 11/2/14 5/21/15 12/7/15 Wasatch Front Load 2013 Wasatch Front Load 2014 Wasatch Front Load 2011 Wasatch Front Load 2012 Wasatch Front Load 2015 Figure 2 Wasatch Front Historical Load from 2011-2015 Table 2 Historical Wasatch Front Peak Load Year Peak Load Percentage Load Growth (MW) 2011 4369 MW 2012 4512 MW 3.27% 2013 4717 MW* 4.54% 2014 4760 MW 0.91% 2015 4734 MW -0.55% * The Nebo, Jerusalem, and Ash Grove load was removed from the Wasatch Front load pocket in 2014. 5 | P a g e C:\Users\p95594\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\M8XSQ745\Wasatch Front South Boundary Capacity_Dec-2015-final.docx The load projections for the Wasatch Front area from the 2015 Load and Resource Study are shown in Table 3. An average of 1.6% load growth each year has been calculated from the network load forecast data submitted by Energy Supply Management (formerly PacifiCorp Commercial and Trading) UAMPS and UMPA, which are PacifiCorp Transmission’s network customers in the Wasatch Front area. Table 3 Wasatch Front Load Forecast, 2015 Load and Resource Study 2015 Coincident Summer Peak Load Forecast (MW) Year Total Wasatch Front Load 2016 5040 2017 5111 2018 5203 2019 5285 2020 5374 2021 5464 2022 5552 2023 5644 2024 5734 2. Methodology 2.1 Study Assumption The study assumptions made in performing this analysis are outlined below. The study took into account published path ratings on the following Western Electricity Coordination Council (WECC) paths: TOT 2B11, TOT 2B2, TOT 2C. The base case transmission line ratings in southern Utah were checked to ensure consistency with PacifiCorp’s Weak Link Database ratings. Resources/tie line flows were adjusted to reflect firm transmission commitments. The major (above 20 MW), new solar and wind generation facilities in southern Utah are incorporated in the base case to reflect existing and planned generation in the system. Table 6 shows the list of planned renewable facilities. The study was performed with the assumption that the prior WECC criterion that mandated the study of a double line outage condition for adjacent circuits on separate transmission structures for 300 kV and above is no longer required. Elimination of this criterion becomes effective January 2016. Hence, the North of Huntington/Sigurd cutplane is not limited by the N-2 outage of the Huntington – Spanish Fork 345 kV and Emery – Spanish Fork 345 kV lines (adjacent circuits on separate structures). 1 TOT 2B1 capacity will be increased to 700 MW northbound after the Pinto 345 kV #3 phase shifter is in-service (2016). 6 | P a g e C:\Users\p95594\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\M8XSQ745\Wasatch Front South Boundary Capacity_Dec-2015-final.docx
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Wasatch Fault
    The WasatchWasatchThe FaultFault UtahUtah Geological Geological Survey Survey PublicPublic Information Information Series Series 40 40 11 9 9 9 9 6 6 The WasatchWasatchThe FaultFault CONTENTS The ups and downs of the Wasatch fault . .1 What is the Wasatch fault? . .1 Where is the Wasatch fault? Globally ............................................................................................2 Regionally . .2 Locally .............................................................................................4 Surface expressions (how to recognize the fault) . .5 Land use - your fault? . .8 At a glance - geological relationships . .10 Earthquakes ..........................................................................................12 When/how often? . .14 Howbig? .........................................................................................15 Earthquake hazards . .15 Future probability of the "big one" . .16 Where to get additional information . .17 Selected bibliography . .17 Acknowledgments Text by Sandra N. Eldredge. Design and graphics by Vicky Clarke. Special thanks to: Walter Arabasz of the University of Utah Seismograph Stations for per- mission to reproduce photographs on p. 6, 9, II; Utah State University for permission to use the satellite image mosaic on the cover; Rebecca Hylland for her assistance; Gary Christenson, Kimm Harty, William Lund, Edith (Deedee) O'Brien, and Christine Wilkerson for their reviews; and James Parker for drafting. Research supported by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Department
    [Show full text]
  • Avalanche Hazard Investigations, Zoning, and Ordinances, Utah, Part 2
    International Snow Science Workshop Avalanche Hazard Investigations, Zoning, and Ordinances, Utah, Part 2 David A. Scroggin, Jack Johnson Company L. Darlene Batatian, P.G., Mountain Land Development ABSTRACT: The Wasatch Mountains of Utah are known as home to the 2002 Winter Olympics as well as having an abundance of avalanche history and avalanche hazard terrain that threatens ski areas, highways, and backcountry. Avalanche professionals historically have been drawn to and/or produced from this region resulting in an abundance of publications and research. Still, the subject of avalanche zoning continues to be neglected by developers and governmental approval agencies at communities encroaching on the foothills of the Bonneville Shoreline into avalanche terrain not previously developed. The first and only avalanche hazard ordinance adopted by a county (Scroggin/Batatian, ISSW 2004) is now being challenged by developers. While geologists continue to improve natural hazards mapping for earthquakes, landslides, and debris flows, avalanche hazards have not been included. This presentation will present a slide show and computer terrain analysis of recent large avalanches that have dropped over 5000 vertical feet to existing and proposed development areas as well as inspire a discussion on ways to address the problem both physically and politically. Potential solutions and ways to identify how to assist developers and governmental agencies will be presented. KEYWORDS: Avalanche Zoning, Ordinance, Governmental Approvals, Utah, 1. INTRODUCTION Salt Lake County ski areas (Alta, Snowbird, In 2002 the first avalanche zoning guidelines for Brighton, Solitude) and Utah Department of a county in Utah was taken into state ordinance Transportation (UDOT) highways of Big (www.avalanche.org/~issw2004/issw_previous/ Cottonwood Canyon, Little Cottonwood Canyon 2004/proceedings/pdffiles/papers/073.pdf).
    [Show full text]
  • Mountain Plants of Northeastern Utah
    MOUNTAIN PLANTS OF NORTHEASTERN UTAH Original booklet and drawings by Berniece A. Andersen and Arthur H. Holmgren Revised May 1996 HG 506 FOREWORD In the original printing, the purpose of this manual was to serve as a guide for students, amateur botanists and anyone interested in the wildflowers of a rather limited geographic area. The intent was to depict and describe over 400 common, conspicuous or beautiful species. In this revision we have tried to maintain the intent and integrity of the original. Scientific names have been updated in accordance with changes in taxonomic thought since the time of the first printing. Some changes have been incorporated in order to make the manual more user-friendly for the beginner. The species are now organized primarily by floral color. We hope that these changes serve to enhance the enjoyment and usefulness of this long-popular manual. We would also like to thank Larry A. Rupp, Extension Horticulture Specialist, for critical review of the draft and for the cover photo. Linda Allen, Assistant Curator, Intermountain Herbarium Donna H. Falkenborg, Extension Editor Utah State University Extension is an affirmative action/equal employment opportunity employer and educational organization. We offer our programs to persons regardless of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or disability. Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Robert L. Gilliland, Vice-President and Director, Cooperative Extension
    [Show full text]
  • The Wasatch Front in 1869: a Geographical Description
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 1965 The Wasatch Front in 1869: A Geographical Description Rodney Dale Griffin Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Geography Commons, History Commons, and the Mormon Studies Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Griffin, Rodney Dale, "The Wasatch Front in 1869: A Geographical Description" (1965). Theses and Dissertations. 4729. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/4729 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. THE WASATCH FRONT IN 1869 A geographical description A thesis presented to the department of geography brigham young university in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree master of science by rodney dale griffin august 1965 acknowledgments many have contributed to this thesis sincere appreciation is expressed to all who directly or indirectly aided in preparation of this work to dr robert L layton who gave me the idea that resulted in this study and has contributed in many ways to my academic efforts I1 offer sincere gratitude to dr alan grey chairman of the thesis committee who has spent long hours in reading and in suggesting changes I1 offer special gratitude appreciation is also expressed to professor elliott tuttle for advice
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Construction and Verification of A
    1 Construction and Verification of a Wasatch Front Community Velocity Model: Collaborative Research with San Diego State University and the University of Utah Final Technical Report Harold Magistrale Jim Pechmann Kim Olsen San Diego State University University of Utah Award numbers 05HQGR0006 and 05HQGR0011 06HQGR0009 and 06HQGR0012 2 Introduction. A fundamental problem in assessing seismic hazard from an active fault zone is determining the distribution, amplitude, frequency characteristics, and duration of strong ground motion from potential future earthquakes. This task becomes more difficult when accounting for the influence of 3D geologic structures, such as sediment-filled basins. The population of Utah is concentrated in such basins at the foot of the Wasatch Front, with 40% of the population residing in the Salt Lake basin. The Wasatch Front is formed by the active, normal Wasatch fault, the most prominent potential source of future large earthquakes in the area. Evaluation of the seismic hazard requires numerical ground motion simulations to quantify the contribution of deep basin structure and shallow site conditions to ground motions. A key requirement to perform these simulations is the availabilty of a 3D Wasatch Front community seismic velocity model (CVM). With NEHRP support we have developed an initial version of the community velocity model. The CVM has been developed in consultation with the Utah Ground-Shaking Working Group (UGSWG), a NEHRP-supported effort spearheaded by the Utah Geological Survey (UGS). CVM Construction Method. In creating the Wasatch Front CVM, we followed the method that Magistrale et al. (2000) used to construct the SCEC southern California CVM. Both models consist of detailed, rule-based representations of the major populated sediment-filled basins, embedded in a 3D crust, over a variable depth Moho, over upper mantle velocities.
    [Show full text]
  • Provo-Orem, Utah
    COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Provo-Orem, Utah U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research As of April 1, 2019 Provo-Orem, Utah Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis as of April 1, 2019 Executive Summary 2 Davis GREAT SALT Major Roads Summit ¨¦§80 LAKE Major Waterbodies Salt Lake Elko Urbanized Areas Provo-Orem HMA Tooele Wasatch UTAH LAKE UTAH NEVADA Duchesne Utah Juab Carbon ¨¦§15 White White Pine Executive Summary Sanpete Millard Emery Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Housing Market Area Description Salt Lake The Provo-Orem Housing Market Area (HMA) is coterminous with ! Lehi Wasatch ! American Fork ! Saratoga Springs ! Pleasant Grove the Provo-Orem, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), consisting Eagle Mountain ! ! ! Orem of Utah and Juab Counties. The HMA is one of three metropolitan Vineyard ! Tooele Provo areas comprising the Salt Lake City-Provo-Orem Combined UTAH LAKE Statistical Area, a region of more than 2.61 million residents along ! Spanish Fork the Wasatch Mountain Range (Wasatch Front, hereafter). The current HMA population is estimated at 657,900. ¨¦§15 Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA The presence of two universities, Brigham Young University (BYU) and Utah Valley University (UVU), has resulted in a highly educated Tools and Resources workforce and a growing number of high-tech jobs in the area. Find interim updates for this metropolitan area, and select geographies nationally, at PD&R’s Market-at-a-Glance tool. Additional data for the HMA can be found in this report’s supplemental tables. For information on HUD-supported activity in this area, see the Community Assessment Reporting Tool.
    [Show full text]
  • Ground Water in Utah's Densely Populated Wasatch Front Area the Challenge and the Choices
    Ground Water in Utah's Densely Populated Wasatch Front Area the Challenge and the Choices United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2232 Ground Water in Utah's Densely Populated Wasatch Front Area the Challenge and the Choices By DON PRICE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2232 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1985 For sale by the Branch of Distribution U.S. Geological Survey 604 South Pickett Street Alexandria, VA 22304 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Price, Don, 1929- Ground water in Utah's densely populated Wasatch Front area. (U.S. Geological Survey water-supply paper ; 2232) viii, 71 p. Bibliography: p. 70-71 Supt. of Docs. No.: I 19.13:2232 1. Water, Underground Utah. 2. Water, Underground Wasatch Range (Utah and Idaho) I. Title. II. Series. GB1025.U8P74 1985 553.7'9'097922 83-600281 PREFACE TIME WAS Time was when just the Red Man roamed this lonely land, Hunted its snowcapped mountains, its sun-baked desert sand; Time was when the White Man entered upon the scene, Tilled the fertile soil, turned the valleys green. Yes, he settled this lonely region, with the precious water he found In the sparkling mountain streams and hidden in the ground; He built his homes and cities; and temples toward the sun; But without the precious water, his work might not be done. .**- ste'iA CONTENTS Page Preface ..................................................... Ill Abstract ................................................... 1 Significance Ground water in perspective ................................ 1 The Wasatch Front area Utah's urban corridor ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • TOD Policy & Procedures
    LIVING CONNECTED DRAFT 4 Collaborative Process Acknowledgements The UTA TOD Strategic Plan has been created in collaboration with a Regional Partners variety of stakeholders along the Wasatch Front Region. The creative WFRC - Ted Knowlton, Julie Bjornstad, Scott Hess, Jon Larsen, Andy Li, process has been led by a Project Team that involved Utah Transit Callie New - MAG - Jim Price, Tim Hereth, Susan Hardy - Envision Utah Authority and the two Metropolitan Planning Organizations along the - Shane Woods - University of Utah - Reid Ewing Wasatch Front. This team has been responsible for creating the basic framework and concept of the strategic plan, as well as organizing Local Partners additional engagement events and activies, including focus groups with Salt Lake County - Wilf Sommerkorn - Provo City - Bill Peperone - public and private stakeholders and a peer agency review. Bountiful City - Chad Wilkinson, Beth Holbrook - Farmington City Focus Peer UTA - Dave Peterson, Eric Anderson - Weber County - James Ebert - Roy Project Concept Agency Concept Team Development Group Revisions Board Events Review Approval City - Steve Parkinson - Brigham City - Paul Larsen - West Valley City - Nicole Cottle Fig 0.1 - Collaborative Process Development Community Because of this collaborative process, the UTA TOD Strategic Plan Cowboy Partners - Dan Lofgren - Salt Development - Thomas Vegh represents a way in which various stakeholders from around the region - Form Development - Keith Smith, Chris Zarek - Daybreak - Stephen can work collectively to bring the vision of transit-oriented development James - Hamilton Partners - Bruce Bingham - Boulder Ventures - Jeff to fruition. Vitek, Sherry DeVoge - Giv Group - Chris Parker - Creasote - Bryce Baker Project Team UTA - Paul Drake, Jordan Swain, G.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Highlights Neighborhood Characteristics of TRAX And
    2014 | Volume 74, Number 1 Highlights Neighborhood Characteristics of TRAX • The Utah Transit Authority has invested almost $4.4 billion and FrontRunner Stations over the past 20 years in light rail and commuter rail transit along the Wasatch Front. John C. Downen, Senior Research Analyst • In 2010, almost 100,000 people, about 10 percent of Salt Lake County’s population, lived within a half-mile of an existing or future TRAX station. History of TRAX and FrontRunner • Approximately 12 percent of Salt Lake’s minority population The Utah Transit Authority began capital expenditures toward the lived within a half-mile of a light rail station in 2010. Nearly TRAX light rail system in 1994 and 1995. They were less than one-third of the population living near a station was minority $1.5 million in the first year and a little over $4.1 million in the versus 26 percent countywide. second year, but in 1996 UTA began investments in rolling stock (rail cars) and facilities (tracks, power systems, passenger stations, • Seventeen percent of Salt Lake County’s 2010 renter population lived within a half-mile of a TRAX station. These etc.) and total capital expenditures exceeded $26.5 million (all renters represented 51 percent of the population; amounts are constant 2013 dollars). The first TRAX line opened countywide, renters made up 29 percent of the population. in December 1999 and ran between downtown Salt Lake City and Sandy. A second line, between downtown Salt Lake and Rice- • While about one-third of all occupied dwelling units in Salt Eccles Stadium at the University of Utah, opened in 2001 and was Lake County in 2010 were renter occupied, 59 percent of extended to the university’s medical center by 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Timpanogos Cave National Monument Foundation Document
    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Foundation Document Overview Timpanogos Cave National Monument Utah Contact Information For more information about the Timpanogos Cave National Monument Foundation Document, contact: [email protected] or (801) 756-5238 or write to: Superintendent, Timpanogos Cave National Monument, RR 3 Box 200, American Fork, UT 84003 Purpose Significance Significance statements express why Timpanogos Cave National Monument resources and values are important enough to merit national park unit designation. Statements of significance describe why an area is important within a global, national, regional, and systemwide context. These statements are linked to the purpose of the park unit, and are supported by data, research, and consensus. Significance statements describe the distinctive nature of the park and inform management decisions, focusing efforts on preserving and protecting the most important resources and values of the park unit. • Cave System. The well-preserved, high-elevation cave TIMPANOGOS CAVE NATIONAL MONUMENT system showcases delicate ecosystems with an abundance protects a scientifically important of cave formations in a variety of forms and colors, providing opportunity for scientific discovery and intimate high-elevation, fault-controlled access to the resources. cave system and associated natural processes while promoting research, • Cave Geology. A unique intersection of geological processes public understanding, stewardship, continues to create the canyon and caves. This began with and enjoyment. rising hydrothermal fluids mixing with the water table dissolving passages and precipitating minerals along faults, resulting in an unusual combination of colored speleothems. • Cave Trail. The challenging 1.5 mile-long trail to the cave system ascends 1,067 feet, providing visitors the rare opportunity to hike through more than 200 million years of geologic time and immerses them in the constantly evolving landscape of American Fork Canyon and its rich diversity of wildlife and vegetation.
    [Show full text]
  • Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest Is Where Civilization Meets the “Wild.” Metropolitan Areas and Get to Know Us
    inta-Wasatch-Cache NATIONAL FOREST U VISITOR GUIDE The Forest Next Door Logan River (© Mike Norton) Nebo Loop Road (© Willie Holdman) What’s Inside he Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest is where civilization meets the “wild.” Metropolitan areas and Get»to»Know»Us»......................... 2 Tcommunities bordering the forest make up some of the Special»Places»...........................3 fastest growing areas in the Intermountain West. Quick, Scenic»Byways»&»Backways»......4 convenient access is available to forest visitors year-round, Wilderness».................................6 Activities».................................... 8 making the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache an intensely used Hiking».......................................»10 destination spanning backyard to backcountry. Roads and Winter»Recreation....................»12 trails lead visitors to natural settings and spectacular vistas Flora»&»Fauna»..........................»14 with fresh water and clean air. Know»Before»You»Go.................16 Campgrounds»&»Picnic»Areas...18 In winter, the “Greatest Snow on Fast Forest Facts Maps»........................................»24 Earth” draws people from around Contact»Information»................»28 »» Size:»2.1»million»acres,»from» the world. desert»to»high»mountain»peaks.» »» The»oldest»exposed»rocks»in»Utah» can»be»seen»in»outcrops»near»the» mouth»of»Farmington»Canyon.» orest lands have sustained local communities »» The»Jardine»Juniper»tree»is»over» for thousands of years. We recognize our role in 1,500»years»old»and»is»one»of»the» F finding balance and maintaining relevance, while oldest»living»trees»in»the»Rocky» Mountains. providing sustainable recreation for a diverse and growing population. This Visitor Guide provides the information you need to make the most of your Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest experience. G et to Know Us History s “The Forest Next Door,” the Uinta-Wasatch- y the1890s many of the range and timber resources of ACache National Forest has long been sought after for its Bthe Uinta and Wasatch Mountains were seriously depleted.
    [Show full text]
  • Wasatch Front Economic Development District STRATEGY COMMITTEE February 27, 2017, 1:00 Pm – 3:00 Pm AGENDA There Will Be A
    Wasatch Front Economic Development District STRATEGY COMMITTEE February 27, 2017, 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm AGENDA There will be a meeting of the Wasatch Front Economic Development District’s Strategy Committee on Monday, February 27, 2017 at 1:00 p.m. in the Wasatch Front Regional Council offices located at 295 North Jimmy Doolittle Road, Salt Lake City, Utah 84116. You are welcome to join the meeting by phone. Dial 801-363-4250, select extension 7, enter conference pin # 9012 1. Welcome and Introductions Mike Bouwhuis 2. Opportunity for Public Comment Mike Bouwhuis 3. Action: Meeting Minutes from November 28, 2016 and May 23, 2016 Mike Bouwhuis 4. New Member Orientation LaNiece Davenport 5. Action: CEDS Projects LaNiece Davenport a. Ogden City Brandon Cooper b. Powder Mountain Shaun Mulreed 6. U.S. EDA Evaluation of WFEDD LaNiece Davenport 7. Roundtable Updates / Discussion All 8. Overview of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act LaNiece Davenport 9. Other Business Mike Bouwhuis a. Mark your Calendar for the 2017 Meetings: May 22nd, August 28th, and November 27th Note: Information material located at www.wfrc.org Public participation is solicited without regard to age, sex, disability, race, color or national origin. Persons who require translation for a meeting should contact the WFRC’s Title VI Administrator at 801-363-4250 or [email protected] at least 72 hours in advance. Se solicita la participación del público, sin importar la edad, el sexo, la discapacidad, la raza, color o nacionalidad. Personas que requieren servicios de traducción deben contactar a WFRC’s Administrador de Titulo VI al teléfono 801-363-4250 o [email protected] por lo menos 72 horas antes de la reunión.
    [Show full text]