DOCSLIB.ORG

The Amchitka Independent Assessment Science Plan (Hereinafter Referred to As Science Plan)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Amchitka Independent Assessment Science Plan (Hereinafter Referred to As Science Plan) AMCHITKA INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT SCIENCE PLAN Prepared for the Interagency Amchitka Policy Group June 24, 2003* CRESP Amchitka Oversight Committee Charles W. Powers, PhD Principal Investigator—CRESP & UMDNJ David Barnes, PhD Barry Friedlander, MD CRESP-University of Alaska Fairbanks CRESP-Deputy Executive Director & UMDNJ Joanna Burger, PhD Michael Gochfeld, MD, PhD CRESP-Rutgers University CRESP-UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Lawrence K. Duffy, PhD Stephen Jewett, PhD CRESP-University of Alaska Fairbanks CRESP-University of Alaska Fairbanks John Eichelberger, PhD David Kosson, PhD CRESP-University of Alaska Fairbanks CRESP-Vanderbilt University CRESP II 317 George Street, Suite 202 New Brunswick, NJ 08901 Telephone 732-296-1960 FAX 732-235-9607 http://www.cresp.org * corrected for typographical and similar errors Amchitka Independent Assessment Science Plan June 24, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary..................................................................................................................... 6 Disclaimer................................................................................................................................... 9 II. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 11 A. CRESP and PCCRARM ..................................................................................................... 13 B. Risk Assessment and Uncertainties..................................................................................... 14 1. Ecological Risk Assessment ............................................................................................. 16 2. Categories of Uncertainties:............................................................................................. 18 C. Location and Background .................................................................................................. 22 1. The Bering Sea Ecosystem ............................................................................................... 22 2. Biodiversity and Amchitka ............................................................................................... 22 D. History of Amchitka............................................................................................................ 23 1. Chronology ...................................................................................................................... 24 2. Recent History ................................................................................................................. 27 E. Importance of the Problem .................................................................................................. 29 F. Previous Environmental Sampling Efforts at Amchitka ..................................................... 32 G. Scientific Approach............................................................................................................. 34 H. Chemical Tracers and Radiological Signature.................................................................... 36 III. The Contaminant Path............................................................................................................. 39 A. Source Term......................................................................................................................... 40 B. Rock Envelope ..................................................................................................................... 40 C. Groundwater Flow................................................................................................................ 41 D. Marine Environment- Physical ........................................................................................... 45 E. Marine Environment – Biological....................................................................................... 46 1. Humans and Food Webs ................................................................................................... 49 2. Bioavailability, Bioaccumulation and Biomagnification.................................................. 51 3. Receptors of Concern........................................................................................................ 53 IV. Long Term Stewardship ......................................................................................................... 55 V. Quality Assurance and Data Quality Objectives..................................................................... 57 A. Data Quality Objectives Process.......................................................................................... 58 VI. Health and Safety Plan......................................................................................................... 61 VII. Relationship of this Project to Previous Work .................................................................... 62 VIII. Expected Outcomes............................................................................................................. 64 IX. Prioritization of Tasks and Subtasks...................................................................................... 65 A. Clarification of Criteria for Prioritization ............................................................................ 65 X. NNSA Funding ........................................................................................................................ 73 XI. Tasks....................................................................................................................................... 75 Task 1 Sampling The Marine Environment............................................................................ 75 Task 1.1 Biological Sampling.............................................................................................. 75 Task 1.2 Physical Marine Environment............................................................................... 86 Task 1.3 Radionuclide Analysis of Marine Samples.......................................................... 90 1 Amchitka Independent Assessment Science Plan June 24, 2003 Task 1.4 Consumption of Marine Food by Humans............................................................ 92 Task 2 Ocean Conditions......................................................................................................... 97 Task 2.1: Ocean floor characterization ................................................................................. 97 Task 2.2 Salinity Structure and Discharge......................................................................... 102 Task 2.3 Ocean Circulation................................................................................................ 104 Task 3: Amchitka Geology and Hydrology............................................................................ 109 Task 3.1 Amchitka Data Recovery and Synthesis............................................................. 109 Task 3.2 Amchitka Structure and Determination of Subsurface Freshwater/saltwater Interface. ............................................................................................................................. 112 Task 3.3 Groundwater Recharge........................................................................................ 115 Task 3.4 Radionuclide Content of the Test Area: The Source Term................................. 119 Task 3.5 Water/rock Interaction in the Rock Envelope..................................................... 121 Task 3.6 Radionuclide Sorption on Sediments................................................................. 123 Task 3.7 Deformation of the Amchitka massif.................................................................. 125 Task 4 Stakeholder Dimensions............................................................................................. 132 Task 4.1 Stakeholder Participation .................................................................................... 132 Task 4.2 Long-term Monitoring ......................................................................................... 133 XII. Management and Oversight................................................................................................. 135 XIII. References.......................................................................................................................... 143 Appendix 1.................................................................................................................................. 164 2 Amchitka Independent Assessment Science Plan June 24, 2003 FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES: Fig. 1. PCCRARM: Model of risk assessment and risk management 13 Fig. 2. Exposure pathway from south to population effects 16 Fig. 3a. Map of the Aleutian chain showing Amchitka 20 Fig. 3b, 3c Map of Amchitka showing test sites and faults 21 Fig. 4. Primary productivity map of North Pacific and Bering Sea 30 Fig. 5. Bathymetry map of Amchitka region 31 Fig. 6. Tectonic schematic of Amchitka 32 Fig. 7. Temporal pattern of studies from source to food chain effects 35 Fig. 8. Schematic of an underground nuclear test shot cavity 39 Fig. 9 Generic cross section of hydrology 42 Fig 10 Site motion vectors for Aleutian arc 43 Fig. 11 Radar interferogram of displacement at Amchitka 44 Fig. 12 Marine food web for Amchitka 50 Fig. 13 Conceptual model of relationships among tasks and migration pathway 67 Fig. 14 Possible transfer of radionuclides through Amchitka food web 78 Fig. 15a Ocean floor off Amchitka 98 Fig. 15b High-resolution
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wind Energy Development in the Aleutian Pribilof Islands
    WindWind EnergyEnergy DevelopmentDevelopment InIn thethe AleutianAleutian PribilofPribilof IslandsIslands “The“The BirthplaceBirthplace ofof thethe Wind”Wind” USDOE/Tribal Energy Projects Review October 2005 By Connie Fredenberg Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association 201 East 3rd Avenue Anchorage, AK 99501 • Anchorage to Adak - 1,200 air miles for $1,240 • Rich in renewable energy resources: wind, geothermal, hydro, tidal • Home to 2,329 Unangan for over 10,000 years • The richest marine ecosystem left in the world Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc. 2 COLDCOLD HARDHARD FACTSFACTS • All Fossil Fuels are Imported • Diesel up to $2.80/gallon wholesale • Electricity primarily produced by diesel generators • Electricity costs between $0.22/kWh to $0.58/kWh to produce • The State of Alaska’s Power Cost Equalization (PCE) program subsidizes electric bills for residents in qualifying communities Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc. 3 OUR PARTNER TDX POWER a subsidiary of Tanadgusix Corporation St. Paul Island, Alaska CEO Ron Philemonof points to a still turbine. A rare site; the wind isn’t blowing in St. Paul. • North America’s largest high penetration wind-diesel hybrid power plant • $1,000,000 cost; paid for in 5 years • Excess electricity heats water to displace diesel heat • Two more Vestas turbines to be installed May 2006 to help power the City Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc. St. Paul Island Population 489 Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc. It Is Not Always Winter On St. Paul Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc. Operator buy in and dedication is the single most important indicator of long term project success. ST. PAUL ISLAND Operator Paul Melovidov Doing Winter and Summer Maintenance Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Baseline Study of Subsistence Resource Utilization in the Pribilof Islands
    A PRELIMINARY BASELINE STUDY OF SUBSISTENCE RESOURCE UTILIZATION IN THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS Douglas W. Veltre Ph.D Mary J. Veltre, B.A. Technical Paper Number 57 Prepared for Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Contract 81-119 October 15, 1981 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . The authors would like to thank those numerous mem- bers of St. George and St. Paul who gave generously of their time and knowledge to help with this project. The Tanaq Corporation of St. George and the Tanadgusix Corporation of St. Paul, as well as the village councils of both communities, also deserve thanks for their cooperation. In addition, per- sonnel of the National Marine Fisheries Service in the Pribi- lofs provided insight into the fur seal operations. Finally, Linda Ellanna and Alice Stickney of the Department of Fish and Game gave valuable assistance and guidance, especially through their participation in field research. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . ii Chapter I INTRODUCTION . 1 Purpose . 1 Research objectives . : . 4 Research methods . 6 Discussion of research methodology . 8 Organization of the report . 11 II BACKGROUND ON ALEUT SUBSISTENCE . 13 Introduction . 13 Precontact subsistence patterns . 15 The early postcontact period . 22 Conclusions . 23 III HISTORICAL BACXGROUND . 27 Introduction . 27 Russian period . 27 American period ........... 35 History of Pribilof Island settlements ... 37 St. George community profile ........ 39 St. Paul community profile ......... 45 Conclusions ......... ; ........ 48 IV THE NATURAL SETTING .............. 50 Introduction ................ 50 Location, geography, and geology ...... 50 Climate ................... 55 Fauna and flora ............... 61 Aleutian-Pribilof Islands comparison .... 72 V SUBSISTENCE RESOURCES AND UTILIZATION IN THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS ............ 74 Introduction ................ 74 Inventory of subsistence resources .
    [Show full text]
  • BERING SEA WILDERNESS: PRIBILOFS, KATMAI, and KODIAK Current Route: Nome, Alaska to Seward, Alaska
    BERING SEA WILDERNESS: PRIBILOFS, KATMAI, AND KODIAK Current route: Nome, Alaska to Seward, Alaska 13 Days Expeditions in: Jul Traverse the depth and breadth of the iconic Bering Strait and venture deep into the two distinct worlds it joins. Encounter the rich culture of Provideniya, “the Gateway to the Arctic,” before exploring the Pribilof Islands, a naturalist’s paradise sometimes referred to as "the Galápagos of the North.” From those lively breeding grounds continue on to explore the dynamic history, culture, and natural wonders of the remote islands along Alaska’s rugged coast. A visit to Katmai National Park, one of the premier brown bear viewing areas in the world and a unique petrified forest round out this immersive expedition. Call us at 1.800.397.3348 or call your Travel Agent. In Australia, call 1300.361.012 • www.expeditions.com Important Flight Information DAY 1: Anchorage, Alaska, padding Please check departure and arrival times U.S./Nome/Embark prior to booking flights. Arrive in Anchorage and fly to Nome, Alaska. Embark National Geographic Orion. (L,D) Cost Includes: Accommodations; meals indicated; DAY 2: At Sea/Crossing the Bering Strait alcoholic beverages (except premium padding Spend the first day at sea crossing one of the brands); excursions; services of Lindblad most iconic bodies of water on the planet. (B,L,D) Expeditions’ Leader, Naturalist staff and expert guides; use of kayaks; entrance fees; all port charges and service taxes; DAY 3: Provideniya, Russian Federation padding gratuities to ship’s crew. At the western limit of the rich transboundary area known as Beringia, we visit the remote city Cost Not Included: of Provideniya, the administrative center where we Air transportation; personal items such as will conduct our clearance in Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Flashback
    u@ THE RETURN TO AMCHITKA 1436 U Street, NW Report of a Greenpeace Scientific Expedition to Washington, DC 20009 1-800-326-0959 Amchitka Island, Alaska-Site of the Largest http://www.greenpeace.org/-usa Underground l\Juclear Test In U.S. History A Greenpeace Report by Pam Miller Scientific Adviser Norman Buske Greenpeace was compelled to return to Purpose Amchitka in June 1996 to conduct an independent chitka Island, Alaska was the site of three underground nudcar tests: investigation of the nuclear detonation sites at Long Sho t, an 80 kiloto n test (80,000 tons TNT equivalent) in 1965; Amchitka. AE ilrow, a 1 megaton test (1,000,000 tons TNT equivalent) in 1969; and Cannikin, a 5 megaton test (5,000,000 tons TNT equivalent) in 1971. Project Cannikin was the largest underground nuclear test in U.S. history. Greenpeace was founded by a group of activists who sailed from Vancouver, Canada toward Am chitka Island in an attempt to stop the Cannikin blast through non-violent direct action. Twenty-five years after the founding of Greenpeace, concerns about the legacy of the unstoppable nuclear explosion dubbed Cannikin beckoned us to return to investigate the impacts of nuclear testing at Amchitka. The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) calculaled the cum ulative inventori es of radioactive isotopes generated from underground nuclear tests th roughout the world. They estimate a fission yield of 0.1 megacurie per megaton explosive yi eld for strontium-90, 0.1 G megacurie per megaton for cesium- J37, and un flss io ned plutonium-239 at 150 curies per test.
    [Show full text]
  • Bob Farquhar
    1 2 Created by Bob Farquhar For and dedicated to my grandchildren, their children, and all humanity. This is Copyright material 3 Table of Contents Preface 4 Conclusions 6 Gadget 8 Making Bombs Tick 15 ‘Little Boy’ 25 ‘Fat Man’ 40 Effectiveness 49 Death By Radiation 52 Crossroads 55 Atomic Bomb Targets 66 Acheson–Lilienthal Report & Baruch Plan 68 The Tests 71 Guinea Pigs 92 Atomic Animals 96 Downwinders 100 The H-Bomb 109 Nukes in Space 119 Going Underground 124 Leaks and Vents 132 Turning Swords Into Plowshares 135 Nuclear Detonations by Other Countries 147 Cessation of Testing 159 Building Bombs 161 Delivering Bombs 178 Strategic Bombers 181 Nuclear Capable Tactical Aircraft 188 Missiles and MIRV’s 193 Naval Delivery 211 Stand-Off & Cruise Missiles 219 U.S. Nuclear Arsenal 229 Enduring Stockpile 246 Nuclear Treaties 251 Duck and Cover 255 Let’s Nuke Des Moines! 265 Conclusion 270 Lest We Forget 274 The Beginning or The End? 280 Update: 7/1/12 Copyright © 2012 rbf 4 Preface 5 Hey there, I’m Ralph. That’s my dog Spot over there. Welcome to the not-so-wonderful world of nuclear weaponry. This book is a journey from 1945 when the first atomic bomb was detonated in the New Mexico desert to where we are today. It’s an interesting and sometimes bizarre journey. It can also be horribly frightening. Today, there are enough nuclear weapons to destroy the civilized world several times over. Over 23,000. “Enough to make the rubble bounce,” Winston Churchill said. The United States alone has over 10,000 warheads in what’s called the ‘enduring stockpile.’ In my time, we took care of things Mano-a-Mano.
    [Show full text]
  • Archeology, National Natural Landmarks, and State Game Sanctuaries: Combining Efforts for Science and Management
    Archeology, National Natural Landmarks, and State Game Sanctuaries: Combining Efforts for Science and Management Jeanne Schaaf, Judy Alderson, Joe Meehan, and Joel Cusick The sanctuary and the National Natural Landmarks program THE WALRUS ISLANDS STATE GAME SANCTUARY AND NATIONAL NATURAL LANDMARK (NNL) in Bristol Bay, Alaska, comprises a group of seven small islands about 63 miles southwest of Dillingham. During the 1950s, declining population numbers of the Pacific walrus (Odo- benus rosmarus) caused a great deal of concern about the future of the species. As a result, the state game sanctuary was established in 1960 “to protect the walruses and other game on the Walrus Islands”; it is managed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G). Eight years later, the Walrus Islands National Natural Landmark was established to add nationwide recognition of the importance of this area for its concentration of Pacific walrus, with Round Island in particular serving as a summer haul-out for male walruses (see cover photo, this issue). It is one of the most southern of the walrus haul-outs and, at the time of establishment of the sanctuary and the NNL, it was one of the few remaining annual haul- outs in Alaska (and perhaps the only one consistently in use). The Walrus Islands are open to public access, but visitors to Round Island must obtain an access permit prior to arriving. The National Natural Landmarks Pro- lic’s appreciation of America’s natural her- gram recognizes and encourages the con- itage. The National Park Service adminis- servation of outstanding examples of our ters the NNL program, and, if requested, country’s natural history.It is the only natu- assists NNL owners and managers with the ral areas program of national scope that conservation of these important sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenpeace, Earth First! and the Earth Liberation Front: the Rp Ogression of the Radical Environmental Movement in America" (2008)
    University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Senior Honors Projects Honors Program at the University of Rhode Island 2008 Greenpeace, Earth First! and The aE rth Liberation Front: The rP ogression of the Radical Environmental Movement in America Christopher J. Covill University of Rhode Island, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Covill, Christopher J., "Greenpeace, Earth First! and The Earth Liberation Front: The rP ogression of the Radical Environmental Movement in America" (2008). Senior Honors Projects. Paper 93. http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/93http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/93 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Program at the University of Rhode Island at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Honors Projects by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Greenpeace, Earth First! and The Earth Liberation Front: The Progression of the Radical Environmental Movement in America Christopher John Covill Faculty Sponsor: Professor Timothy Hennessey, Political Science Causes of worldwide environmental destruction created a form of activism, Ecotage with an incredible success rate. Ecotage uses direct action, or monkey wrenching, to prevent environmental destruction. Mainstream conservation efforts were viewed by many environmentalists as having failed from compromise inspiring the birth of radicalized groups. This eventually transformed conservationists into radicals. Green Peace inspired radical environmentalism by civil disobedience, media campaigns and direct action tactics, but remained mainstream. Earth First’s! philosophy is based on a no compromise approach.
    [Show full text]
  • The Northern Fur Seal ~/
    Wflal~erv:-c;rrc. The Northern Fur Seal ~/ / U IS, S, R, / / Breeding grounds of the northern fur seals: Robben Island (Kaihyoto or Tyuleniy Island) off Sakhalin; the Commandel Islands (Bering Island and Medny or Copper Island) at the Soviet end of the Aleutian chain; and the Pribilof Islands - St. Paul Island, St. George Island, Otter Island, Walrus Island, and Sea Lion Rock. Cover - The Pribilof Islands in Bering Sea are the homeland of the largest fur eal herd in the world. Here the fur seals come ashore to bear their young on the rocks and sands above tidewater. The story behind the restoration and de­ velopment of the Ala ka fur cal herd is one of adventure and international diplomac}. It i a heartening account of cooperation among nations - an out- tanding example of wildlife conservation. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Walter J. Hickel, Secretary Leslie L. Glasgow, Assistant Secretary f01' Fish and Wildlife, PaTks, and Marine Resources Charles H , Meacham, Commissioner, U,S, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Philip M, Roedel, Di1'ecto1', BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES The Northern Fur Seal By RALPH C. BAKER, FORD WILKE, and C. HOWARD BALTZ02 Circular 336 Washington, D.C. April 1970 As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has basic responsibilities for water, fish, wildlife, mineral, land, park, and recreational resources. Indian and Territorial affairs are other major concerns of America's " Department of Natural Resources." The Department works to assure the wisest choice in managing all our resources so each will make its full contribution to a better United States - now and in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds New to North America and the Pribilof Islands, Alaska
    Oct., 1969] General Notes 747 resident of Panama. Wintering birds appear to defend a specificforaging area as do birds defendingbreeding territories. Individuals apparently move to new areas with the onsetof the dry season.The potential usefulnessof tape recordedvocalizations in studies of wintering birds is demonstrated. I thank Horace Loftin for his valuable help during my stay in Panama, Sidney McDaniel for his aid in identifying plants, John Kramarczyk for his assistancein the field, George Clark for suggestionson the manuscript, Alexander Wetmore, Wesley Lanyon, and Eugene Eisenmann for suggestionsregarding the study in Panama. Financial support for studies of Traill's Flycatchershas been provided by the Frank M. Chapman Fund of the American Museum of Natural History, the University of Connecticut Research Foundation, and the National ScienceFoundation. Specimens were examined at the United States National Museum and the American Museum of Natural History. The White Memorial Foundation of Litchfield generouslyprovided accessto study areas in Connecticut.---L•o• J. GoRs•:•, Department o] Biological Sciences,Central Connecticut State College, New Britain, Connecticut 06050. Birds new to North America and the Pribilof Islands, Alaska.--Smiths0nian Institution and SouthwesternCollege personnel have spent five seasonsworking on the avifauna of the Pribilof Islands, July-September 1964, June-September 1965, May- September 1966, May-September 1967, and April-August 1968. Thompson was in- volved in all 5 years of the studiesand DeLong in 1965-66. The SmithsonianInstitution sponsored the 1964-66 studies and Southwestern College the 1967-68. In addition to our banding operations, we made collections and observations.that add several speciesto the North American list as well as to the Pribilof Islands list.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Timeline for Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge
    Historical Timeline Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Much of the refuge has been protected as a national wildlife refuge for over a century, and we recognize that refuge lands are the ancestral homelands of Alaska Native people. Development of sophisticated tools and the abundance of coastal and marine wildlife have made it possible for people to thrive here for thousands of years. So many facets of Alaska’s history happened on the lands and waters of the Alaska Maritime Refuge that the Refuge seems like a time-capsule story of the state and the conservation of island wildlife: • Pre 1800s – The first people come to the islands, the Russian voyages of discovery, the beginnings of the fur trade, first rats and fox introduced to islands, Steller sea cow goes extinct. • 1800s – Whaling, America buys Alaska, growth of the fox fur industry, beginnings of the refuge. • 1900 to 1945 – Wildlife Refuge System is born and more land put in the refuge, wildlife protection increases through treaties and legislation, World War II rolls over the refuge, rats and foxes spread to more islands. The Aleutian Islands WWII National Monument designation recognizes some of these significant events and places. • 1945 to the present – Cold War bases built on refuge, nuclear bombs on Amchitka, refuge expands and protections increase, Aleutian goose brought back from near extinction, marine mammals in trouble. Refuge History - Pre - 1800 A World without People Volcanoes push up from the sea. Ocean levels fluctuate. Animals arrive and adapt to dynamic marine conditions as they find niches along the forming continent’s miles of coastline.
    [Show full text]
  • Aleutian Pribilof Islands Wind Energy Feasibility Study
    Award Number: DE-FG36-05GO15183 Recipient Organization: Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association Project Title: Aleutian Pribilof Islands Wind Energy Feasibility Study Project Director: Bruce Wright, [email protected] Team Members: Tanadgusix Corporation (TDX), Connie Fredenberg Distribution Limitations: None TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page Page 1 Table of Contents Page 1 Executive Summary Page 2 Background Page 3 Project Objectives Page 3 Project Activities Page 3 Site Selection and Resource Monitoring Page 3 Avian Collisions Monitoring Page 7 Training and Professional Development Page 14 Communication Network Page 15 Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency Page 18 Load Assessment and Technical Analyses Page 20 Power Market Assessment Page 23 Environmental Evaluation Page 23 Long-Term Operating and Maintenance Planning Page 23 Business and Organizational Planning Page 23 Conclusions Page 31 Appendices (large files, attached) Appendix 1. AEB_Energy_Assessment_5-18-10_FINAL.pdf Appendix 2. False Pass Wind Resource Report.pdf Appendix 3. Nikolski Wind Resource Report 3-27-07.pdf Appendix 4. Sand Point Final Wind Report.pdf Appendix 5. St. George Wind data report.pdf Appendix 6. TimSandstromPowerHouse314120001.pdf Appendix 7. Nikolski FINAL Report to USDA October 14, 2010.pdf Appendix 8. A Better Use of Wind Energy in Alaska and Russian Villages.pdf Appendix 9. final report, DOE weatherization project.8-17-11.pdf Appendix 10. Adak Renewable Reconnaissance Report-20110829_FINAL.pdf Appendix 11. Sand Point EA.pdf Appendix 12. False_Pass_Wind_Renewable_Energy_GrantApplication.3.pdf −1− EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under this project, the Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association (APIA) conducted wind feasibility studies for Adak, False Pass, Nikolski, Sand Point and St. George. The DOE funds were also be used to continue APIA’s role as project coordinator, to expand the communication network quality between all participants and with other wind interest groups in the state and to provide continued education and training opportunities for regional participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Pribilof Islands
    Sensitive Area Section – Attachment 2 Wildlife Protection Guidelines: Pribilof Islands Aleutians Subarea Contingency Plan For Oil and Hazardous Substance Spills and Releases Pribilof Islands Wildlife Protection Contacts Revision 8 – July 2014 This page is left intentionally blank ALEUTIANS SCP 2 Revision 8 – July 2014 Wildlife Protection Guidelines: Pribilof Islands Table of Contents I. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................5 A. Background and Objectives .....................................................................................5 B. Wildlife Resources ...................................................................................................6 C. Development of Pribilof Guidelines ........................................................................6 D. Procedures for Revisions and Updates.....................................................................7 E. Pribilof Guidelines Organization .............................................................................7 II. Wildlife Resource Agency Notification ...............................................................................9 A. Notification by Federal and State Regulators ..........................................................9 B. Notification by On-Island Representatives. .............................................................9 III. Migratory Birds ..................................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]