DOCSLIB.ORG

Strategies to Conduct Vulnerability Assessments for High Priority Columbia River Basin Hydropower and Dam Facilities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Strategies to Conduct Vulnerability Assessments for High Priority Columbia River Basin Hydropower and Dam Facilities STRATEGIES TO CONDUCT VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS FOR HIGH PRIORITY COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN HYDROPOWER AND DAM FACILITIES Lisa A. DeBruyckere and Stephen H. Phillips BUILDING A REGIONAL DEFENSE AGAINST INVASIVE MUSSELS Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission April 2014 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Background _________________________________________________________________ 1 Preventing an invasion: Building a regional defense against invasive mussels _________ 1 Vulnerability assessments ________________________________________________ 2 Vulnerability assessment team_____________________________________________ 3 Implementation ______________________________________________________________ 4 Determine status of vulnerability assessments at hydropower projects in the Columbia River Basin ___________________________________________________________ 9 The cost of hydropower vulnerability assessments _____________________________12 Determine the risk of hydropower projects to zebra and mussel establishment _______14 Prioritizing vulnerability assessments for the most prominent Columbia River Basin hydropower facilities ____________________________________________________17 Strategy____________________________________________________________________ 18 A strategy to reduce the average cost of vulnerability assessments for prominent hydropower facilities in the Columbia River Basin _____________________________18 Appendices _________________________________________________________________ 24 Appendix A. Adobe FormsCentral survey tool to document status of vulnerability assessments in the Columbia River Basin ____________________________________24 Appendix B. Vulnerability Assessment Checklist ______________________________26 i Background BACKGROUND PREVENTING AN INVASION: BUILDING A REGIONAL DEFENSE AGAINST INVASIVE MUSSELS Quagga and zebra mussels (Dreissenid spp.) are the most economically damaging aquatic organisms to invade the United States, costing an estimated $5 billion in prevention and control efforts since their arrival in the late 1980s. Because of the threat posed by these invasive mussels to the Northwest, there is a compelling need to define and implement a region-wide prevention and response strategy. Recognizing this need, The Pacific NorthWest Economic Region, the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, Portland State University Center for Lakes and Reservoirs, and the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission sponsored a workshop on May 15, 2013 entitled, “Preventing an Invasion: Building a Regional Defense against Quagga and Zebra Mussels.” The workshop convened 90 individuals representing Canadian and Pacific Northwest irrigation and water districts, water suppliers, legislators, state and federal agencies, tribal sovereign nations, nonprofit organizations, recreational boating interests, consortiums, and others in Vancouver, Washington. Workshop outcomes included the development of a set of regulatory/policy, outreach, funding and research action items addressing the challenges and barriers to prevent the introduction of invasive mussels to the Pacific Northwest. One of the priority action items developed included creating a Vulnerability Assessment Team (VAT) to coordinate/prioritize needed assessment and mitigation response efforts at hydro/raw water projects and facilitate sharing of information among both affected and uninfested areas. The Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, in cooperation with the Bonneville Power Administration, was designated as the lead agencies to coordinate this important task. Vulnerability assessments itemize and inspect all hydropower facility structures and components that come into contact with raw water, and make an informed judgment on the degree to which Dreissenid mussels could impair the performance of the structures and its components. Understanding these factors in advance of an introduction can best prepare the facility to both prevent and deal with an introduction. 1 Background VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS Vulnerability assessments1 itemize and inspect all hydropower facility structures and components that come into contact with raw water, and make an informed judgment on the degree to which dreissenid mussels will impair the performance of the structures and components.2 A facility assessment process usually requires considerable time for planning and coordination, background research, site visits, evaluation of data and preparation of a report.3 It is likely that a team approach with two or three people is most effective at carrying out the assessment with at least one person with operational knowledge/experience of the specific facility. The assessment team lead should become familiar with general mussel characteristics and behavior or possibly have a support person familiar with mussels as part of the assessment team. The specific risks and problems that a particular facility will have with the dreissenids will depend on: The size of the dreissenid population in the area – actual/anticipated. How the raw water gets into the facility. Any processes to treat or transform the water for various facility applications. The routing of all piping branches and location of components and equipment, including materials of construction. The operating envelope of the various water systems (such as maximum and minimum flow rates, frequency of operation, temperature ranges). 1 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, May 2009, Facility Vulnerability Assessment Template, Invasive Quagga and Zebra Mussels. Prepared for Reclamation by: RNT Consulting Inc., 823 County Road 35, Picton, Ontario, Canada K0K 2T0, 26pp. 2 Prescott, T. Vulnerability Assessment of Zebra and Quagga Mussels on Facilities from Intake to Discharge. RNT Consulting, Inc. (PowerPoint Presentation). 3 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, May 2009, Facility Vulnerability Assessment Template, Invasive Quagga and Zebra Mussels. Prepared for Reclamation by: RNT Consulting Inc., 823 County Road 35, Picton, Ontario, Canada K0K 2T0, 26pp. 2 Background Vulnerability Assessment Team Because every facility has a number of unique features, a site person familiar Members with the operation of the various water uses in the plant/facility is an essential contributor to the assessment. A template (Appendix B), including checklists Lisa DeBruyckere, Creative Resource and other key information can be used under most circumstances and for the Strategies, LLC most common assets to assist in implementing a facility assessment. (Coordinator) Dave Arbaugh, Arbaugh Associates Arnie Aspelund, Puget VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TEAM Sound Energy Chris Brueske, Whatcom County The VAT was created in July 2013 and consists of 33 individuals (see sidebar Lori Campbell, PGN Renata Claudi, RNT to the left) representing both public and private hydropower facilities in the Consulting Pacific Northwest. David DeRosa, Teck Metals, LTD The VAT was tasked with three specific goals: Hannah Dondy-Kaplan, BPA 1. Determine status of vulnerability assessments at key hydropower projects in Tom Dresser, Public Utility the Columbia River Basin (CRB). No. 2 of Grant County, WA Tim Dykstra, USACE 2. Determine the risk of these hydropower projects to zebra and quagga mussel Todd Gatewood, GE Power and Water establishment. Micah Goo, Centralia City and Light 3. Create a planning document that recommends the highest priority needs for Ritchie Graves, NOAA vulnerability assessments and the costs associated with completing them. Jackson Gross, Smith- Root Michele Hanson, USACE Bruce Howard, Avista Corp. Doug Johnson, BC Hydro Mark Jones, BPA Keith Kirkendall, NOAA Chas Kyger, Douglas County PUD Scott Lindsay, Northwest Public Power Association Scott Lund, USBR Carrie Link, Marrone Bio Innovations Madelyn Martinez, USACE Stephen Phillips, PSMFC Christine Pratt, Seattle City Light Jared Rubin, EWEB Michael Stephenson, Idaho Power Sheila Street, FortisBC Andrew Talabere, EWEB Krista Watts, Columbia Power Steve Wells, PSU 3 Leonard Willett, USBR Bonneville Dam on the Columbia River. Photo credit: US Army Corps of Engineers archives. Background IMPLEMENTATION SELECTING HYDROPOWER FACILITIES TO SURVEY The National Inventory of Dams defines a major dam as being 50 feet (15 m) tall with a storage capacity of at least 5,000 acre feet (6,200,000 m3), or of any height with a storage capacity of 25,000 acre feet (31,000,000 m3).4 There are about 8,100 major dams in the United States. The universe of dam/weir facilities in the CRB is extensive (Figure 1), totaling 2,657 documented features. To determine which facilities would be included in this initiative effort, a total of 75 of the most prominent dams (Figure 2, Table 1), owned by the federal government, public utilities, private entities, and state, provincial, or local governments was selected initially to document the status of vulnerability assessments. Figure 1. Dam/weir facilities in the Pacific Northwest. CRB facilities are designated in light blue. Source: Van Hare, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. 4 Major Dams of the United States. National Atlas of the United States. USGS. September 17, 2009. Retrieved October 24, 2009. 4 Background Figure 2. Locations of 75 of the most prominent dams in the CRB by ownership. Source: Van Hare, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. 5 Background Table 1. List of mainstem dams within the Columbia River Basin. Dams in bolded text were included in survey responses.5 Structure Name River Owner Blue River Dam Blue River
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mckern Presentation
    WHO KILLED THE SNAKE RIVER SALMON JuneCELILO 1 FALLS COMMERCIAL HARVEST – 1860s to 1970s PEAK HARVEST 43 MILLION POUNDS – 1886 -SPRING CHINOOK SECOND PEAK 1910 – 43 MILLION POUNDS - ALL SPECIES EAST BOAT BASIN - ASTORIA MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT - 1972 NOAA RECENT ESTIMATE 20 TO 40 % OF SPRING CHINOOK Gold Dredge at Sumpter, Oregon Dredged Powder River Valley Oregon LOGGING WATERSHED DAMAGE EROSION SPLASH DAMS WATER RETENTION ROAD CONSTRUCTION METHODS Mainstem Snake River Dams WITHOUT FISH PASSAGE Oxbow dam – 1961 Shoshone Falls Hells Canyon Dam – (Upper Limit) 1967 Upper Salmon Falls – 1937 WITH FISH PASSAGE Lower Salmon Falls - Lower Granite Dam – 1910 1975 Bliss Dam – 1950 Little Goose Dam 1970 C. J. Strike Dam - Lower Monumental Dam 1952 – 1969 Swan Falls Dam -1901 Ice Harbor Dam - 1962 Brownlee Dam – 1959 SHOSHONE FALLS Tributary Dams Owyhee River Powder River Wild Horse Dam – 1937 Thief Valley Dam – 1931 Owyhee Dam – 1932 Mason Dam - 1968 Boise River Salmon River Anderson Ranch Dam – 1950 Sunbeam Dam – 1909 – 1934 Arrowrock Dam – 1915 Wallowa River Boise R Diversion Dam – 1912 OFC Dam 1898 - 1914 Lucky Peak Dam - 1955 Clearwater River Barber Dam - 1906 Lewiston Dam – 1917 - 1973 Payette River Grangeville Dam – 1910 – 1963 Black Canyon Dam – 1924 Dworshak Dam - 1972 Deadwood Dam - 1929 Malheur River Warm Springs Dam – 1930 Agency Valley Dam – 1936 Bully Creek Dam – 1963 Sunbeam Dam – Salmon River 1909 to 1934 1909 to 1920s - no fish passage 1920s to 1934 - poor fish passage Channel around by IDF&G 1934 NOTE 3 PEOPLE IN RED CIRCLE
    [Show full text]
  • BRIDGEPORT STATE PARK Chief Joseph Dam, Washington
    BRIDGEPORT STATE PARK Chief Joseph Dam, Washington Sun Shelter and Play Area Group Camp Fire Circle Bridgeport State Park, located on systems; landscaping; and the Columbia River at Chief Joseph sprinkler irrigation. Osborn Pacific Dam, was an existing development Group provided complete design composed of a boat launch, services followed by completion campground, temporary of bid documents for the park and administration area, and day-use recreation amenity features, and group-use areas. The park was buildings, landscape architecture, created subsequent to the Chief and sprinkler irrigation. Joseph Dam construction and was Subconsultants provided civil, Picnic Shelter built by the U.S. Army Corps of structural, mechanical, and Engineers. The park is maintained electrical engineering. Site: Approximately 400 acres of rolling and operated by Washington State arid topography on shore of Rufus Parks. Woods Lake. Approximately 30 acres Project: is developed. Osborn Pacific Group Inc. was Bridgeport State Park Services: Client: retained by the U.S. Army Corps of Final design, construction documents, US Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle and cost estimate of park and Engineers to provide design District recreation amenity features, buildings, services and prepared construction Location: landscape architecture, and sprinkler documents for a $1.4 million park Chief Joseph Dam, Columbia River, irrigation. Contract administration expansion project. Features Washington and coordination for civil, structural, mechanical, and electrical included: upgrading and expanding engineering. recreation vehicle campground area, day-use picnic area and swim beach development; group camp area development; pedestrian and handicapped access trails; ranger residence; maintenance building; restrooms and shelters; roads; water, sanitary, and electrical .
    [Show full text]
  • Kootenay System Operations
    Columbia River Treaty Review – Technical Studies Appendix C Kootenay System Operations Operation of the Kootenay River system is complicated as it is administered by several different jurisdictions and the hydroelectric facilities are owned by different agencies/companies. As shown in Figure 1, the Kootenay River originates in the Rocky Mountains not far from Field, BC. The river flows south, within a few km of the source of the Columbia River at Canal Flats, and then continues south into Koocanusa Reservoir, formed behind Libby Dam in Montana, United States. From Libby, the Kootenay River turns west and north, and re-enters British Columbia near the community of Creston, flowing into the south arm of Kootenay Lake. In the northern part of the Kootenay basin, the Duncan River is joined by the Lardeau River just downstream from Duncan Dam, and then flows into the north arm of Kootenay Lake. Water from the north and south arms of Kootenay Lake then flows through the west arm of the lake and past the Corra Linn Dam near Nelson (as well as other dams) en route to the Columbia–Kootenay confluence at Castlegar. The components of this system and various agreements/orders that regulate flows are described in this Appendix. November 29, 2013 1 Columbia River Treaty Review – Technical Studies Figure 1: Kootenay and Columbia Region November 29, 2013 2 Columbia River Treaty Review – Technical Studies 1.0 Coordination of Libby Operations Background Under the terms of the Columbia River Treaty, Canada permitted the U.S. to build the Libby Dam on the Kootenai River (U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Seismicity, Seismotectonics and Preliminary Earthquake Hazard Analysis of the Teton Region, WY
    FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT DEVELOPMENT OF EARTHQUAKE GROUND SHAKING HAZARD MAPS FOR THE YELLOWSTONE- JACKSON HOLE-STAR VALLEY, WYOMING Submitted to the U.S. Geological Survey Under the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Program Element II Evaluate Urban Hazard and Risk USGS Award 05HQGR0026 Prepared by Bonnie Jean Pickering White Department of Geology and Geophysics The University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 94112 and Robert B. Smith Department of Geology and Geophysics The University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 94112 Principal Investigator Ivan Wong Seismic Hazards Group URS Corporation 1333 Broadway, Suite 800, Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510) 874-3014, Fax: (510) 874-3268 E-mail: [email protected] 26 September 2006 __________________________ This research was supported by the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Department of the Interior, under USGS Award Number 05HQGR0026. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied of the U.S. Government. PREFACE The Yellowstone-Jackson Hole-Star Valley corridor is located within the seismically and tectonically active Intermountain Seismic Belt in westernmost Wyoming and eastern Idaho. The corridor has the highest seismic hazard in the Intermountain U.S. based on the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Hazard Maps. The region contains the heavily visited Yellowstone and Teton National Parks and the rapidly growing areas of Jackson Hole and Star Valley. Although there has only been one large earthquake in this region in historical times (1959 moment magnitude [M] 7.5 Hebgen Lake), abundant geologic evidence exists for the past occurrence of surface-faulting earthquakes of M 7 or greater.
    [Show full text]
  • KR/KL Burbot Conservation Strategy
    January 2005 Citation: KVRI Burbot Committee. 2005. Kootenai River/Kootenay Lake Conservation Strategy. Prepared by the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho with assistance from S. P. Cramer and Associates. 77 pp. plus appendices. Conservation strategies delineate reasonable actions that are believed necessary to protect, rehabilitate, and maintain species and populations that have been recognized as imperiled, but not federally listed as threatened or endangered under the US Endangered Species Act. This Strategy resulted from cooperative efforts of U.S. and Canadian Federal, Provincial, and State agencies, Native American Tribes, First Nations, local Elected Officials, Congressional and Governor’s staff, and other important resource stakeholders, including members of the Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative. This Conservation Strategy does not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or approval of all individuals or agencies involved with its formulation. This Conservation Strategy is subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of conservation tasks. 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Kootenai Tribe of Idaho would like to thank the Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative (KVRI) and the KVRI Burbot Committee for their contributions to this Burbot Conservation Strategy. The Tribe also thanks the Boundary County Historical Society and the residents of Boundary County for providing local historical information provided in Appendix 2. The Tribe also thanks Ray Beamesderfer and Paul Anders of S.P. Cramer and Associates for their assistance in preparing this document. Funding was provided by the Bonneville Power Administration through the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program, and by the Idaho Congressional Delegation through a congressional appropriation administered to the Kootenai Tribe by the Department of Interior.
    [Show full text]
  • License Application Boundary Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2144)
    License Application Boundary Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2144) Seattle City Light September 2009 LICENSE APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS AND DEFINITIONS List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. ix List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... xiv List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ....................................................................................... xxi INITIAL STATEMENT EXHIBIT A: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 Contents and Purpose of This Exhibit .............................................................................. A-1 2 General Project Description............................................................................................... A-1 3 Project Area and Vicinity ................................................................................................... A-1 4 Project Lands ...................................................................................................................... A-5 5 License Requirements ......................................................................................................... A-5 5.1. License Articles ............................................................................................................. A-5 5.2. Additional FERC Orders ............................................................................................... A-8 5.3. Other Licenses/Permits
    [Show full text]
  • Coe Portland District (Nwp) Hydropower Projects
    Updated March 30, 2021. Use the appropriate district distribution list below when submitting a System Operational Request (SOR). COE PORTLAND DISTRICT (NWP) HYDROPOWER PROJECTS COE SEATTLE DISTRICT (NWS) HYDROPOWER PROJECTS Bonneville Dam & Lake on Columbia River Libby Dam & Lake Koocanusa on Kootenai River The Dalles Dam & Lake Celilo on Columbia River Hungry Horse Dam & Lake on South Fork Flathead River John Day Dam & Lake Umatilla on Columbia River Albeni Falls Dam & Pend Oreille Lake on Pend Oreille River Chief Joseph Dam and Rufus Woods Lake on Columbia River Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division (NWD) Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division (NWD) SEATTLE DISTRICT (NWS) PORTLAND DISTRICT (NWP) TO: TO: BG Pete Helmlinger COE-NWD-ZA Commander BG Pete Helmlinger COE-NWD-ZA Commander COL Alexander Bullock COE-NWS Commander COL Mike Helton COE-NWP Commander Jim Fredericks COE-NWD-PDD Chief Jim Fredericks COE-NWD-PDD Chief Steven Barton COE-NWD-PDW Chief Steven Barton COE-NWD-PDW Chief Tim Dykstra COE-NWD-PDD Tim Dykstra COE-NWD-PDD Julie Ammann COE-NWD-PDW-R Julie Ammann COE-NWD-PDW-R Doug Baus COE-NWD-PDW-R Doug Baus COE-NWD-PDW-R Aaron Marshall COE-NWD-PDW-R Aaron Marshall COE-NWD-PDW-R Lisa Wright COE-NWD-PDW-R Lisa Wright COE-NWD-PDW-R Jon Moen COE-NWS-ENH-W Tammy Mackey COE-NWP-OD Mary Karen Scullion COE-NWP-EC-HR Lorri Gray USBR-PN Regional Director Lorri Gray USBR-PN Regional Director John Roache USBR-PN-6208 John Roache USBR-PN-6208 Joel Fenolio USBR-PN-6204 Joel Fenolio USBR-PN-6204 John Hairston BPA Administrator Kieran Connolly BPA-PG-5 John Hairston BPA Administrator Scott Armentrout BPA-E-4 Kieran Connolly BPA-PG-5 Jason Sweet BPA-PGB-5 Scott Armentrout BPA-E-4 Eve James BPA-PGPO-5 Jason Sweet BPA-PGB-5 Tony Norris BPA-PGPO-5 Eve James BPA-PGPO-5 Scott Bettin BPA-EWP-4 Tony Norris BPA-PGPO-5 Tribal Liaisons: Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Kootenay Performance Measures
    Columbia River Treaty Review – Technical Report Appendix H Development of Kootenay Performance Measures Relative to the Columbia River, the Kootenay River system has not had as extensive a history of public planning processes to develop information about interests that may be affected by reservoir levels and flows. As a result, the project team undertook desktop studies to fill in some of the information gaps on the Kootenay system. Estimating how interests on the Kootenay River system might directly be affected by water management alternatives was undertaken using the following methods: Public consultative sessions in spring and fall of 2012; Discussions with individual First Nations; Feedback provided by communities to BC Hydro, FortisBC, and Columbia Power Corporation on operations over a number of years; Reviewing available reports prepared for other planning processes; Drawing parallels with similar situations in other areas of BC for which performance measures had already been developed; and The Fish and Wildlife Technical Committee had as a key focus to develop fish and aquatic ecosystem, and vegetation and wildlife performance measures for the Kootenay system. This appendix reviews the development of the new Kootenay performance measures covering the environmental performance measures reviewed by the Fish and Wildlife Technical Committee and social performance measures on interests that have been raised by basin residents. While detailed information on the Kootenay performance measures is provided in Appendix G, this appendix focuses on the interests that for various reasons did not have a performance measure developed. First Nations Culture and Archaeological Sites The linkages between aboriginal people and the Kootenay River system are long and enduring.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.2 Flood Level of Risk* to Flooding Is a Common Occurrence in Northwest Oregon
    PUBLIC COMMENT DRAFT 11/07/2016 3.2 Flood Level of Risk* to Flooding is a common occurrence in Northwest Oregon. All Flood Hazards jurisdictions in the Planning Area have rivers with high flood risk called Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA), except Wood High Village. Portions of the unincorporated area are particularly exposed to high flood risk from riverine flooding. •Unicorporated Multnomah County Developed areas in Gresham and Troutdale have moderate levels of risk to riverine flooding. Preliminary Flood Insurance Moderate Rate Maps (FIRMs) for the Sandy River developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 2016 •Gresham •Troutdale show significant additional risk to residents in Troutdale. Channel migration along the Sandy River poses risk to Low-Moderate hundreds of homes in Troutdale and unincorporated areas. •Fairview Some undeveloped areas of unincorporated Multnomah •Wood Village County are subject to urban flooding, but the impacts are low. Developed areas in the cities have a more moderate risk to Low urban flooding. •None Levee systems protect low-lying areas along the Columbia River, including thousands of residents and billions of dollars *Level of risk is based on the local OEM in assessed property. Though the probability of levee failure is Hazard Analysis scores determined by low, the impacts would be high for the Planning Area. each jurisdiction in the Planning Area. See Appendix C for more information Dam failure, though rare, can causing flooding in downstream on the methodology and scoring. communities in the Planning Area. Depending on the size of the dam, flooding can be localized or extreme and far-reaching.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. G Eolo:.:Jical. Survey
    Pierce and Colman: Submerged Shorelines of Jackson Lake, Wyoming: Do They Exist and SUBMERGED SHORELINES OF JACKSON LAKE, WYOMING: DO THEY EXIST AND DEFINE POSTGLACIAL DEFORMATION ON THE TETON FAULT Kenneth L. Pierce u.s. Geolo:.:Jical. Survey Denver, co Steven M. Colman u.s. Geological Survey Woods Hole, M A Obj::ctives The Teton fault is one of the moot active normal faults in the world, as attested by the precipitous high front of the Teton Range. After deglaciation of northern Jackson Hole arout 15,000 years ago (Parter and others, 1983), offset on the Teton fault eouthwest of Jackoon Lake has tntaled 19-24 m (60-80 feet) (Gilbert and others, 1983). In less than the last 9 million years, offset on the Teton fault has tntaled from 7,500 to 9,000 meters (Love and Reed, 1971). Figure 1 shows how downdropping on the Teton fault results in tilting of Jacks::>n HoJe towards the fault. Submerged paJ.eoohorel:ines of Jackoon Lake may record this downdropping and tilt because the level of Jackoon Lake is controlled by both the furtui.tous ,{X)Sition of the Jake ootlet and the immediate downstream course of the Snake River (Figure 1). The ootlet of Jackson Lake is 12 km east of the fault and from there the Snake River has a very low gradient to a bedrock threshold 6 km further east. Thus the level of Jackson Lake is controlled by the bed of the river east of the hinge line of tiJ.ting (Figure 1). The postglacial history of movement on the Teton fault may thus be recorded by paJ.eoohorelines submerged OOJ.ow the level of the pre-dam Jake.
    [Show full text]
  • Dolen, Timothy P
    Historical Development of Durable Concrete for the Bureau of Reclamation Timothy P. Dolen Research Civil Engineer - Senior Technical Specialist Materials Engineering and Research Laboratory Technical Service Center - Denver, Colorado Introduction The Bureau of Reclamation infrastructure stretches across many different climates and environments in the seventeen western states. Many of the dams, spillways, pumping plants, power plants, canals, and tunnels are constructed with concrete. These structures were built from Arizona to Montana, across the plains and in the mountains and deserts. Concrete structures had to remain durable to resist both the design loads and the natural environments of the western climate zones. Many natural environments can be quite destructive to concrete and the earliest Reclamation projects were faced with a variety of durability problems. The state-of-the-art of concrete construction advanced from hand mixing and horse and wagon transporting operations to automated mixing plants, underwater canal construction, and pumping and conveyor placing. This paper first overviews the challenges facing concrete construction in the beginning of the 20th Century. It then traces the Bureau of Reclamation’s role in the development of durable concrete to resist the environments of the west. What is Concrete? Before we begin, we must first understand what is concrete, the most versatile building material. The American Concrete Institute defines concrete as “a composite material that consists essentially of a binding medium within which are embedded particles or fragments of aggregate, usually a combination of fine aggregate and coarse aggregate; in portland-cement concrete, the binder is a mixture of portland cement and water.”1 The earliest concretes date at least as far back as early Roman times including the aqueducts and the historic Pantheon in Rome.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior ,C£$ PftRKSERVIC National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Pla Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not ap property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcatei instructins. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name: American Falls Reservoir Flooded Townsite other name/site number: 2. Location street & number American Falls Reservoir [ ] not for publication city or town American Falls ______ [ X ] vicinity state: Idaho code: ID county: Power code: 077 zip code: 83211 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this [X] nomination [ ] request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36
    [Show full text]