FLOOD04543

• County: Statewide
• Community: Harrison County, Iowa
• Basin: Statewide
• Title: California Bend Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Mitigation
• Date: 11/1/1994
• Prepared For: US Army Corps of Engineers
• Prepared By: Greenhorne & O'Mara, Inc.
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Data ‎(general)‎

I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

22. Paee 38. add "wilh available data." to the end of the next to last seDtetlCe in ptl'llifaph Ill.
23. Page 39, rust line, please eltpand OD what is meant by "periodic drec1glna and/or
cltcavatlon" .

24. Page 39. second full parapph, 1st sentence, plwc cbange "PlaDs and SpecifICations" to
"ConstrUCtion" .

2S. P-llC 39, ~tion 12 and Table 8, the E&D and S&1 costS are $159,000 aad $3!i,ono
respectively.

26. Page 41, Table 9, Implementation Schedule. See attaChed muted up table.

27. Page 44. CbaD&C "Rich4rcl Oonon" to "Robert Nebel". Add "C.mdaee Thoma.<. Study
Manager, Environmental Resources Specialist, Omaha District." DeIete"Beclc:y Latka". Mick
'Sadine" should be "Sandine". Delete the SlUdy Manager responsibility for John Remus' duties.

28. Page 47. Delete "CONSIDERATIONS" from the title oCthis page. First paragraph needs
to compare the environmental impacts of the selected plan to those of the other alternatives.
Needs to show that !he selected plan is the least enviromnentally damaging.

29. Page 47. Paragraph La. Discuss that the amount ot fill involved lias been Jnlnl1nl,..ed to
the extent practical. Paragraph l.b. Discuss that other sites would also involve placement of
fill material.

30. Page 52. Change "Richard Oorton" to "Robert S. Nebel". Also,Deed to acid I statement
that, based on consideration of the factors discusse4, the proposed discbarae complies with the
guidelines.

31. Page 55. OPPD should be Omaha Public Power District. Also, "Hesse ct. aJ" (three of
them) netd to be properly cited, with the names of all authors.

Volume IT

Appendix C. Hydraulic Analysis.

32. HEC-2 Modeling - The reach of river mOdeled Is Inadequate. The HEC.2 model staIU at
the downstream end of the project. How were starting water surface elevations determined or
known? Figure S indi<'.alf!~ a ereat variation in slope. 'The model should be started several miles
downstream $0 that uncertainties in the starting water surface are roinim;".cd by the time the
project area is reached (promes are more likely to attain the "normal" depth in the project area).
Otherwise. it could lead to errors of 0..5 feeL or llllJre GudgiDg by r:~ S). Our records
indicate that the data set we provided started at river mile 644.7 and extended to river mile
660 0 Plea~ extend the model downstream.

3