Preserving Marine Life While Increasing Hydroelectric Efficiency: Four Lower Snake River Dams

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Preserving Marine Life While Increasing Hydroelectric Efficiency: Four Lower Snake River Dams Preserving Marine Life While Increasing Hydroelectric Efficiency: Four Lower Snake River Dams Kaitlyn DeGroot Rajas Karajgikar [email protected] [email protected] Max Milone Pranav Penmetcha [email protected] [email protected] Olivia Wang [email protected] July 22, 2016 The New Jersey Governor’s School of Engineering and Technology Abstract Kaplan turbines, and temperature regulat- ing systems, were implemented into an ideal Hydroelectric dams are the most widely dam design. This design also includes mod- used source of clean energy, but they are ified turbine screens, Western White Pine also harmful to the marine life in the rivers trees along the bank of the water, and a and reservoirs the dams are built on; for siphon spillway system with a piano key these reasons, an exploration of dams is weir. The ideal dam design serves to pro- necessary. The four Lower Snake River mote features of dams that would enhance dams were identified as dams with mul- hydroelectric production and marine life tiple issues including hydroelectric ineffi- sustainability. Though the ideal dam design ciency, dangers in the turbine pathway for was made to resolve problems specific to the fish, sedimentation buildup, flooding, and four Lower Snake River dams, the overall temperature fluctuations in the water. The system can be implemented in other dams complications that arise from the construc- to address similar issues and to prevent the tion of dams threaten marine life popula- same problems. tions, and they can permenently damage an ecosystem. People living near dams may face problems such as property damage 1 Introduction and power shortages. To address these is- sues, original components of the four Lower The first known dam was built in Egypt Snake River dams, such as bypass systems, around 2950-2750 B.C., and since then, 1 dams have transformed and are being built area, specifically the juvenile salmon popu- for the purpose of generating power through lation. These disadvantages present issues hydroelectricity [1]. Unlike fossil fuels, hy- that would ultimately threaten the wildlife droelectric dams can complete various tasks and humans in the Snake River ecosystem. without producing greenhouse gases and By identifying specific components of the harming the environment. Although hy- four Lower Snake River dams and research- droelectricity itself is not dangerous for the ing the applications of those specific compo- environment, recent research demonstrates nents, the ultimate causes of the major is- that dams can have drastic consequences. sues of the dams could be addressed. Re- The allocation of water in reservoirs cre- search in the four Lower Snake River dams ated by dams disrupts native fish popula- offers the potential to establish solutions to tions that use the rivers as a breeding and varying issues involving hydroelectric effi- living area, in essence destroying the habi- ciency and marine life preservation. tat of marine species. In addition, dams erode the downstream river banks by caus- ing a buildup of sedimentation [2]. Hydro- electricity, although inexpensive when com- pared to other clean energy obtaining meth- ods, is still considered costly due to the ex- penses of construction, maintenance, and future repairs of dams. As a result, civil en- gineers that work with dams are confronted with the question of efficiency versus cost; therefore, it is important for civil engineers to visualize a dam which can generate a large amount of electricity without harming the aquatic ecosystem, while also considering the cost of its construction. Four large hydroelectric dams were built by the federal government on the Snake River in the 1960s and early 1970s. The four Lower Snake River dams are storage Figure 1.1: dams which are used as reservoirs for wa- This map shows the Snake River system, ter [3]. The four Lower Snake River dams which includes the four lower Snake River have numerous benefits essential for the dams and the Dworshak Dam [5]. community surrounding the Snake River. The benefits of the dams include provid- ing emission-free renewable energy and power to the Northwest, stabilizing the 2 Background Snake River system, contributing to trans- mission system reliability, supporting wind 2.1 Hydroelectricity power, and assisting in irrigation [4]. De- spite their advantages, the four Lower Snake With various energy transformations, River dams have drawbacks which nega- dams can generate a substantial amount tively affect the marine life that inhabit the of hydroelectric power. When water flows 2 from a high to low elevation, potential en- bine. Examples of gravity turbines include ergy is converted into kinetic energy. The the reverse Archimedes Screw and the over- resulting kinetic energy is then converted to shot water wheel. mechanical energy by the turbines in a dam. The most efficient types of turbines are When a generator turns, the mechanical en- the Pelton and Kaplan turbines, which work ergy formed by the turbine is then converted well even below the design flow, or the into electrical energy, which is essentially amount of water the turbine was meant to be the hydroelectric power. Electric efficiency used for. Unlike these turbines, the Cross- is enhanced when large quantities of poten- flow and Francis turbines only work effec- tial energy are stored. For instance, when tively for the design flow [8]. Thus, in sit- dams have larger heads, or longer distances uations where dams may be holding less between the source of the water and the tur- water than their full potential, the Cross- bine, the water gains more potential energy flow and Francis turbines will be ineffec- as it travels farther. If dam pipes are larger, tive. Between the Pelton and Kaplan tur- more water volume is present, which causes bines, which have proven success rates, the a larger amount to pass through the turbines Pelton turbines are generally cheaper. The and generate hydroelectricity. The dams cost of these turbines can be modeled by the manipulate energy transformations to gen- formula: erate hydroelectric power for the surround- 0:54 ing community [6]. C = 8300(QH) (1) ”Q” is the flow rate in meters cubed per sec- ond and ”H” is the length of the head in me- 2.2 Turbines ters. The cost of Kaplan turbines can be modeled by the formula: Dams generate hydroelectricity by using turbines. The type of turbine selected for C = 15000(QH)0:68 (2) a given dam has a direct correlation with cost, efficiency, and marine life. Turbines ”Q” and ”H” take on the same units as in come in three varieties: impulse, reaction, the aforementioned formula [9]. However, and gravity. Impulse turbines work because in terms of preserving marine life, neither they are driven by jets of water which travel the Pelton nor the Kaplan turbines would at high velocities. Examples of impulse tur- be the best choice. Pelton turbines, due to bines are the Pelton and Crossflow turbines. their design, cause virtually 100% fish mor- Unlike impulse turbines, reaction turbines tality and Kaplan turbines have a fish mor- utilize a rotor which is submerged in wa- tality rate between 5-20%. Large, lowhead ter and placed in a casing. Pressure differ- turbines lead to eel mortality rates of 10- ences on opposing sides of the blades of the 20%, and smaller turbines found in typical turbine cause the rotor to rotate. Examples hydroelectric power plants cause fish mor- of reaction turbines include the Francis and tality rates of 50%. Mortality rates are high Kaplan designs, which are similar in compo- because fish are unable to survive passing sition and are commonly used due to their through turbines which can cause shearing efficiency [7]. Gravity turbines are driven effects and abrasion [9]. The best alterna- by the water which falls from the top of the tive is the Alden turbine, which is consid- turbine to the bottom. The water’s weight is ered fish-friendly due to its 98% survival the force behind the functionality of this tur- rate. In terms of efficiency, Alden turbines 3 are only 1% less efficient than Kaplan tur- ence of their heads, juvenile fish have an bines, coming in with a 94% rate [10]. increased chance of passing through the The four Lower Snake River Dam sys- holes of the turbine screens. Since the four tem consists of the following dams: the Lower Snake River dams have Kaplan tur- Ice Harbor, the Lower Monumental, the bines, once a fish passes through the screen, Lower Granite, and the Little Goose. Each it has a high chance of dying by the tur- of these dams have Kaplan turbines, with 6 bine. Another predicament is that the cur- blades each. Due to the amount of blades, rent turbine screens, themselves, pose a life- large structure, and complex composition, threatening risk to the fish. Since the size of the turbines produce, on average, 212,400 the turbine screen is not much larger than horsepower, or 158,390,000 Watts [11]. the actual turbine itself, the fish are exposed to an area where they can easily be sucked in or get stuck on the turbine screen and 2.3 Turbine Screens be unable to escape. Stainless steel is most effective for the turbine screens, because it Turbine screens are a crucial component is highly effective, inexpensive, and com- of many dams that serve the purpose of in- monly available [14]. Stainless steel is ap- creasing the survival rate of fish traveling proximately 489 pounds per cubic foot [15], through a turbine passage. These screens and costs $300 per metric ton [16]. serve to divert fish away from the turbine while still allowing water to flow through the turbine. 2.4 Spillways The four Lower Snake River dams have turbine screens that generally resemble a A spillway is a structure used to provide conveyor belt.
Recommended publications
  • Characterizing Migration and Survival Between the Upper Salmon River Basin and Lower Granite Dam for Juvenile Snake River Sockeye Salmon, 2011-2014
    Characterizing migration and survival between the Upper Salmon River Basin and Lower Granite Dam for juvenile Snake River sockeye salmon, 2011-2014 Gordon A. Axel, Christine C. Kozfkay,† Benjamin P. Sandford, Mike Peterson,† Matthew G. Nesbit, Brian J. Burke, Kinsey E. Frick, and Jesse J. Lamb Report of research by Fish Ecology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, Washington 98112 and †Idaho Department of Fish and Game 1800 Trout Road, Eagle, Idaho 83616 for Division of Fish and Wildlife, Bonneville Power Administration U.S. Department of Energy P.O. Box 3621, Portland, Oregon 97208-3621 Project 2010-076-00; covers work performed and completed under contract 46273 REL 78 from March 2010 to March 2016 May 2017 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of its program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. Views in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. ii Executive Summary During spring 2011-2014, we tagged and released groups of juvenile hatchery Snake River sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka to Redfish Lake Creek in the upper Salmon River Basin. These releases were part of a coordinated study to characterize migration and survival of juvenile sockeye to Lower Granite Dam. We estimated detection probability, survival, and travel time based on detections of fish tagged with either a passive integrated transponder (PIT) or radio transmitter and PIT tag.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Clearwater Assessment: 8. Fishery Resources
    8 Fishery Resources 8.1 Fish Status Currently more than 30 species of fish inhabit the Clearwater subbasin, including 19 native species, two of which have been reintroduced (Table 43). Salmonids and cyprinids are most numerous, representing 10 and 6 species, respectively. Exotic species within the subbasin are generally introduced sport or forage species, and include primarily centrarchids, ictalurids, and salmonids. Five fish species have been chosen as aquatic focal species in this assessment: chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss subspecies), westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). Aquatic focal species may serve as indicators of larger communities, and are listed by federal and/or state agencies as species of concern or, in the case of brook trout, have the potential to negatively impact other selected species. In addition, aquatic focal species had adequate data available for species status, distribution, and habitat use to aid future decision making. Information is also provided for additional species of interest for which only limited data exists, redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss subspecies), Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) and coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Although species status is discussed, data limitations for these species prohibits substantial consideration of limiting factors and distribution or condition of existing habitat areas. The resident fishery in Dworshak Reservoir is also considered a substantial fishery resource in the Clearwater subbasin. The Dworshak Reservoir fishery involves multiple species, and is addressed as a single fishery rather than as a large number of individual species. Distribution and status information was compiled for the five aquatic focal species using 23 data sources.
    [Show full text]
  • IDFG Emergency Procedures and Feasibility Plan at Lower Granite
    Trap and Haul Emergency Procedures and Feasibility Plan at Lower Granite Dam Prepared by: Chris Kozfkay Russell Kiefer Dan Baker Eric Johnson And Travis Brown Updated by: Jonathan Ebel John Powell Eric Johnson Lance Hebdon Idaho Department of Fish and Game 600 South Walnut Street P.O. Box 25 Bosie, Idaho 83707 February, 2017 Updated: April 2021 1 Executive Summary The trap and haul contingency plan was developed to address the concern of low adult Sockeye Salmon conversion rates resulting from high water temperatures during their migration through the Columbia, Snake and lower Salmon rivers. Trap and haul of Snake River Sockeye Salmon has been tested successfully from fish collected at the Lower Granite Dam adult trap. While trap and haul is a valuable tool in the conservation tool box under emergency situations it involves a recognized tradeoff between increased adult survival in the short term and the overall goal of the SR sockeye salmon program to restore a healthy, self-sustaining population that has a complete natural anadromous life history which includes the ability to migrate from the Ocean to the spawning grounds. This plan provides the framework to evaluate passage conditions and conduct adult Sockeye Salmon trap and haul activities from Lower Granite Dam. Specific goals of this plan are to (1) identify indicators that will be monitored, (2) develop trapping, holding, and transport protocols, (3) develop a person of contact (POC) list to facilitate coordination and distribution of program updates among cooperators and (4) develop a list of resources and personnel required to successfully implement this activity if a passage emergency has been declared.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishway Ladder
    FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS A. Fishway B. Riverwalk C. DNR Compliance with NR 333 D. Dam Removal E. Property Issues F. Fish and Aquatic Life G. Wildlife H. Recreational Use A. Fishway 1. What is the estimated cost to build a fishway at Bridge Street dam? The engineering consultant, Bonestroo, has estimated the cost at $1.3 million per the NOAA grant. 2. If the fishway is constructed next year, will it have to be rebuilt when the dam needs to be removed and replaced? Essentially no. Most of the fishway is a separate upstream structure and will not be impacted by demolition and construction of a new dam. The fishway entrance area may need to be modified if a new dam is installed or if the dam abutments are altered. 3. Why is the fishway being constructed on the west bank of the river? The west bank allows land owned by the Village of Grafton to be used for a portion of the channel alignment. Furthermore, the heaviest construction will likely be in the area currently owned by the Village (penetration of the west dam abutment). Other advantages include the appeal to tourists able to view fish entering and ascending the fishway from the riverwalk, and the known presence of shallow bedrock helping assure good foundation characteristics. Furthermore, the historic mill race crosses the area, and a portion of the mill race alignment may assist with fishway construction. 4. How long will it take to complete the construction of the fishway? The fishway will be completed by late fall of 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Steelhead (Snake River Basin) Oncorhynchus Mykiss Gairdneri
    Steelhead (Snake River basin) Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri Actinopterygii — Salmoniformes — Salmonidae CONSERVATION STATUS / CLASSIFICATION Rangewide: Imperiled/Vulnerable subspecies (G5T2T3) Statewide: Vulnerable (S3) ESA: Threatened USFS: Region 1: No status; Region 4: Sensitive BLM: Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate (Type 1) IDFG: Game fish; Threatened BASIS FOR INCLUSION Threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act; declining abundance and habitat degradation. TAXONOMY Steelhead are the anadromous life form of rainbow\redband trout Behnke (2002). Steelhead spawning east of the Cascades are considered part of the redband trout of the Columbia Basin, which is a subspecies of rainbow trout. The rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss complex includes 5 additional subspecies. Rainbow trout were originally described by Walbaum in 1792 (Nelson et al. 2004). DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE Steelhead, which are the anadromous life form of rainbow\redband trout, were historically found along the west coast of North America from southern California to central Alaska. The interior Columbia River basin steelhead ranged from east of the Cascades upstream in the Columbia River and tributary streams to natural geologic barriers such as Shoshone Falls on the Snake River (Behnke 2002). In Idaho, steelhead had access to most of the Clearwater, Salmon, Weiser, Payette, Boise, Owyhee, Bruneau and Salmon Falls Creek drainages. Populations using the tributaries above Hells Canyon Dam were eliminated with the construction of the Hells Canyon complex in the 1950s and earlier upriver dams. Currently, wild and hatchery steelhead are found in the Snake River below Hells Canyon Dam, Clearwater, and Salmon River drainages. The resident life form, inland redband trout, are also present in the Salmon and Clearwater drainage along with steelhead.
    [Show full text]
  • PIT -Tag Monitoring Systems for Hydroelectric Dams and Fish Hatcheries
    American Fisheries Society Symposium 7:323-334, 1990 PIT -Tag Monitoring Systems for Hydroelectric Dams and Fish Hatcheries EARL F. PRENTICE, THOMAS A. FLAGG, CLINTON s. MCCUTCHEON, AND DAVID F. BRASTOW Northwest Fisheries Center, National Marine Fisheries Service 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, Washington 98112, USA Abstract.-Juvenile salmonids implanted with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags can be monitored remotely as they are released from fish hatcheries or as they pass through specially designed facilitiesat hydroelectric dams. We have also designed and tested a system that monitors PIT-tagged adult salmonids. The systems record the individual PIT-tag code, time, date, and location of detection. Interrogation systems at dams can monitor fish traveling up to 3.7 mis and provide tag detection efficiency above 95% and reading accuracy (correct code identification) above 99.0%. The information collected at each dam is automatically transferred to a central data base for storage and processing. The system used to monitor hatchery releases can process over 20,000 fish/h (at a ratio of 1 :4 tagged to untagged) with a 93%, or higher, PIT-tag detection efficiency and a reading accuracy above 99.0%. Salmonids in the Columbia River basin im­ tronic components of the monitoring system are planted with passive integrated transponder (PIT) commercially produced by D-IDI. tags can be interrogated remotely by means of a computer-based PIT-tag monitoring system. De­ tails on the tag, how it operates, and its biological Systems at Hydroelectric Dams and technical suitability have been presented by Most outmigrating salmonids in the Columbia Prentice et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria 2019
    FISH PASSAGE ENGINEERING DESIGN CRITERIA 2019 37.2’ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northeast Region June 2019 Fish and Aquatic Conservation, Fish Passage Engineering Ecological Services, Conservation Planning Assistance United States Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 FISH PASSAGE ENGINEERING DESIGN CRITERIA June 2019 This manual replaces all previous editions of the Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 Suggested citation: USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2019. Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria. USFWS, Northeast Region R5, Hadley, Massachusetts. USFWS R5 Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria June 2019 USFWS R5 Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria June 2019 Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ ix List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x List of Equations ............................................................................................................................ xi List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................ xii 1 Scope of this Document ....................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Role of the USFWS Region 5 Fish Passage Engineering ............................................
    [Show full text]
  • To Save the Salmon Here’S a Bit of History and Highlights of the Corps' Work to Assure Salmon Survival and Restoration
    US Army Corps of Engineers R Portland District To Save North Pacific Region: Northwestern Division The Salmon Pacific Salmon Coordination Office P.O. Box 2870 Portland, OR 97208-2870 Phone: (503) 808-3721 http://www.nwd.usace.army.mil/ps/ Portland District: Public Information P.O. Box 2946 Portland, OR 97208-2946 Phone: (503)808-5150 http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil Walla Walla District: Public Affairs Office 201 N. 3rd Ave Walla Walla, WA 99362-1876 Phone: (509) 527-7020 http://www.nww.usace.army.mil 11/97 Corps Efforts to Save the Salmon Here’s a bit of history and highlights of the Corps' work to assure salmon survival and restoration. 1805-1900s: Lewis and Clark see “multitudes” 1951: The Corps embarks on a new research of migrating fish in the Columbia River. By program focusing on designs for more effective 1850, settlements bring agriculture, commercial adult fishways. fishing to the area. 1955: A fisheries field unit was established at 1888: A Corps report warns Congress of “an Bonneville Dam. There, biologists and enormous reduction in the numbers of spawning technicians work to better understand and fish...” in the Columbia River. improve fish passage conditions on the river 1900s-1930s: Overfishing, pollution, non- system. federal dams, unscreened irrigation ditches and 1960s: Experimental diversion screens at Ice ruined spawning grounds destroy fish runs. Harbor Dam guide some juveniles away from the Early hatchery operations impact habitat or turbine units, and lead to a major effort to develop close the Clackamas, Salmon and Grande Ronde juvenile bypass systems using screens for other rivers to salmon migration.
    [Show full text]
  • Operation Glen Canyon Dam Spiliway: Summer 1983
    7jq Reprinted from the Proceedings of the Conference Water for Resource Development, HY Di v. /ASCE Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, August 14-17, 1984 Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Spiliways - Summer 1983 Philip H. Burgi 1/, M., ASCE, Bruce M. Moyes 2/, Thomas W. Gamble 3/ Abstract. - Flood control at Glen Canyon Do, is provided by a 41-ft (12.5-rn) diameter tunnel spillway in each abutment. Each spillway is designed to pass 138 000 ft3/s (3907.7 m3/s). The spillways first operated in 1980 and had seen very little use until June 1983. In early June the left spiliway was operated for 72 hours at 20 000 ft3/s (566.3 m3/s). After hearing a rumbling aoise in the left spillway, the radial gates were closed and the tunnel was quickly inspected. Cavitation damage had occurred low in the vertical bend, resulting in removal of approximately 50 yd3 (38.2 rn3) of concrete. Flood flows continued to fill the reservoir. Both spillways were operated releasing a total of 1 626 000 acre-ft (2.0 x m3) over a period of 2 months. Exteri- sive cavitation damage occurred in both spiliways in the vicinity of the vertical bend. Introduction. - The tunnel spiliways are open channel flow type with two 40- by 52.5-ft (12.2- by 16.0-rn) radial gates to control releases to each tunnel. Each spillway consists of a 41-ft (12.5-rn) diameter inclined section, a vertical bend, and 1000 ft (304.8 m) of horizontal tunnel followed by a flip bucket.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashley National Forest Visitor's Guide
    shley National Forest VISITOR GUIDE A Includes the Flaming Gorge National Recreation Area Big Fish, Ancient Rocks Sheep Creek Overlook, Flaming Gorge Painter Basin, High Uinta Wilderness he natural forces that formed the Uinta Mountains are evident in the panorama of geologic history found along waterways, roads, and trails of T the Ashley National Forest. The Uinta Mountains, punctuated by the red rocks of Flaming Gorge on the east, offer access to waterways, vast tracts of backcountry, and rugged wilderness. The forest provides healthy habitat for deer, elk, What’s Inside mountain goats, bighorn sheep, and trophy-sized History .......................................... 2 trout. Flaming Gorge National Recreation Area, the High Uintas Wilderness........ 3 Scenic Byways & Backways.. 4 Green River, High Uintas Wilderness, and Sheep Creek Winter Recreation.................... 5 National Geological Area are just some of the popular Flaming Gorge NRA................ 6 Forest Map .................................. 8 attractions. Campgrounds ........................ 10 Cabin/Yurt Rental ............... 11 Activities..................................... 12 Fast Forest Facts Know Before You Go .......... 15 Contact Information ............ 16 Elevation Range: 6,000’-13,528’ Unique Feature: The Uinta Mountains are one of the few major ranges in the contiguous United States with an east-west orientation Fish the lakes and rivers; explore the deep canyons, Annual Precipitation: 15-60” in the mountains; 3-8” in the Uinta Basin high peaks; and marvel at the ancient geology of the Lakes in the Uinta Mountains: Over 800 Ashley National Forest! Acres: 1,382,347 Get to Know Us History The Uinta Mountains were named for early relatives of the Ute Indians. or at least 8,000 years, native peoples have Sapphix and son, Ute, 1869 huntedF animals, gathered plants for food and fiber, photo courtesy of First People and used stone tools, and other resources to make a living.
    [Show full text]
  • Dworshak Small Hydroelectric Project, DOE/EIS-0183-SA-02
    DOE F 1325.8 e Electronic Form Approved by CGIR - 01/20/95 (8-89) United States Government Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration memorandum DATE: June 20, 2000 REPLY TO ATTN OF: KECP-4 SUBJECT: Supplement Analysis for the Dworshak Small Hydroelectric Project, DOE/EIS-0183-SA-02 TO : Thomas Foeller Project Manager – PNG-1 Proposed Action: Dworshak Small Hydroelectric Project – Purchase of Electrical Energy Output, Contract No. DE-MS79-90BP92888 PL-6: P31101 Location: North Fork Clearwater River, Clearwater County, Idaho Proposed by: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and Idaho Water Resource Board (IWRB) 1. Introduction BPA is considering purchasing all of the electrical output of IWRB’s new 2.9 megawatt (MW) Dworshak Small Hydroelectric Project. The term of the contract is 30 years. BPA analyzed the potential environmental impacts of renewable resources development and BPA acquisition of those resources in its Business Plan Environmental Impact Statement (BP EIS, DOE/EIS-0183, June 1995). The Business Plan Record of Decision (BP ROD, August 15, 1995) documented BPA’s decision to pursue a market-driven business direction. The acquisition of renewable energy resources was included in that decision. The purpose of this Supplement Analysis is to determine whether any further NEPA documentation is required for BPA to enter into the contract with IWRB. 2. NEPA Analysis to Date Several existing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents address various aspects of the project: • BPA’s BP EIS analyzed the generic impacts of renewable energy resources and transmission, as well as the impacts of adding those resources to the existing system.
    [Show full text]
  • 2006 Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Annual Report
    Annual Report for Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Ahsahka, Idaho Fiscal Year 2006 ______________ ____1/16/07_____ Complex Manager Date Table of Contents Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….. 4 FY 2006 Production Summary . .7 Fish Culture Operations………………………………………………………………….. 9 Steelhead…………………………………………………………………………… 9 Brood Year 2005…………………………………………………………… 9 Brood Year 2006…………………………………………………………… 13 Spring Chinook Salmon……………………………………………………………. 18 Brood Year 2004…………………………………………………………… 18 Brood Year 2005…………………………………………………………… 19 Brood Year 2006…………………………………………………………… 20 Coho Salmon………………………………………………………………………. 24 Brood Year 2004…………………………………………………………… 24 Brood Year 2005…………………………………………………………… 25 Rainbow Trout……………………………………………………………………... 25 Brood Year 2005…………………………………………………………… 25 Brood Year 2006…………………………………………………………… 26 Production Photos . .. Administration……………………………………………………………………………. 28 Meetings…………………………………………………………………………… 28 Training……………………………………………………………………………. 30 Safety & Wellness…………………………………………………………………. 31 Staffing…………………………………………………………………………….. 32 Personnel Actions………………………………………………………………….. 33 Photos. Facilities Maintenance . 34 Photos . .. Outreach & Visitor Activities…………………………………………………………… 40 Visitor Use Statistics . .40 Table Summary . .40 Photos . .. Cooperative Programs……………………………………………………………………. 43 Photos . Introduction Dworshak National Fish Hatchery (DNFH) is located in North Central Idaho down river from Dworshak Dam, at the confluence of the North Fork and the main stem of the Clearwater River. Dworshak
    [Show full text]