DOCSLIB.ORG

Bbm:978-1-4613-0857-7/1.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bbm:978-1-4613-0857-7/1.Pdf INDEX INDEX A prestressing, 6 Roman, 1 Abrasion of flow surfaces, 634, 701, 707-709 shear, 579 Absorption, reservoir bottom, 423, 425, 449-450 slenderness coefficient, 580 Acceleration, attenuation of, 160, 375 static analysis, nonlinear, 503 Accelerators, concrete, 194 Areia Dam, 368, 371, 374, 382,410-411,413-414 Access, emergency, 779 cofferdam for, 234 Admixtures, concrete, 194, 208 Areia Dam spillway, 620, 622, 629-633, 653, 664 Aeration, 616, 620-634, 709 Asphalt Aerator grout, 331-332, 585 modeling, 630 membrane, 11 spacing, 633 Asphaltic concrete, 263 types, 625 Aswan Dam, 153 Aggregate, 193-194, 553-555 Aswan High Dam, 167, 724 Aggregate processing equipment, 554 Attenuation of ground acceleration, 160 Aggregates, RCC, 204 Auburn Dam, 119, 141 Air blows in outlets, 718 Automation of instrumentation, 773, 779 Air bulking, 633, 656 Avalanche, 739-740 Air-entraining agents, concrete, 194 Air entrainment mechanism, 625 Albuera de Feria Dam, 1 B Aldeadavila Dam, 624 Alicura Dam, 336 Backflow, spillway, 635 Alkali-aggregate reaction, 194, 525, 596-600 Bailey, R. D., Dam, 234 Almendralejo Dam, 1 Balderhead Dam, 270 Alto Anchicaya Dam, 368 Baldwin Hills Reservoir, 8-16, 57, 117, 125, 141 Ambiesta Dam, 507 Balsam Meadow Dam, 396, 397, 398 Ambursen dams, 3, 466, 470, 590 Bank storage, reservoir, 728 Amplitude suprema, 158 Batter pile, 472 Analysis of dam performance, 781 Bear Mountains fault, 119 Anchor Dam, 698 Beauharnois Project, 596-600 Anchor force, horizontal, 593 Bench mark installation, 752 Anchors, 591-596 Bennett, W. A. C., Dam, 371, 788 Angostura Dam, 724 Berm, 259, 360 Antecedent precipitation index (API), 97 Blanket Appurtenant facilities, surveillance of, 786 drain, 267, 361 Arch dam impervious, 265 analysis Blowcount (N-value), 302 dynamic, 445-452, 506 Blue Mesa Dam, 700 simplified, 452, 455-456 Boardman Dam, 137 traditional, 444-445 Boldness coefficient, arch dam, 580 boldness coefficient, 580 Borehole extensometer, 772 design criteria, 493-502 Borrow for earthfill, 342 earthquake response analysis, 444-456 Brantley Dam, 637, 725 elastic design, 456-457 Bratsk Dam, 620, 621, 625, 633 evolution of arch shapes, 502 Bridge, spillway, 474 joints, 503 Buck Dam, 600, 607 799 800 INDEX Bucket Cogswell Dam, 411, 413, 414 deflector, 635, 691 Colstrip Effluent Pond Dam, 136 dispersion, 635 Colstrip Surge Pond Dam, 134 flip, 635 Columbia River fault zone, 113 Buffalo Bill Dam, 511 Compaction equipment, 347-349 Bulking of flow, 633, 656 Compaction meter, 6 Buttress dams Compactor, 2, 347-349 design, 470-471 Compressibility of water, 425-426, 450-451, 506 earthquake response, 417 Concrete, 193-215 multiple-arch, 529-538 accelerators, 194 reinforcement, 475 admixtures, 194-195,556 strengthening, 579, 590-591 aggregate, 553, 570 types, 3,466 air-entraining agents, 194 Byllesby Darn, 607 alkali-aggregate reaction, 194, 525, 596-600 batching and mixing, 557 bonding, 521, 600 C compaction, 572 consolidation, 565 Cableway, 562 conventional, 193-197 Cabril Dam, 586 cooling, 567 Calamus Dam, 290-292, 773 creep, 196 Calaveras Dam, 300, 363 curing, 195, 572 Camanche Dam, Dike No.2, 403 delivery, 560, 571 Canelles Dam, 602, 724 diaphragm, 266 Cannelton Dam, cofferdam for, 223, 232 durability, 195 Carbonate rocks, 724 expansion, 596-601 Carlson meters, 771-773 fiber reinforced, 198, 644, 649 Caron Compactor Wheel, 348-349 forms, 565 Carsington Dam, 350, 360 insulation, 568 Casitas Dam, 309 lift, 565 Castaic Dam, 147 mixing, 570 Catapulting of gates, 717 modulus of elasticity, 195 Cat Creek Canyon arch dam, 738 Poisson's ratio, 196 Caverns, 129 polymers in, 200-201, 644, 649 Cavitation, 506, 616, 620-634, 650, 701, 705, 708-712 porous, 583, 584 Cavitation index, critical, 623 pozzolans, 194, 556 Cavities, 129, 148 production, 555 Cedar Springs Dam, 119, 138 roller compacted, 202-215, 469-470, 472, 508-509, Cement 544,569-577,644-645 availability, 555 silica fume, 198, 644 grout, 329 special, 198-201 natural, 193 strength, 196-197,501-502 portland, 193 temperature control, 195, 567-569 slag, 193 tests, 559 types, 193 thermal properties, 196 wet milled method, 4 tolerance, 642 Cethana Dam, 410, 411,413 tremie, 266 Channel erosion, 619, 635 vibration, 565 Cherry Valley Dam, 411 water reduction, 195 Chichester Dam, 591 Concrete dam construction, 540-577 Chicoasen Dam, 2, 368,411,414 Concrete dam performance, 578-608, 782 Chief Joseph Dam, 556 Concrete stress cell, 758 Chivor (Esmeralda) Dam, 2, 339, 368, 412 Construction Choke Canyon Dam, 341, 761 concrete dam, 540-577 Churchill Falls Project, 414 embankment, 321-353, 388-408 Clark Canyon Dam, 760 Construction joints, 473 Clark unit hydrograph, 85 Construction records, 351, 546 Claytor Dam, 596, 603-606 Contraction joints, 472 Cloverleaf cell, 223 Contractive state, soil, 297 Cofferdam, 219-238 Conveyor, 563 cell types, 225 Copperfield Dam, 573, 575-577 dewatering, 229 Corbara Dam, 586 diversion, 233 Corrosion of anchor, 591 earth and rockfill, 233-237 Cottonwood Dam No.5, 680 steel sheetpile cellular, 219-232 Cottonwood Project, 725 Cogoti Dam, 287, 411, 414 Cougar Dam, 368, 411, 413 INDEX 801 Coulomb equation, 483 Douglas Dam, 148 Counterfort, 532 Downie slide, 113-116 Courtright Dam, 411, 413, 414 Drag, coefficient of, 92 Cow Green Reservoir, 724 Drainage Coyote Dam, 287 borrow, 342 Cracked base analysis, 491 concrete dam, 606 Cracking, 118,285,359,491,578,583 earthfill, 270-275 Cracking mode, 505 foundation, 266-270, 328, 552, 574 Crack measuring microscope, 772 Drawdown, rapid, 281 Crack-stopper filter, 119 Drawings, as-built, 352 Crane Valley Dam, 411, 413 Drilling, 338 Creager envelope, 61, 97 Dworshak Dam Crest pressure, spillway, 618, 634 construction, 420, 473, 556, 560-562, 567 Creter Crane, 564, 571 gates, 695, 717 Crippen, J. R., envelope curve, 61, 97 instrumentation, 794 Critical path method (CPM), 545 remedial work, 606, 649-652 Crossarm settlement device, 753, 757, 765 Dynamic analysis Crumb test, 179 concrete dam, 416-465, 476, 506, 534-538 Crystal Dam, 773, 775 embankment, 239-240 Crystal Springs Dam, 117, 457, 458 Dynamic soil properties, 244-245 Cuber Dam, 724 Dynamic strength of concrete, 196-197,501-502 Culimo Dam, 287 Curing, concrete, 195 Currant Creek Dam, 761 E Cutoff, 266, 358, 637 Cutoff wall EACD-3D computer program, concrete dam, 417, 455, concrete-element, 358 457,461 concrete-panel, 358 EADHI computer program, 459, 460 sheetpile, 358 EAGD-84 computer program, gravity dam, 433, 442, Cyclic loading, 292-293, 300-301, 311-316, 318 457,459-461 Earthfill dam abutment details, 264-265 D berm, 259, 360 borrow, 342 Dam break analysis, 102-103,496,498 compaction, 343-349 Dam-foundation interaction, 426-429, 452 construction and foundation treatment, 321-353 Damping, 245, 246, 507 cracking, 285 Dam types, 3 crest details, 258-259 Dam-water interaction, 422-423 deformation, 285-287, 298-299, 301 Daniel Johnson (Manicouagan No.5) Dam, 530 density tests, 345 Darcy's law, 372 design and analysis, 256-320 Dashields Dam, 222 design features, 258-270 Data acquisition system (DAS), 774 foundation preparation, 263-264 Data entry device, 787 freeboard, 258-261 Debris flow, 739-740 moisture control, 344 Deer Flat Dam, 760 performance and remedial measures, 354-367 Deformation during cyclic loading, 301 seepage analysis, 270-275 Deformation gage, 757 seepage control, 265-270 Deformation of embankment slope protection, 261-263 during seismic loading, 316 stability analysis, 275-285 Jansen equation for, 287 Z-condition, 300-301 Makdisi-Seed method, 286 zoning, 256, 258 Newmark method, 276, 286 Earth-gravel mixtures, 346 separated from stability, 298-299 Earthquake simplified estimating of, 286-287 Alaska, 163 steady state, 293 Assam, 169 Degree-day method, snowmelt, 81 Aswan, 168 Demec strain gage, 757, 758 Chile, 155 Dentates, 651 controlling maximum, 120 Dewatering, 328 design, 456 Diamond-head buttress dam, 470 El Centro, 158 Dilation of rock foundation, 595 floating, 123 Dilative state, soil, 297 ground motion, 243-244, 498, 500 Directivity focusing, 155 Hebgen Lake, 118 Dispersive soils, 5, 176-182 Hsinfengkiang, 162, 169 Displacement, foundation, 119 Imperial Valley, 158, 160 802 INDEX Earthquake (Continued) jet diffusion, 691 Iran, 155 plunge pool, 618, 691 Kariba, 162, 742 roller bucket, 618 Kern County (Taft), 158 sleeve valve well, 691 Koyna, 162,431,462,743 sudden enlargement, 691 Kremasta, 162,742 Englebright Dam, 461 Lisbon, 163 Environs, surveillance of, 787 loading, 284 Epoxide resin grout, 586 maximum, 120 Epoxy mortar, 649 maximum credible, 120, 288, 498-500, 534 Erosion Michoacan-Guerrero, 117, 155 channel, 619, 635 Nurek, 162 reservoir, 733-735 Oroville, 142, 167 stilling basin, 649, 652, 653, 691 Parkfield, 158, 160 Esmeralda (Chivor) Dam, 2, 339, 368, 412 reservoir-induced, 153, 161-162,498,742-747 Evacuation of threatened areas, \00 San Fernando, 118, 155, 158, 168, 239, 462 Evaporites, 724 San Francisco, 117, 119, 154, 160,457 Extensometer, 125-126,752,757,758,772,784 Santa Barbara, 118, 239 South India, 118 Taiwan, 158, 161 F West Yellowstone, 133 Earthquake design criteria, 499 Facing, concrete dam, 589-590 Earthquake response analysis of concrete dams, 416-465 Facing, RCC, 574-577 Earthquake response analysis of embankment dams, 239- Failures 255 Baldwin Hills Reservoir, 8-16,57, 117, 125, 141 Earth, reinforced, 366-367 Calaveras Dam, 300, 312 East Branch Dam, 357 Fort Peck Dam, 292, 312 East Canyon Dam, 511 Malpasset Dam, 17-27 East Fork Dam, 234-237 Puentes Dam, 1 Eklutna Dam, 153 St. Francis Dam, 28-34, 138- 139 Elastic modulus, concrete, 195 Teton
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report
    16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report Jingfen Sheng John P. Wilson Acknowledgements: Financial support for this work was provided by the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy and the County of Los Angeles, as part of the “Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California” Project. The authors thank Jennifer Wolch for her comments and edits on this report. The authors would also like to thank Frank Simpson for his input on this report. Prepared for: San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy 900 South Fremont Avenue, Alhambra, California 91802-1460 Photography: Cover, left to right: Arroyo Simi within the city of Moorpark (Jaime Sayre/Jingfen Sheng); eastern Calleguas Creek Watershed tributaries, classifi ed by Strahler stream order (Jingfen Sheng); Morris Dam (Jaime Sayre/Jingfen Sheng). All in-text photos are credited to Jaime Sayre/ Jingfen Sheng, with the exceptions of Photo 4.6 (http://www.you-are- here.com/location/la_river.html) and Photo 4.7 (digital-library.csun.edu/ cdm4/browse.php?...). Preferred Citation: Sheng, J. and Wilson, J.P. 2008. The Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California. 16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report. University of Southern California GIS Research Laboratory and Center for Sustainable Cities, Los Angeles, California. This report was printed on recycled paper. The mission of the Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California is to offer a guide to habitat conservation, watershed health and recreational open space for the Los Angeles metropolitan region. The Plan will also provide decision support tools to nurture a living green matrix for southern California.
    [Show full text]
  • INSIDE for Construction of Power Plants
    L State Moves to Streamline Permits INSIDESince the passage of the For Construction of Power Plants Clean Air Act in 1970, and the With only one dissenting vote, proposed site, then an alternate site inform utilities and the public early by the ARB this month was a "pol- creation of the Environmental the State Air Resources Board and can be added to the original three in the planning stages for new lution banking" policy designed to Protection Agency, the battle the Energy Commission approved sites submitted to the energy power plants of the chances for provide economic incentives for I between ''ecology and econ- a sweeping new policy statement commission. acceptance-before large amounts industry to clean up the air. The omy" has taken on immense this month aimed at streamlining The new agreenient would re- of money are spent, Quinn said. proposal is a modification of the proportions. Environmental- government permit procedures for quire public agencies involved to Another proposal approached (Continued on Page 9) ists, armed with legions of power plants. 111"liti lawyers, lobbyists and their ARB Chairman Tom Quinn de- own breed of "earth scien- scribed the policy statement as "an I .'rsr»*= tists" have captured the voice effort to bring together statutes of the public on Capitol Hill into a framework that will guaran- i Qut.'/il.l/*1 and manipulated the judicial . tee airquality and still allow power /*Ift,Ol \01~01 system. plant sitings." He claims that izomil..;4 '1= 1 As overzealous env iron- adoption of the new policy will cut 11~~~ PUBLISHED TO PROMOTE THE GENERAI WELFARE OF ALL ENGINEERS AND THEIR FAMILIES mental demands become en- by six months the time needed by trenched in EPA's regulatory government agencies to review \9eL--i-,41 Jurisdiction· N.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Opinion for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration EIS
    Biological Opinion for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration EIS and Its Effects on Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Coho Salmon, Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon, Central Valley Spring-run Chinook Salmon, and Central Valley Steelhead Consultation Conducted by: National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Region October 12, 2000 -17442- UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmaspheric Admlnililtratian NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Southwest Region 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200 Long eaoch, Calffomia 90802-421:3 F/SWO:DRR OCT J 2 2000 Michael J. Spear Manager, CalifornialNevada Operations Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W-2606 Sacramento, CA 95825 Lester A. Snow Regional Director, Mid-Pacific Region U.S. B:ureau of Reclamation 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, CA 95825 Dear Messrs. Spear and Snow: Enclosed is the National Marine Fisheries Services's (NMFS) biological opinion addressing the preferred alternative described in the October 1999 Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration draft Environmental Impact StatementIReport (TRMFR DEIS), responding to your June 6, 2000, request for formal consultation (and enclosed June 5, 2000, biological assessment) regarding the: effects of the proposed restoration program on listed salmon and steelhead, and reinitiation of the 1992-1993 consultation concerning Central Valley Project operations, in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Based on a review of the TRMFR DEIS, the Trinity River Flow Evaluation (TRFE) Final Report, and other available information, NMFS has concluded that implementation of the TRMFR DEIS preferred alternative is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of Southern OregonINorthern California Coast coho salmon, Sacramento River Winter-run chinook salmon, Central Valley Spring-run chinook salmon, or Central Valley steelhead.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    This page intentionally left blank Table of Contents 1. Section 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning ...................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 ............................................................................... 1-1 1.4 Community Rating System – Activity 510 Floodplain Management Planning ....... 1-2 1.5 Local Participants ..................................................................................................... 1-2 1.6 Community Profile ................................................................................................... 1-3 1.6.1 Unincorporated Ventura County................................................................... 1-3 1.6.2 Participating Cities ........................................................................................ 1-3 1.6.3 Participating Special Districts ....................................................................... 1-4 1.7 Description of the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan ..................................................... 1-6 1.7.1 Section 2: Record of Adoption ..................................................................... 1-6 1.7.2 Section 3: Planning Process .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nikola P. Prokopovich Papers
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt4199s0f4 No online items Inventory of the Nikola P. Prokopovich Papers Finding aid created by Manuscript Archivist Elizabeth Phillips. Processing of this collection was funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and administered by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives program. Department of Special Collections General Library University of California, Davis Davis, CA 95616-5292 Phone: (530) 752-1621 Fax: Fax: (530) 754-5758 Email: [email protected] © 2011 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Inventory of the Nikola P. D-229 1 Prokopovich Papers Creator: Prokopovich, Nikola P. Title: Nikola P. Prokopovich Papers Date: 1947-1994 Extent: 83 linear feet Abstract: The Nikola P. Prokopovich Papers document United States Bureau of Reclamation geologist Nikola Prokopovich's work on irrigation, land subsidence, and geochemistry in California. The collection includes draft reports and memoranda, published writings, slides, photographs, and two films related to several state-wide water projects. Prokopovich was particularly interested in the engineering geology of the Central Valley Project's canals and dam sites and in the effects of the state water projects on the surrounding landscape. Phyiscal location: Researchers should contact Special Collections to request collections, as many are stored offsite. Repository: University of California, Davis. General Library. Dept. of Special Collections. Davis, California 95616-5292 Collection number: D-229 Language of Material: Collection materials in English Biography Nikola P. Prokopovich (1918-1999) was a California-based geologist for the United States Bureau of Reclamation. He was born in Kiev, Ukraine and came to the United States in 1950.
    [Show full text]
  • Uma Hinman Consulting Team
    Upper Feather River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Statement of Qualifications Photo: exploreplumascounty.bigfishcreations.com April 2014 Uma Hinman Consulting Team Leah Wills Independent Consultant Uma Hinman Consulting PO Box 1251, Cedar Ridge, CA 95924 4/10/2014 Mr. Randy Wilson, Planning Director/Co-Manager Plumas County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 555 Main Street Quincy, CA 95971 RE: Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Update Services Dear Mr. Wilson, Uma Hinman Consulting is enthusiastic about this opportunity to provide the enclosed Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) to assist the Plumas County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) and Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) in their efforts to update the 2005 Upper Feather River (UFR) Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Plan. The enclosed SOQ is submitted on behalf of a highly- qualified team of consultants including Uma Hinman Consulting, Leah Wills, Deer Creek Resources, ECORP, PMC, Plumas Geo-Hydrology, California Indian Environmental Alliance, Sierra Institute for Community and Environment, and SWALE Inc. Our Team interprets this Project as an integrative and collaborative planning effort, supported by science and local knowledge. In response, we present a Team led by land use and water resource planners, and backed by a highly skilled group of expert geographers and cartographers, scientists, socio-economists, Tribal outreach and water resource experts with extensive knowledge of the Feather River watershed and the people who call the Upper Feather River Basin home. Additionally, we have taken great care to bring together firms and individuals both local to the Plumas area and those who have extensive experience in the watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Valley Project, Folsom and Sly Park Unit, California
    The Central Valley Project The American River Division The Folsom and Sly Park Units The Auburn-Folsom South Unit Wm. Joe Simonds Bureau of Reclamation History Program Denver, Colorado 1994 Reformatted, Edited, and Reprinted: January 2010 by Brit Storey Table of Contents Table of Contents..............................................................1 The American River Division ....................................................2 The Folsom and Sly Park Units.............................................2 The Auburn-Folsom South Unit ............................................3 Project Location.........................................................3 Historic Setting .........................................................4 Project Authorization.....................................................7 Construction History .....................................................8 Folsom and Sly Park Units ..........................................8 Auburn Folsom South Unit .........................................16 Post Construction History ................................................20 Settlement of Project Lands ...............................................22 Uses of Project Water ...................................................23 Conclusion............................................................25 About the Author .............................................................26 Bibliography ................................................................27 Manuscript and Archival Collections .......................................27
    [Show full text]
  • Foresthill Divide Community Plan
    00087 PPllaacceerr CCoountuntyy,, CCaalliiffoorrniniaa August, 2003 Quad Knopf,Inc. Prepared by: Plan Team Community Foresthill Divide Planning Dept. Placer County Prepared for: Community Plan Foresthill Divide PPllaacceerr CCoountuntyy,, CCaalliiffoorrniniaa August, 2003 Roberta MacGlashan,Project Manager Contact: 784-7823 (916) Roseville, CA95678 One Sierragate Plaza, Suite270C Quad Knopf, Inc. Prepared by: Michael Wells,Senior Planner Contact: (530) 886-3000 Auburn, CA95603 11414 BAvenue Plan Team Foresthill DivideCommunity Placer CountyPlanningDept. Prepared for: Community Plan Foresthill Divide TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1-1 A. PURPOSE OF COMMUNITY PLAN 1-1 B. THE PLAN AREA 1-2 C. REGIONAL SETTING/CONTEXT 1-3 D. PLANNING PROCESS 1-3 E. PLAN ASSUMPTIONS 1-3 F. RELATIONSHIP TO COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES 1-5 G. VISION STATEMENT 1-5 II. GENERAL COMMUNITY GOALS 2-1 III. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT 3-1 A. POPULATION AND HOUSING 3-1 1. Purpose 3-1 2. Goals and Policies 3-2 3. Population 3-3 4. Housing 3-4 5. Implementation 3-7 B. LAND USE 3-16 1. Purpose 3-16 2. General Concepts/Description 3-17 3. Goals and Policies 3-24 4. Description of Land Use Districts 3-30 5. Implementation 3-41 C. COMMUNITY DESIGN 3-43 1. Purpose 3-43 2. Elements of Community Design 3-43 3. Goals and Policies 3-52 4. Implementation 3-57 D. PUBLIC FACILITIES 3-58 1. Purpose 3-58 2. Goals and Policies 3-58 i 3. Sewage Disposal 3-60 4. Water Supply 3-62 5. Education/Schools 3-64 6. Fire Protection 3-68 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement - Los Padres National Forest Tamarisk Removal Project
    Final Environmental Impact United States Department of Agriculture Statement Forest Service Los Padres National Forest September 2016 Tamarisk Removal Project Los Padres National Forest Kern, Los Angeles, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties, California In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877- 8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD- 3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.
    [Show full text]
  • Arroyo Toad (Bufo Californicus (=Microscaphus))
    Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus (=microscaphus)) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) Photo by permission of Will Flaxington U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office Ventura, California August 2009 5-YEAR REVIEW Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus (=microscaphus)) I. GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of 5-Year Reviews: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is required by section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing of a species as endangered or threatened is based on the existence of threats attributable to one or more of the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act, and we must consider these same five factors in any subsequent consideration of reclassification or delisting of a species. In the 5-year review, we consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed or last reviewed. If we recommend a change in listing status based on the results of the 5-year review, we must propose to do so through a separate rule-making process defined in the Act that includes public review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles 1:O~1Department of Water & Power Los Angeles
    ~ los Angeles 1:o~1Department of Water & Power Commission ERIC GARCEITI MEL LEVINE, President MARCIE L. EDWARDS Mayor WILLIAM W. FUNDERBURK JR., Vice President General Manager JILL BANKS BARAD MICHAEL F. FLEMING CHRISTINA E. NOONAN BARBARA E. MOSCHOS, Secretary June 5, 2014 The Honorable City Council City of Los Angeles Room 395, City Hall Los Angeles, California 90012 Honorable Members: Subject: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Relicensing Process Agreement No. BP 13-062 with the California Department of Water Resources for the State Water Project Hydropower Project No. 2426 Pursuant to Charter Section 674, enclosed for approval by your Honorable Body is Resolution No. 014227, adopted by the Board of Water and Power Commissioners on June 3, 2014, approved as to form and legality by the City Attorney, which authorizes execution of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Relicensing Process Agreement No. BP 13-062 with the California Department of Water Resources for the South State Water Project Hydropower Project No. 2426, including Castaic Power Plant, and Amendment No.5 to Contract No. 10099 for Cooperative Development West Branch California Aqueduct. If additional information is required, please contact Ms. Winifred Yancy, Director of Intergovernmental Affairs and Community Relations, at (213) 367-0025. Sincerely, ~~,~ Barbara E. Moschos Board Secretary BEM:oja Enclosures: LADWP Resolution Board Letter CAO Report Ordinance Relicensing Process Agreement between California Department of Water Resources and The Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles for the South SWP Hydropower Project No. 2426 Amendment No.5 Contract No.1 0099 for Cooperative Development West Branch, California Aqueduct.
    [Show full text]
  • Sedimentation in the Piru Creek Watershed Southern California
    Sedimentation in the Piru Creek Watershed Southern California GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1798-E Prepared in cooperation with the California Department of Plater Resources Sedimentation in the Piru Creek Watershed Southern California By KEVIN M. SCOTT, JOHN R. RITTER, and JAMES M. KNOTT SEDIMENTATION IN SMALL BASINS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1798-E Prepared in cooperation with the California Department of W^ater Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1968 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY William T. Pecora, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 35 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract_______________________________________________________ El Introduction and acknowledgments._________________________________ 2 Location and physical features._____________________________________ 5 Climate._________________________________________________________ 6 Lithology and structure.___________________________________________ 8 Geomorphology _ __________________________________________________ 10 Soils and vegetation.___________________________-__--_-_--_---_-_-- 13 Land use and fire history___________________________________________ 13 Direct measurement of sediment deposited in Lake Piru________________ 14 Reservoir use and operation___________________________________ 14 Method of survey__ ___________________________________________ 16 Sediment sampling___________________________________________
    [Show full text]