DOCSLIB.ORG

Truckee-Carson River Basin Study: Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Western Water Policy Review Advisory River Basin Studies Commission (1997) 9-1-1997 Truckee-Carson River Basin Study: Final Report Jeremy Pratt Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/law_service_westernwater_rbs University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Recommended Citation Pratt, Jeremy. "Truckee-Carson River Basin Study: Final Report." (1997). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ law_service_westernwater_rbs/26 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission (1997) at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in River Basin Studies by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Truckee-Carson RiverBasinStudy FinalReport JeremyPratt ClearwaterConsulting Corporation Seattle,Washington ReporttotheWesternWater PolicyReviewAdvisoryCommission Truckee-Carson River Basin Study Final Report Jeremy Pratt Clearwater Consulting Corporation Seattle, Washington Report to the Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission September 1997 The Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission Under the Western Water Policy Review Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-575, Title XXX), Congress directed the President to undertake a comprehensive review of Federal activities in the 19 Western States that directly or indirectly affect the allocation and use of water resources, whether surface or subsurface, and to submit a report of findings to the congressional committees having jurisdiction over Federal Water Programs. As directed by the statute, the President appointed the Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission. The Commission was composed of 22 members, 10 appointed by the President, including the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army, and 12 members of Congress serving ex-officio by virtue of being the chair or ranking minority member of the 6 congressional committees and subcommittees with jurisdiction over the appropriations and programs of water resources agencies. A complete roster is provided below. Commission Membership Denise Fort, Chair Albuquerque, New Mexico Appointed Members: Huali Chai Patrick O'Toole Secretary of the Interior San Jose, California Savery, Wyoming Washington, D.C. Represented by: John H. Davidson Jack Robertson Joe Sax, September 1995 - December 1996 Vermillion, South Dakota Portland, Oregon Patricia J. Beneke, December 1996 - John Echohawk Kenneth L. Salazar Secretary of the Army Boulder, Colorado Denver, Colorado Washington, DC Represented by: Janet Neuman Dr. John H. Zirschky Portland, Oregon Members of Congress (Ex-officio Members): U.S. Senate: Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Hon. Frank Murkowski, Chairman Hon. Dale Bumpers, Ranking Minority Member Hon. J. Bennett Johnston (September 1995 to January 1997) U.S. Senate: Subcommittee on Water and Power, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Hon. Jon Kyl, Chairman Hon. Daniel K. Akaka, Ranking Minority Member Hon. Larry E. Craig (September 1995 to January 1997) Hon. Bill Bradley (September 1995 to January 1997) U.S. Senate: Committee on Appropriations Hon. Ted Stevens, Chairman Hon. Robert C. Byrd, Ranking Minority Member Hon. Mark O. Hatfield (September 1995 to January 1997) U.S. House of Representatives: Committee on Resources Hon. Don Young, Chairman Hon. George Miller, Ranking Minority Member U.S. House of Representatives: Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Hon. Bud Shuster, Chairman Hon. James L. Oberstar, Ranking Minority Member U.S. House of Representatives: Committee on Appropriations Hon. Bob Livingston, Chairman Hon. David R. Obey, Ranking Minority Member This is an Independent Report to the Commission The report published herein was prepared for the Commission as part of its information gathering activity. The views, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and are not intended to represent the views of the Commission, the Administration, or Members of Congress serving on the Commission. Publication by the Commission does not imply endorsement of the author's findings or recommendations. This report is published to share with the public the information and ideas gathered and considered by the Commission in its deliberations. The Commission's views, conclusions, and recommendations will be set forth in the Commission's own report. Additional copies of this publication may be obtained from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia, 22161; phone 703-487-4650. Contents Page Executive Summary .............................................. S-1 1. Existing Setting ................................................. 1 1.1 Climate and Hydrology ....................................... 1 Climate .................................................. 1 Surface Hydrology and Water Development ................... 2 Groundwater Hydrology and Use ........................... 10 1.2 Water Quality ............................................. 15 1.3 Natural Resources ......................................... 18 Carson River Ecosystem ................................... 19 Truckee River Ecosystem .................................. 23 1.4 Socioeconomic Setting ...................................... 28 1.5 Public Lands and Public Trust Resources ...................... 31 Carson River Watershed .................................. 32 Truckee River Watershed .................................. 33 1.6 Institutional Setting ........................................ 34 Federal Agencies ......................................... 34 State Agencies ........................................... 36 Regional Agencies ........................................ 36 Cities and Counties ....................................... 37 Native American Tribes ................................... 38 Environmental Community ................................ 41 Lahontan Valley Environmental Alliance .................... 41 Newlands Water Protective Association ..................... 42 Truckee-Carson Leasing Authority ......................... 42 2. Water Use and Rights .......................................... 43 2.1 Water Use ................................................ 43 Municipal Use ............................................ 43 Agricultural Use .......................................... 46 Hydroelectric Use ......................................... 49 Environmental Use ....................................... 50 2.2 Water Purveyors ........................................... 51 Sierra Pacific Power Company/WestPac Utilities .............. 51 Truckee-Carson Irrigation District .......................... 52 Carson-Truckee Water Conservancy District ................. 52 Carson Water Subconservancy District ...................... 52 Small Purveyors .......................................... 53 2.3 Water Operations in the Truckee-Carson Basin ................ 53 Principal Storage Facilities of the Truckee River Basin ........ 53 Principal Storage Facilities of the Carson River Basin ......... 61 Current Diversion from the Truckee River and Lake Tahoe Basins ..................................... 61 Current Diversions into the Carson River Basin .............. 65 iii Contents Page Agreements, Decrees and Doctrines Governing the Allocation of Water in the Truckee-Carson River Basins ........................................... 67 Operating Criteria and Procedures .......................... 87 Unappropriated Water .................................... 98 2.4 Water Transfer Markets .................................... 99 Historical Development of the Regional Water Market ........ 99 Present-Day Water Transfers Market ...................... 104 3. History and Implementation of the Settlement Act ................ 109 3.1 Early Conflicts ............................................ 109 3.2 History of Settlement Act of 1990 ........................... 112 3.3 The Settlement Act Negotiations ............................ 118 3.4 Washington, D.C.: The Bigger Picture ....................... 120 3.5 The Settlement Provisions: P.L. 101-618 ..................... 123 3.6 Implementation of P.L. 101-618 ............................. 126 The Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe ......................... 126 Federal Water Master .................................... 127 Water Allocation Between Nevada and California ........... 128 TROA and the PSA ...................................... 130 Newlands-Related Issues ................................. 132 Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe-Related Issues .................. 133 Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge ........................ 134 3.7 Subsequent Negotiations and Agreements .................... 136 The “Second Generation” or “Facilitated” Negotiations ....... 136 Negotiations Sponsored by Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources .................... 139 Water Quality Agreement ................................ 139 Suit Seeking Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement ............................................ 140 4. Critical Issues: Case Study Discussion .......................... 143 4.1 Water Transfers .......................................... 144 Description of Emerging Markets .......................... 144 Market Evaluation ...................................... 159 Mechanisms to Mitigate Problems ......................... 163 Evaluation of Other Issues ................................ 178 4.2 Surface-Groundwater Relationships ........................
Recommended publications
  • Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012

    Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012

    Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012 Jennifer E. Manning Information Research Specialist Colleen J. Shogan Deputy Director and Senior Specialist November 26, 2012 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL30261 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012 Summary Ninety-four women currently serve in the 112th Congress: 77 in the House (53 Democrats and 24 Republicans) and 17 in the Senate (12 Democrats and 5 Republicans). Ninety-two women were initially sworn in to the 112th Congress, two women Democratic House Members have since resigned, and four others have been elected. This number (94) is lower than the record number of 95 women who were initially elected to the 111th Congress. The first woman elected to Congress was Representative Jeannette Rankin (R-MT, 1917-1919, 1941-1943). The first woman to serve in the Senate was Rebecca Latimer Felton (D-GA). She was appointed in 1922 and served for only one day. A total of 278 women have served in Congress, 178 Democrats and 100 Republicans. Of these women, 239 (153 Democrats, 86 Republicans) have served only in the House of Representatives; 31 (19 Democrats, 12 Republicans) have served only in the Senate; and 8 (6 Democrats, 2 Republicans) have served in both houses. These figures include one non-voting Delegate each from Guam, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Currently serving Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) holds the record for length of service by a woman in Congress with 35 years (10 of which were spent in the House).
  • Appendix File Anes 1988‐1992 Merged Senate File

    Appendix File Anes 1988‐1992 Merged Senate File

    Version 03 Codebook ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ CODEBOOK APPENDIX FILE ANES 1988‐1992 MERGED SENATE FILE USER NOTE: Much of his file has been converted to electronic format via OCR scanning. As a result, the user is advised that some errors in character recognition may have resulted within the text. MASTER CODES: The following master codes follow in this order: PARTY‐CANDIDATE MASTER CODE CAMPAIGN ISSUES MASTER CODES CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP CODE ELECTIVE OFFICE CODE RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE MASTER CODE SENATOR NAMES CODES CAMPAIGN MANAGERS AND POLLSTERS CAMPAIGN CONTENT CODES HOUSE CANDIDATES CANDIDATE CODES >> VII. MASTER CODES ‐ Survey Variables >> VII.A. Party/Candidate ('Likes/Dislikes') ? PARTY‐CANDIDATE MASTER CODE PARTY ONLY ‐‐ PEOPLE WITHIN PARTY 0001 Johnson 0002 Kennedy, John; JFK 0003 Kennedy, Robert; RFK 0004 Kennedy, Edward; "Ted" 0005 Kennedy, NA which 0006 Truman 0007 Roosevelt; "FDR" 0008 McGovern 0009 Carter 0010 Mondale 0011 McCarthy, Eugene 0012 Humphrey 0013 Muskie 0014 Dukakis, Michael 0015 Wallace 0016 Jackson, Jesse 0017 Clinton, Bill 0031 Eisenhower; Ike 0032 Nixon 0034 Rockefeller 0035 Reagan 0036 Ford 0037 Bush 0038 Connally 0039 Kissinger 0040 McCarthy, Joseph 0041 Buchanan, Pat 0051 Other national party figures (Senators, Congressman, etc.) 0052 Local party figures (city, state, etc.) 0053 Good/Young/Experienced leaders; like whole ticket 0054 Bad/Old/Inexperienced leaders; dislike whole ticket 0055 Reference to vice‐presidential candidate ? Make 0097 Other people within party reasons Card PARTY ONLY ‐‐ PARTY CHARACTERISTICS 0101 Traditional Democratic voter: always been a Democrat; just a Democrat; never been a Republican; just couldn't vote Republican 0102 Traditional Republican voter: always been a Republican; just a Republican; never been a Democrat; just couldn't vote Democratic 0111 Positive, personal, affective terms applied to party‐‐good/nice people; patriotic; etc.
  • HISTORY of the TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST a Compilation

    HISTORY of the TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST a Compilation

    HISTORY OF THE TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST A Compilation Posting the Toiyabe National Forest Boundary, 1924 Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Chronology ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Bridgeport and Carson Ranger District Centennial .................................................................... 126 Forest Histories ........................................................................................................................... 127 Toiyabe National Reserve: March 1, 1907 to Present ............................................................ 127 Toquima National Forest: April 15, 1907 – July 2, 1908 ....................................................... 128 Monitor National Forest: April 15, 1907 – July 2, 1908 ........................................................ 128 Vegas National Forest: December 12, 1907 – July 2, 1908 .................................................... 128 Mount Charleston Forest Reserve: November 5, 1906 – July 2, 1908 ................................... 128 Moapa National Forest: July 2, 1908 – 1915 .......................................................................... 128 Nevada National Forest: February 10, 1909 – August 9, 1957 .............................................. 128 Ruby Mountain Forest Reserve: March 3, 1908 – June 19, 1916 ..........................................
  • Northern Paiute and Western Shoshone Land Use in Northern Nevada: a Class I Ethnographic/Ethnohistoric Overview

    Northern Paiute and Western Shoshone Land Use in Northern Nevada: a Class I Ethnographic/Ethnohistoric Overview

    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management NEVADA NORTHERN PAIUTE AND WESTERN SHOSHONE LAND USE IN NORTHERN NEVADA: A CLASS I ETHNOGRAPHIC/ETHNOHISTORIC OVERVIEW Ginny Bengston CULTURAL RESOURCE SERIES NO. 12 2003 SWCA ENVIROHMENTAL CON..·S:.. .U LTt;NTS . iitew.a,e.El t:ti.r B'i!lt e.a:b ~f l-amd :Nf'arat:1.iern'.~nt N~:¥G~GI Sl$i~-'®'ffl'c~. P,rceP,GJ r.ei l l§y. SWGA.,,En:v,ir.e.m"me'Y-tfol I €on's.wlf.arats NORTHERN PAIUTE AND WESTERN SHOSHONE LAND USE IN NORTHERN NEVADA: A CLASS I ETHNOGRAPHIC/ETHNOHISTORIC OVERVIEW Submitted to BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Nevada State Office 1340 Financial Boulevard Reno, Nevada 89520-0008 Submitted by SWCA, INC. Environmental Consultants 5370 Kietzke Lane, Suite 205 Reno, Nevada 89511 (775) 826-1700 Prepared by Ginny Bengston SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 02-551 December 16, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ................................................................v List of Tables .................................................................v List of Appendixes ............................................................ vi CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................1 CHAPTER 2. ETHNOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW .....................................4 Northern Paiute ............................................................4 Habitation Patterns .......................................................8 Subsistence .............................................................9 Burial Practices ........................................................11
  • Biogeographical Profiles of Shorebird Migration in Midcontinental North America

    Biogeographical Profiles of Shorebird Migration in Midcontinental North America

    U.S. Geological Survey Biological Resources Division Technical Report Series Information and Biological Science Reports ISSN 1081-292X Technology Reports ISSN 1081-2911 Papers published in this series record the significant find­ These reports are intended for the publication of book­ ings resulting from USGS/BRD-sponsored and cospon­ length-monographs; synthesis documents; compilations sored research programs. They may include extensive data of conference and workshop papers; important planning or theoretical analyses. These papers are the in-house coun­ and reference materials such as strategic plans, standard terpart to peer-reviewed journal articles, but with less strin­ operating procedures, protocols, handbooks, and manu­ gent restrictions on length, tables, or raw data, for example. als; and data compilations such as tables and bibliogra­ We encourage authors to publish their fmdings in the most phies. Papers in this series are held to the same peer-review appropriate journal possible. However, the Biological Sci­ and high quality standards as their journal counterparts. ence Reports represent an outlet in which BRD authors may publish papers that are difficult to publish elsewhere due to the formatting and length restrictions of journals. At the same time, papers in this series are held to the same peer-review and high quality standards as their journal counterparts. To purchase this report, contact the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161 (call toll free 1-800-553-684 7), or the Defense Technical Infonnation Center, 8725 Kingman Rd., Suite 0944, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6218. Biogeographical files o Shorebird Migration · Midcontinental Biological Science USGS/BRD/BSR--2000-0003 December 1 By Susan K.
  • October 2010 Newsletter

    October 2010 Newsletter

    VOLUME 2, ISSUE 2 OCTOBER 2010 INSIDE THIS ISSUE: Volume 2, Issue 2 Mt. Rose RW 2 NEWSLETTER Achievement/Sparks 3 Fernley 4 From the President...... Lynne Hartung Membership/Website 5 History/ByLaw 6 To the members of fully about Sharron Angle unseating Harry Reid. We are being asked to help News-Dean Heller 7 the NvFRW: all Republicans throughout the United Legislation/P.E.M. 8 First, I am so proud to States just as other NFRW clubs and announce that the federations are working hard to turn SHRW 9 Nevada Federation of over control of Congress to Republi- ARW 10 Republican Women has cans, including unseating Nancy Pelosi. been recognized by the Having just returned from Guest Mark Amodei 11 Nevada Republican Party Charleston, So. Carolina, for the NFRW for its contributions to the Party’s success. Scholarship/Literacy 12 th Fall Board of Directors, I was able to On September 25 , the NvFRW was listen to Republican candidates in South Membership Retent. 13 honored with one of Carolina – from Congressmen Joe the two Tom Wiesner Wilson to Senator Jim DeMint. I was, awards. I was so as were all the other people in the audi- LIST OF OFFICERS honored to accept ence, so impressed by Tim Scott. LYNNE HARTUNG—PRESIDENT this tribute, presented Running for South Carolina’s First 775-359-2434 by former Gov. List, [email protected] Congressional District, Scott is dynamic on behalf of the almost 1,400 current and enthusiastic. He believes in the MARAYA EVANS—1ST V.P. members and the thousands of past PROGRAMS traditional values of the Republican 702-293-4478 members.
  • Harris, Thomas R. Professor Department of Resource Economics Director University Center for Economic Development University of Nevada, Reno

    Harris, Thomas R. Professor Department of Resource Economics Director University Center for Economic Development University of Nevada, Reno

    VITA NAME AND ADDRESS: Harris, Thomas R. Professor Department of Resource Economics Director University Center for Economic Development University of Nevada, Reno DATE AND PLACE OF BIRTH: July 29, 1948 Longview, Texas EDUCATION: Ph.D. Agricultural Economics 1981 Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma M.S. Agricultural Economics 1972 Texas Tech University Lubbock, Texas B.B.A. Economics 1970 University of Texas at Arlington Arlington, Texas WORK EXPERIENCE: 2011 to Present Professor Department of Economics Director University Center for Economic Development State Extension Specialist—Economic Development University of Nevada Cooperative Extension University of Nevada, Reno 2009 to 2011 Professor Department of Resource Economics Director University Center for Economic Development State Extension Specialist—Economic Development University of Nevada Cooperative Extension University of Nevada, Reno 2008 to 2009 Interim Department Chair and Foundation Professor Department of Resource Economics Director University Center for Economic Development State Extension Specialist—Economic Development University of Nevada Cooperative Extension University of Nevada, Reno 2000 to 2008 Foundation Professor Department of Resource Economics Director University Center for Economic Development State Extension Specialist—Economic Development University of Nevada Cooperative Extension University of Nevada, Reno 1999 to 2000 Interim Department Chair and Foundation Professor Department of Applied Economics and Statistics Director University Center for Economic
  • 5.1 Historic Period Human Interaction with the Watershed

    5.1 Historic Period Human Interaction with the Watershed

    Upper Carson River Watershed Stream Corridor Assessment 5. Human Interaction With the Watershed 5.1 Historic Period Human Interaction With the Watershed The purpose of this section is to summarize human activities that have had some effect on the Carson River watershed in Alpine County, California. Regional prehistory and ethnography are summarized by Nevers (1976), Elston (1982), d’Azevedo (1986), and Lindstrom et al. (2000). Details of regional history can be found in Maule (1938), Jackson (1964), Dangberg (1972), Clark (1977), Murphy (1982), Marvin (1997), and other sources. A book published by the Centennial Book Committee (1987) contains an excellent selection of historic photographs. Particularly useful is a study on the historical geography of Alpine County by Howatt (1968). 5.1.1 Prehistoric Land Use Human habitation of the Upper Carson River Watershed extends thousands of years back into antiquity. Archaeological evidence suggests use of the area over at least the last 8,000 to 9,000 years. For most of that time, the land was home to small bands of Native Americans. Their number varied over time, depending on regional environmental conditions. For at least the last 2,000 years, the Washoe occupied the Upper Carson River Watershed. Ethnographic data provides clues as to past land use and land management practices (see extended discussions in Downs 1966; Blackburn and Anderson 1993; Lindstrom et al. 2000; Rucks 2002). A broad range of aboriginal harvesting and hunting practices, fishing, and camp tending would have affected the landscape and ecology of the study area. Shrubs such as service berry and willow were pruned to enhance growth.
  • California Water Trust Network

    California Water Trust Network

    RESTORING CARSON MEADOWS: ASSESSMENT AND PRIORITIZATION A report supported by the National Fish and Wildlife February 2018 Foundation Results of a broadly-collaborative effort to prioritize meadows in the Carson River Watershed for restoration. Restoring Carson Meadows Restoring Carson Meadows: Assessment and Prioritization Julie Fair, Luke Hunt, Meg Hanley and Jacob Dyste 2018. Restoring Carson Meadows: Assessment and Prioritization. A report by American Rivers submitted to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. Page 1 Restoring Carson Meadows CONTENTS CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................... 2 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 3 THE CARSON WATERSHED .................................................................................................. 4 METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF CONDITION DATA ............................................................ 7 PRIORITIES ........................................................................................................................... 9 PRIORITIZATION FOR LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT TROUT ................................................. 14 INFLUENCE OF BEAVER ..................................................................................................... 14 CONCLUSION
  • Congressional Record—House H11234

    Congressional Record—House H11234

    H11234 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Ð HOUSE September 26, 1996 believe the time has come when we Mr. Speaker, today, once again, the fice to commingle political and office must stand up for the rights of victims Members of this House have a chance resources, guilty; using the House floor of gun violence, not the rights of per- to vote for the release of the outside to advertise his Political Action Com- petrators of gun violence. We Ameri- counsel report. I urge Members to sup- mittee, guilty. cans have a basic right. It is the right port my resolution. To do otherwise is The bipartisan Ethics Committee re- to be safe in our homes, on our streets, to risk being accused of participating buked Speaker GINGRICH because he, and in our churches. in a Newt Gingrich ethics coverup. and I quote, ``capitalized on his office f f and exploited his office for personal gain,'' when he signed his $4 million THE MESS IN HAITI TRIBUTE TO THE HONORABLE book review with a major Republican (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given BARBARA VUCANOVICH contributor. permission to address the House for 1 (Mr. ENSIGN asked and was given Now taxpayers have spent $500,000 to minute and to revise and extend his re- permission to address the House for 1 investigate his other activities, yet marks.) minute and to revise and extend his re- Speaker GINGRICH has squelched this Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, 2 years marks.) Government report; $500,000 of the tax- ago, President Clinton sent our troops Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to payers' dollars spent on the investiga- into Haiti, spending over $2 billion recognize the accomplishments of a tion, yet Speaker GINGRICH has there, and now calls Haiti a foreign distinguished lady who is retiring after squelched this Government report.
  • Carson River Geographic Response Plan

    Carson River Geographic Response Plan

    Carson River Geographic Response Plan Final Alpine County, California and Douglas, Carson City, Lyon, Churchill Counties, Nevada April 2006 Prepared by: Carson & Walker Rivers Area Committee (CWRAC) Carson River Geographic Response Plan April 2006 Acknowledgements The Carson River Geographic Response Plan (CRGRP) was developed through a collaborative effort between the local, state, and federal government agencies listed below. Local Government • Carson City Fire • Douglas County Emergency Management • East Fork Fire and Paramedic District • Lyon County Sheriff’s Office • Mason Valley Fire • Mono County Conservation District State Government • California Department of Fish and Game, Office of Spill Prevention and Response • California Office of Emergency Services • Nevada Division of Emergency Management • Nevada Division of Environmental Protection • Nevada Highway Patrol Tribal Government • Washo Tribe Federal Government • U.S. Bureau of Land Management • U.S. Department of Agriculture Carson Valley Conservation District • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IX o U.S. EPA Region IX Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START), Ecology & Environment, Inc. • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service i Carson River Geographic Response Plan April 2006 If this is an Emergency… …Involving a release or threatened release of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other contaminants impacting public health and/or the environment Most important – Protect yourself and others! Then: 1) Turn to the Immediate Action Guide (Yellow Tab) for initial steps taken in a hazardous material, petroleum product, or other contaminant emergency. 2) Make the initial notification to Dispatch by dialing 911. Dispatch will make the Mandatory Notifications. A list of county dispatch centers is on page R-2 of this plan.
  • Cardno ENTRIX Report Template

    Cardno ENTRIX Report Template

    Markleeville Creek Floodplain Restoration Project Alpine County, California Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Volume II – Appendices A-G February 2014 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Markleeville Creek Floodplain Restoration Project Document Information Prepared for Alpine County, CA Project Name Markleeville Creek Floodplain Restoration Project Project Number 3343000100 Project Manager Virginia Mahacek Date February 2014 Lead Agency: Alpine County 50 Diamond Valley Road, Markleeville, CA 96120 530.694.2140 www.alpinecountyca.gov Sponsor: Alpine Watershed Group 270 Laramie St. Markleeville, CA 96120 530.694.2327 www.alpinecountyca.gov Prepared by: Cardno ENTRIX 295 Highway 50, Suite 1 / PO Box 1533, Zephyr Cove, NV 89448 775.588.9069 www.cardno.com February 2014 Cardno ENTRIX Document Information i Markleeville IS-MND_Volume II_Appendices A-G_Feb2014.docx Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Markleeville Creek Floodplain Restoration Project This Page Intentionally Left Blank ii Document Information Cardno ENTRIX February 2014 Markleeville IS-MND_Volume II_Appendices A-G_Feb2014.docx Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Markleeville Creek Floodplain Restoration Project Appendices Appendix A Site Flood History Appendix B MPUD Sewer Diagrams Appendix C Restoration Plans and Details Appendix D Hydraulic Modelling Memo Appendix E Wetland Delineation Report Appendix F Noxious Weeds/Invasive Plants Memo Appendix G Cultural Resources Inventory and Recommendations Letter Report February 2014 Cardno ENTRIX