<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=AJP</id>
	<title>EGM Heritage - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=AJP"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/AJP"/>
	<updated>2026-06-04T18:27:45Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.41.0</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=St._Andrew%27s_Lock_and_Dam&amp;diff=2837</id>
		<title>St. Andrew's Lock and Dam</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=St._Andrew%27s_Lock_and_Dam&amp;diff=2837"/>
		<updated>2022-10-31T19:44:06Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: /* References */ Removed two broken references. I tried to track them down but the aren't moved; they're gone.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&amp;lt;onlyinclude&amp;gt; &amp;lt;includeonly&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
'''St. Andrew's Lock and Dam'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Completed in 1910, this engineering system is comprised of three elements; a dam, a lock, and a bridge. The design employed a Camere style dam and, at 240 metres long, it is the largest dam of this type ever built. It is also considered to be the only one still in existence in the world. It continues to operate to this day, regulating the water level of the Red River. It also allows river traffic to operate between Winnipeg and points downstream, while providing a link for road traffic across the river. ([[St. Andrew's Lock and Dam|Full Article...]])&amp;lt;/includeonly&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/onlyinclude&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:4083715791_873ec4b2ba_b.jpg|border|left|thumb|St. Andrew's Lock and Dam, Photo Credit: Alan Pollard]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam upstream view 2007 10 30.JPG|border|left|thumb|Upstream view - October 2007  Photo Credit: Provincial Government]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam downstream view - drop section construction for floodway enhancements in the background 2007 10 30.JPG|left|thumb|Downstream view with construction activity in the Floodway Channel in the background - October 2007, Photo Credit: Provincial Government]]&amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam overhead view - work barge on the downstream side 2007 10 30.JPG|left|thumb|Overhead view - October 2007, Photo Credit: Provincial Government]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam upstream view west side 2007.JPG|left|thumb|Upstream view of the locks on the west side - October 2007, Photo Credit: Provincial Government]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrews Lock and Dam 2019 08 01 Alan Pollard.jpg|left|thumb|Locks - August 2019, Photo Credit: Alan Pollard]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock Curtain wall CLoseUp 20190801 Alan Pollard.jpg|left|thumb|Curtain Dam Close up - August 2019, Photo Credit: Alan Pollard]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- THE MAIN ARTICLE STARTS HERE   --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Completed in 1910, this engineering system is comprised of three elements; a dam, a lock, and a bridge. The design employed a Caméré style dam and, at 240 metres long, it is the largest dam of this type ever built. It is also considered to be the only one still in existence in the world. It continues to operate to this day, regulating the water level of the Red River. It also allows river traffic to operate between Winnipeg and points downstream, while providing a link for road traffic across the river.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
__NOTOC__&lt;br /&gt;
==Quick Facts==&lt;br /&gt;
* Dam constructed 1907-10. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Bridge constructed 1912-13. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Modifications in 1949 to increase loading capacity. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Frame and curtain replacement in 1967. (1) &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Metallized in 1999 (2)  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Location==&lt;br /&gt;
Lockport, Manitoba&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{#display_map:Lockport, MB |height=400|width=400|type=satellite|zoom=35}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why==  &lt;br /&gt;
Prior to it's construction, there wasn't a singular mode of transportation between areas downstream of Selkirk (including all of Lake Winnipeg) and areas upstream of St. Andrew's. At the time, there were no rail lines connecting Winnipeg with areas North of it. The elevation drop of the Red River (approximately 13 feet between between Middle Church and Lister Rapids) also prevented freighter ships from navigating through the area currently known as Lockport. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Immediately after the opening of the locks and dam, freighter ships as large as the &amp;quot;Winnitoba&amp;quot;, which could carry 2,000 passengers and thirty-five carloads of freight, could  provide a viable link. These passenger and freighter ships ensured economically sustainable development of fisheries, farming land, and mineral resources. (3)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
With the competition of rail lines and road transportation, the use of the locks for river travel waned considerably by the middle of the 20th Century. However, the dam continues to provide a key role in flood mitigation as a control structure.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Images were photographed and digitized by Alan Pollard, P. Eng. (SM) FEC with the assistance of the R.M. of St. Clement in 2019&lt;br /&gt;
====Typical shipping vessels====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Selkirk Ferry Crossing - 1916.jpg|border|left|thumb|Selkirk Ferry Crossing - c. 1916.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Winnitoban Ship at Offical Opening of St Andrews Locks 1 - 1910 reduced.jpg|left|thumb|Winnitoban at the Official Opening - c. 1910, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Traditional York Boat - c1910.jpg|border|left|thumb|York Boat passing through - c. 1910.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Winnitoba Downstream at St Andrews Post card.jpg|border|left|thumb|Winnitoba Downstream at St. Andrews Dam - postcard.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:SS Majestic at Lockport.jpg|border|left|thumb|SS Majestic passing through the locks.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:SS Keenora at Lockport - 1941.jpg|left|thumb|SS Keenora at Lockport - c. 1941, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]]&amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Ship Passing Through the Locks.jpg|left|thumb|Unidentified Ship, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Ship Passing Through the Locks 3.jpg|left|thumb|Unidentified Ship, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Ship Passing Through the Locks 2.jpg|left|thumb|Unidentified Ship, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How== &lt;br /&gt;
The St. Andrew's Dam is a unique “Caméré” style dam using moveable curtains consisting of horizontal sections of wood hinged together, which are raised or lowered to control water flows. Invented by French engineer M. Caméré, this type of dam was popular in western Europe in the late nineteenth century. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The structure consists of:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Seven 15 m high concrete piers&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Steel trusses approximately 40 m long that span between the piers&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* A 6 m high by 11 m wide concrete sill or fixed dam that joins the bottom of the piers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 15 steel frames per span which are hung from the trusses, and&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 89 wood curtains&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The design consists of a repeating series of two movable components. The first is a steel frame that is stored horizontally when the dam is not restricting flow. These frames are hung from the upper structure and are rotated down from an axis that is transverse to the flow of the river and located at the top end of the frame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Attached to these frames are curtains, 4 m long and 2.1 m wide and consisting of 50 individually sized Douglas Fir laths held together with brass hinges and pins. During the navigation season the curtains are individually rolled up to increase flow, or rolled down to restrict flow, depending on daily water flow rates in the river.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Construction Photos===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam Construction.jpg|left|thumb|Construction - date unknown, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]]&amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Building St Andrews Lock and Dam 2 - 1908.jpg|left|thumb|Construction Activities c. 1908, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Building St Andrews Lock and Dam 1 - 1908.jpg|left|thumb|Construction Activities c. 1908, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Buidling St. Andrew's lock and Dam Construction 1908 - hi res.jpg|left|thumb|Construction Activities c. 1908 (hi resolution), Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St Andrews Locks - 1910.jpg|left|thumb|Lock c. 1910, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:OfficialOpeningFoote.jpg|left|thumb|Official Opening, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives/L.B. Foote]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Upstream at St Andrews Lock and Dam - 1910 .jpg|border|left|thumb|Looking downstream at St. Andrews Dam - c. 1910.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Downstream of Dam with Boats before Bridge Added.jpg|left|thumb|Downstream area before bridge was added date unknown, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Offical Opening of Bascule Lift Span - c1914.jpg|left|thumb|Opening of the Bascule Lift Span c. 1914, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam Downstream area - 1926.jpg|border|left|thumb|Downstream area c. 1926.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Bascule Bridge span Raised for SS Keenora - 1939.jpg|border|left|thumb|Bascule Bridge span raised for SS Keenora c. 1939.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Fun Facts==&lt;br /&gt;
* The Canadian government constructed the dam and lock as part of a proposed river steamboat navigation system extending from Winnipeg to Edmonton.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The total cost of construction was $3.5 million by 1913.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* It was opened by the Honorable Wilfred Laurier, the Prime Minister of Canada, from the deck of the Winnitoba, which was built in Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* During construction, organizations prearranged excursions to see the work in progress.  A special trail for visitors was created from Winnipeg and Back.  The cost was 45 cents return, allowing them two hours to inspect the project. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Also See==&lt;br /&gt;
Caméré dam, curtain dam (US) (it was invented by Caméré and introduced in 1876-1880 at Port Villez on the lower Seine. In it wooden curtains that can be rolled up from the bottom were substituted for the needles in the Poiree weir) Camerewehr, Rolladenwehr, Jalousiewehr, Rollvorhangwehr&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Key Players==&lt;br /&gt;
Mr. A.R. Dufresne - Construction Engineer. Mr. A. St. Laurent and H.E .Vautelet, Design Engineers&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Summary Article for Engineers Geoscientists Centennial Anniversary in 2020 ==&lt;br /&gt;
The Lockport Dam and Bridge goes by many names but it is known officially as the St. Andrew’s Caméré Curtain Dam. Completed in 1910, this engineering marvel is comprised of three elements: a dam, a lock, and a bridge. The design employs a caméré-style dam and is the only structure of its kind in North America and one of only four in the world. At 240 metres long, it is also the largest dam of this type ever built. In 1990, it was designated as a national historical site due to the uniqueness of its engineering design. It continues to operate to this day, regulating the water level of the Red River, and enabling circumnavigation of an historically challenging reach of the river via the only lock on the Canadian prairies. It allows river traffic to operate between Winnipeg and points downstream, while the incorporated bridge provides a link for road traffic over the river.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The dam and lock were to be a cornerstone project in creating an inland water transportation system stretching westward to Edmonton, eastward to Thunder Bay, and northward to Hudson Bay. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, steamship transport was an important mode of transportation. During the 1890s, more than 30 steamships provided freight and passenger service to the lower reaches of the Red River and Lake Winnipeg, including a connection via Grand Rapids to steamship service on the Saskatchewan River.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The natural course of the Red River is blocked by series of five rapids which start just north of Middle Church and continue downstream to the St. Andrew’s Rapids. The rapids were an impediment to navigation with its fall of some 15 feet within a 10-mile distance. Accordingly, towards the end of the 19th century, surveys determined the best method of overcoming these obstacles. A dam at St. Andrews was determined to be the ideal solution. The reason for selecting this site was that it contained a long bend in the river which gave the engineers sufficient room in which to build the lock. The location was also the site of a natural fault in the rock strata, high enough to give easy access to the bedrock for construction of the foundations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Several factors weighed on the decision about the type of dam to construct. The structure had to allow for free passage of ice during the spring melt. It had to be removable on short notice, perhaps in a matter of hours, if necessary. Short-term fluctuations in river level caused by atmospheric and wind pressure on Lake Winnipeg, 27 miles to the north, had to be considered too. A caméré dam, with a removable curtain forming a weir, met all the criteria.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The project was constructed in two phases, the first being the construction of the lock and dam between 1900 and 1910 by the federal Department of Public Works. The dam is 788 feet (240 m) long and is supported by seven piers, 50 feet (15 m) high and 131 feet (40 m) apart. A working deck is located below the road deck where a series of removable wood and metal curtains are lowered and operated.  Each curtain is made of 50 Douglas Fir ‘laths’ fastened to a cast-iron plate at the bottom. The curtains maintain the river at a navigable depth during the summer months and are rolled up and removed each fall to enable the spring flood waters and ice to pass unimpeded. After the spring run-off has passed, the curtains are lowered, usually in the middle of May, and they rest on a concrete sill at the river bottom. The dam maintains a relatively stable water level at Winnipeg of about 734 feet above sea level.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The adjacent lock section is 215 feet long, 45 feet wide, and 22 feet deep. Water in the lock can be raised or lowered in approximately 10 minutes. Its gates are 13 feet high and are connected by bronze pins and hinges. Completed in early 1910, the first steamer to pass through the locks was the Victoria, on 2 May 1910. The official inauguration did not occur, however, until 14 July 1910 when a large number of federal, provincial, and municipal dignitaries, including Prime Minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier, traversed the locks aboard the Winnitoba. An example of the envisioned potential that the project would unleash can be seen in the size of some of the newly constructed ships, the largest being the Winnitoba with a capacity of 2,000 passengers and 35 carloads of freight.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In its first year of operation, 1,600 vessels passed through the lock and no tolls were charged for the passage. Several professional journals devoted space to detailed technical descriptions of the project. The prestigious American publication Engineering News even included an eight-page feature on the dam in its October 1910 edition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The second phase of construction entailed the addition of a vehicular bridge between 1912 and 1913. This brought the total project cost to $3.5 million, or about $93 million in today’s money. The bridge is 270 m long and consists of seven truss spans with the upper cords supporting a road deck and the lower cords supporting a working deck for the dam. To allow for the passage of ships with high masts through the locks, the bridge works over the lock section included a bascule-type hinged apparatus, which raised the road section to allow vessels to pass beneath. A few years later, a fish ladder was added on the east side to enable spawning fish to swim upstream.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By the time the dam and lock were finished, the extension of railway networks throughout Manitoba led to a steady decline in the importance of waterways for the movement of freight and passengers. By the middle of the 20th century, under intense competition from railways and road transportation, use of the locks for economic activity had waned. However, the dam continues to mitigate floods on the Red River. And it was still used by pleasure craft. During the 1990s, between 1,000 to 1,500 boats smaller than 40 feet in length passed through the locks in an average summer season, with an additional 300 to 500 boats larger than 40 feet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1984, the lock gates needed to be replaced. A search found forests near Seattle where suitable Douglas Fir trees, estimated to be 350 years old, could be used to make “dense select structural” timber. In total, 108 of these special timbers—28 feet long, 33 inches wide, and 15 inches deep—were used to reconstruct the gates. Between 1994 and 1999, a full reconstruction of the water control structure was undertaken, at a cost of $20 million.&lt;br /&gt;
==What else is there to see==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The area is a nice destination for a Sunday afternoon drive from Winnipeg to enjoy one of the many restaurants in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Skinners Hotdog 20190801 Alan Pollard.jpg|border|left|thumb|Footlong hotdog from Skinners Restaurant, August 2019. Photo Credit: Alan Pollard]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=4441&lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.tac-atc.ca/english/resourcecentre/readingroom/conference/conf2004/docs/s5/bowen.pdf&lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/pageant/11/locks.shtml&lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=4441&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Compiled by==&lt;br /&gt;
Alan Pollard, P.Eng. (SM), FEC &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Ryan Bernier, P. Eng.&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Last posting by Glen Cook, P. Eng. (SM), FEC&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Shoal_Lake_Aqueduct&amp;diff=2836</id>
		<title>Shoal Lake Aqueduct</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Shoal_Lake_Aqueduct&amp;diff=2836"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T22:14:01Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: /* Web links related to the topic */ Fixed broken link to CSCE&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Shoal Lake Aqueduct is a 155 km concrete conduit that delivers water from the Shoal Lake/Lake of the Woods watersheds to a reservoir in The City of Winnipeg. Like the aqueducts built by the early Romans, it is powered entirely by gravity. Built between 1914 and 1918, the conduit conveys water primarily as a covered open-channel flow conduit. There are seven river crossings where it is operated under pressure as an inverted siphon. The construction of the conduit and the post-construction operation of the system was accomplished by an adjoining railway built specifically for these purposes.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The aqueduct is known variously as the Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (GWWD) Aqueduct. The GWWD was an inter-municipal corporation owned by eight, but not all, of the civic entities in the areas around the Red and Assiniboine Rivers. While the project was spearheaded by The City of Winnipeg, the corporation’s Board of Directors was not dominated by Winnipeg. The project impetus, as stated in the campaign promise of the 1913 elected mayor of Winnipeg, Thomas Deacon (an engineer), was to provide “at once for the people of Winnipeg an ample and permanent supply of pure soft water which will forever remove the menace now hanging over Winnipeg of a water famine”.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article is confined to the engineering involved in the design and implementation of the aqueduct and not the social and political processes involved in the lead up to the approval of the project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Initial Investigations==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Shoal Lake Area===&lt;br /&gt;
The source of water for the Winnipeg Aqueduct is Shoal Lake, a tributary of Lake of the Woods. The intake location on Shoal Lake is on Indian Bay on the lake’s western edge – about 3km west of the Manitoba-Ontario boundary (see Figure 1). The longer dimension of Indian Bay is east-west. On the south side is an east-west oriented promontory of land. The settlement of the members of the Ojibway First Nation that occupy Shoal Lake Indian Reserve No. 40 is located on that promontory. On its south side is another bay of Shoal Lake known as Snowshoe Bay. The narrowest portion of the land between the two bays is about 840m and is close to the western shore of Indian Bay. A stream known as the Falcon River discharges into Indian Bay immediately south of where the water for the aqueduct is withdrawn. The Falcon River is the outlet of Falcon Lake, some 10 km to the northwest, and also drains much of the muskeg area in between. The height of land forming the western boundary of Shoal Lake along the route of the aqueduct is 6km west of Indian Bay.  The general layout of the area is shown in Figure 1. Note that the scheme involves a channel that diverts the water of the Falcon River away from Indian Bay thereby leaving the indigenous community of Shoal Lake Band 40 on an island with its only vehicular access being seasonal service by a ferry to the east side of the bay and an ice road in the winter months. Years of advocacy by the community protesting that isolation has attracted the attention of three levels of government (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada) and in 2016 there was agreement by the three to fund a 27 km all-season road, with three bridges, that will connect the community “to Canada” at the Trans-Canada Highway North-West of the intake. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Early Engineering===&lt;br /&gt;
In the run up to the decision to build the aqueduct The City of Winnipeg commissioned a 1913 report from a ‘Board’ of New York based consulting engineers, R. Herring, F. P. Stearns and J. H. Fuertes “on a water supply from Shoal Lake for the Greater Winnipeg Water District”. The report relied upon survey work undertaken by the City Engineer H.N. Ruttan in the winter of 1913 and provided a conceptual design and an estimate of the costs ($13,045,600). The report from Ruttan’s survey included topographical information about both a possible route and for the area around Indian Bay and Snowshoe Bay. Soundings were also taken in both bays. It also included for the first time a precise figure for the difference in elevation between Shoal Lake and the McPhillips Reservoir, namely 293.19 ft. (89.42 m).   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Hydraulic Feasibility===&lt;br /&gt;
As noted earlier, Shoal Lake is a tributary of Lake of the Woods. The feasibility of using Shoal Lake as a water source was enhanced by earlier hydrological interventions on Lake of the Woods. A history of the modifications to the water levels of Lake of the Woods as provided by the Shoal Lake Watershed Working Group reads as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''&amp;quot;Shoal Lake is connected to Lake of the Woods at a location known as Ash Rapids. Construction of a control dam at the outlet of Lake of the Woods in the 1880s raised the level of the lake by about a metre above its natural condition. In turn, this brought water levels in Shoal Lake into approximate balance with levels in the much larger Lake of the Woods, at least over an extended portion of the year. The channel at Ash Rapids was deepened and widened from its natural state, through blasting, around the turn of the century [1900]. This was reportedly done to provide a water based transportation route to serve both timber and mining operations in the Shoal Lake area.&amp;quot;''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An aerial perspective of the area surrounding the aqueduct intake is shown in Figure 1, and hydraulic data on Shoal Lake is provided in Table 1. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Figure 1: Indian Bay and Aqueduct Inlet area]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In testimony by three engineers and one hydrologist at the 1914 International Joint Commission hearing on the project, agreed that withdraw of the equivalent of years volume at 85,000,000 imperial gallons per day in a single day, i.e. with no inflow, the draw down of the level of Lake of the Woods would be less than 1.50 inches.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; style=&amp;quot;margin: auto;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
|+Table 1: Lake of The Woods and Shoal Lake Watershed Statistics&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
! !!Lake of the Woods!!Shoal Lake&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!Aspect!!sq. Miles (km2)!!sq. Miles (km2)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Drainage Area||27 000 (69 000)||360 (930)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Surface Area||1250 (3200)||107 (280)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Ratio of Drainage to Surface Area||21.6||3.5&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Major Features of the Aqueduct==&lt;br /&gt;
The overall scheme of the Winnipeg Aqueduct, following in the direction of flow, entailed:&lt;br /&gt;
* a soft water source that required no treatment for potability, colour, or hardness,&lt;br /&gt;
* a 2.4 km dike across a portion of Indian Bay and a 840 m channel excavated between Indian Bay and Snowshoe Bay to divert the water of the Falcon River,&lt;br /&gt;
* an intake structure on the edge of Indian Bay,&lt;br /&gt;
* a 155 km gravity fed enclosed conduit that conveys water, primarily in an unconfined channel, but with some portions under pressure, from the inlet to The City of Winnipeg’s McPhillips Street water reservoir,&lt;br /&gt;
* provision for an equalizing and storage reservoir (Deacon) approximately 21 km east of the McPhillips reservoir,&lt;br /&gt;
* metering facilities for the measurement of the volume of water flowing at vital points, and&lt;br /&gt;
* a railway that facilitated the initial construction and the on-going operation and maintenance of the system.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Features of the enclosed conduit include:&lt;br /&gt;
* a design capacity of 85,000,000 gpd (386,400,000 L/d) per day,&lt;br /&gt;
* cutting through the height of land that forms the boundary of the Shoal Lake watershed,&lt;br /&gt;
* provision for delivery of water into a future second conduit that could increase the combined design capacity to at least 100,000,000 gpd (454,600,00 L/d),&lt;br /&gt;
* seven rivers crossings by means of inverted siphons, &lt;br /&gt;
* a system for water and air pressure relief during operations, &lt;br /&gt;
* a means for inspection during partial operation and for isolation and dewatering of sections for maintenance, and &lt;br /&gt;
* maintained the integrity of local surface drainage systems.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Engineering &amp;amp; Design==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Field Studies for Final Design===&lt;br /&gt;
The GWWD had an in-house engineering department. The Chief Engineer was W.G. Chace, a McGill graduate who had also worked on the Pointe du Bois generating station. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the October 1913 vote authorizing the project to proceed was settled, the GWWD engineers set about the detailed design aided by J. H. Fuertes (a co-author of the Board of Consulting Engineers report) as an ongoing consultant. The first order of business was for the GWWD engineers to determine the final route selection so that the right of way could be established and the railway started. Doing so required more precise and extensive survey information than had been provided by Ruttan. Survey parties were dispatched with one important task, that being to establish a precise set of benchmarks. During the winter of 1913-1914, the survey parties accomplished the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 95 miles of precise levels,&lt;br /&gt;
* 362 miles of transit lines,&lt;br /&gt;
* 1,317 miles of levels, and &lt;br /&gt;
* 380 square miles of topography.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, some 12,000 ft of bore holes were made to assess the foundation conditions and determine the depths of muskeg. Anyone who has surveyed during a Manitoba winter with survey instruments of that era will recognize the accomplishment and appreciate the ordeal that those surveyors endured.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Billy Von Koen in his book Definition of the Engineering Method defines it as “the strategy for causing the best change in a poorly understood or uncertain situation within available resources.” There is little doubt that those engineers responsible for the implementation of the Winnipeg Aqueduct, in seeking to cause the best change, were faced with uncertain situations and finite resources. While they had access to the experiences of other aqueduct designers, they also had to deal with factors that were specific to the locality of the project and that were not well understood. There were two in particular. One was the issue of selecting the most all-round economical route for the conduit. The other was developing a design for the concrete mixture for use in the conduit utilizing the available local aggregates that would meet the necessary compressive strength, permeability, and durability requirements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Designing for the Terrain===&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; style=&amp;quot;float:right; margin-left:10px;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
|+Table 2: Slopes of the Winnipeg Aqueduct for Various Cross Sections &lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!Slope of Aqueduct!!Dimension of Section&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!inches per 100 ft!!(Height x Width)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.11||10’-9” x 9’-0’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.279||10’-9” x 9’-0”&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.300||8’-9” x 7’-45/8’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.382||8’-31/4” x 7’-0’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.480||7’-111/2” x 6’-81/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.600||7’-71/2” x 6’-51/4’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.684||7’-51/2” x 6’-31/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.744||7’-4” x 6’-21/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|1.290||6’-7” x 5’-61/8’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|1.537||6’-41/2” x 5’-41/4’’&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The terrain between Shoal Lake and the prairie country just east of Winnipeg is treed, has a number of rivers, and contains some 80 km2 of muskeg or swamp. It is also for the most part uninhabited and did not lend itself to access or communication. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In approaching the route selection task, the GWWD engineers had available the preliminary design that was provided as part of the report from the Board of Consulting Engineers (Hering et al, 1913) that included details of typical conduit arch sections. With that information, and on-going refinements of the sections, curves were developed showing cost variations for typical aqueduct cross-sections based on depths of excavation and for a range of slopes. With that information available, field staff could make on-site decisions in choosing an alignment that would minimize the costs and the line length while striving to maintain the average slope of 0.57 ft per 1,000 ft of length. By that process, an alignment was established by March of 1914 on which over 30% of its length was very close to the average slope. The final average gradient was 0.62 ft per 1,000 ft at a length that was only 8% longer than the straight-line distance. Table 2 provides a listing of the slopes for each aqueduct cross section.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An early start to the railway was essential to the project, and once the route was decided, the right-of-way could be established and the railway construction could get underway. The right-of-way selected was generally 300 ft (91 m) wide with the railway located 40 ft (12 m) from the south boundary. At the easterly end, which had more construction challenges such as the depth of excavation, the width was increased to 500 ft (152 m).    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Concrete Mix Design===&lt;br /&gt;
The GWWD engineers were keenly aware of the effect that the amount of Portland cement used in a cubic yard of concrete would have on the cost of the project. Their awareness would have been heightened by the knowledge that cement in Canada cost 45% to 50% more than in the US or Great Britain. The cement component eventually selected for the aqueduct concrete, based on their testing program, was 430.5 lbs/cy (255 kg/m3) vs. 549.5 in the mixtures commonly used and recommended for watertight work by other authorities of the time. Chief Engineer Chace reported that the savings achieved by relying on the recommendations of the GWWD engineers were projected to be $350,000 for 400,000 cy (306,000 m3) of concrete. That savings figure was based on a 1915 cement cost of $0.0079 per pound. To put that in 2010 dollars, with cement then at $255 per metric tonne ($0.1158 per pound), the saving would be $5,500,000. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In achieving that economy, the GWWD engineers relied on their own methods. Knowing the sources of granular material available as due to the ongoing 1914 railway construction, and other exploratory work, they undertook an extensive program of analysis and testing of materials from those sources. The program consisted of five tests:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a mechanical analysis of the aggregates from the available natural deposits,&lt;br /&gt;
* the weight per cubic foot of the various gradations and combinations of materials,&lt;br /&gt;
* volumetric tests of the materials for density,&lt;br /&gt;
* tests for compression and tension of various sand-cement mortar mixtures,&lt;br /&gt;
* tests for both permeability and compression of concrete with various mix proportions of stone and sand when selected by using the data derived from the other tests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 2.jpg|thumb|upright=0.75|Figure 2: Permeability Testing Apparatus]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The testing program involved two lots of Portland cement, with the major difference between them being the time interval to final set after mixing. The cement used was manufactured locally by the Canada Cement Company Limited, which began production in Winnipeg in 1913. The specimens for the program were made from 28 distinct concrete mixes. There were 29 tests of permeability and 47 in compression.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The compression testing program, with specimens 8&amp;quot; (20 cm) in diameter and 16&amp;quot; (40 cm) long, seems to have followed standard procedures. However, the permeability test, if not unique, was at a minimum innovative. The concrete specimens were 13&amp;quot; (33 cm) in diameter and 14.5&amp;quot; (37 cm) long and cast with a small internal chamber connected to a metal injection pipe with an external water-stop. The test apparatus forced water into the chamber at a constant pressure with a gauge to measure the water entering the specimen with a means of measuring the amounts passing through the concrete, and a separate measure of any leakage from around the pipe used for the injection. A photo of the apparatus used in the test is shown in Figure 2.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a 1917 paper, the GWWD concluded from their testing program, ''“that with lean mixtures and the gravel materials available, the addition of fine sand would give the work contemplated impenetrable concrete of the desired strength.”'' Their opinion was borne out by tests of the performance of the completed conduit.  Chace also reported in that mixes adopted on the basis of those tests would develop ''“a strength of 2,800 pounds per square inch and a six-inch wall of concrete will be watertight against a hydrostatic pressure of 200 feet of head.”'' &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Cross Section Design===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 3.jpg|thumb|Figure 3: Test Sections Built in Winnipeg, Summer of 1914]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the work on the aggregate supply and the mix details was ongoing, the other step was to finalize the shape and dimensions of the conduit sections. As part of that process, test sections were built and loaded as shown in Figure 3. It is of interest to note that W.M. Scott, the contractor for the test sections, seems to have been the same W.M. Scott (an engineer) who sometime later became the Chief Commissioner of the GWWD. He was also later the President of the first Council (provisional) of the Association of Professional Engineers of the Province of Manitoba in 1920.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The cost significance of the volume of concrete to be incorporated in the project was also a priority. It was estimated that a one-inch increase in the sectional thickness would have cost $400,000. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 4.jpg|thumb|Figure 4: Chief Engineer W.G. Chace at a Typical Arch Section on an Invert]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 5.jpg|thumb|Figure 5: Circular Pressure Section, West End of Brokenhead River Slough]]&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 6.jpg|thumb|Figure 6: Method of Bending Reinforcing Steel]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The engineers were also cognizant of the durability of reinforcing steel should it become exposed to water through cracking of the concrete. With that in mind, they elected to use the unreinforced self-supporting arch type cross-section for the cut-and-cover portions that comprised most of the aqueduct. The arch rested on the edges of a previously cast invert section as seen in Figure 4. The invert had a circular concave upper surface with the radius of the curve somewhat greater than the height of the arch. As an example, the radius for a section with a 2.25 m interior height was 3.4 m. The term “invert” refers to the lowest point in the internal cross-section of an artificial channel, and is thought to have originated from describing an inverted arch. Ruttan et al comment on the function of an invert in the chosen system as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''&amp;quot;Although, as actually constructed, the side walls of the arch rest upon the ends of the invert, the greater part of the load, in a section like the one shown, may be assumed to be borne by those portions of the trench bottom directly beneath the side walls, because the central part of this relatively thin unreinforced type of invert is not considered to provide much in the way of support, but rather to serve merely as a firm water-tight bottom to the aqueduct.&amp;quot;''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
These typically unreinforced arch sections were configured such that, under all loading conditions, the concrete in the arch would be in compression and thereby resistant to cracking. The situations where reinforcing steel was required in the arch section are as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* at road crossings and undeveloped road allowances,&lt;br /&gt;
* for railway crossings, and&lt;br /&gt;
* in the arches where the weight of the backfill material was so light that there was a risk of deformation from outward ground water pressure and separation from the invert. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In each of those cases the concrete thickness was increased to protect the steel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the conduit crossed a river as a siphon, it was under internal pressure, and as the concrete would then be in hoop tension, those sections were reinforced with steel and the wall sections thickened for protection purposes. The same treatment was used for the 6.7 km cast-in-place pressure section east of the Deacon Reservoir location. The circular sections were also built in two castings with the edges of the invert section thicker than the nominal thickness in the upper portion. The reinforcing steel was circular and crossed the construction joint where the steel was lapped. Figure 5 shows one end of a circular section.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Aside from its cost, the use of reinforcing steel was an issue because at the time it did not come prefabricated. It was manufactured and delivered as a straight twisted square bar that had to be bent on site. Figure 6 shows an example of the bending process.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Falcon River Dike and Diversion===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 7.jpg|thumb|Figure 7: Construction of the Falcon River Dike (GWWD No. 84)]]&lt;br /&gt;
As previously noted the Falcon River drains much of the muskeg area west of Indian Bay, and had a brown colour. The dike and channel that diverted the water of the Falcon River to Snowshoe Bay was built to dilute that water with the much clearer, greater Shoal Lake water (see Figure 1).  In that way before the diverted water could reach the intake of the aqueduct, it would have to make its way around the promontory and back into Indian Bay – a distance of 14 km. No doubt the opportunity of the diversion scheme was recognized because of the topographical work and soundings undertaken by City Engineer Ruttan’s staff in 1912 and early 1913. The alternative to the diversion would have been to extend the aqueduct considerably further into Shoal Lake so that it accessed unaffected water. The District’s cost for the dike and diversion work was $147,000. In a paper, Fuertes indicated that the cost to extend the aqueduct a further 8 km would have been $1,000,000.  Figure 7 provides an indication of the scope of the dike construction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 8.jpg|thumb|Figure 8: Falcon River Diversion Channel Excavation]]&lt;br /&gt;
The dike was built using the scow and bridge method. Significantly, as shown by the date on the photo, it was built before the GWWD railway reached Indian Bay. Figure 8 shows excavation of the diversion channel in 1915.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Intake Works===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 9.jpg|thumb|Figure 9: Intake Structure Before Flooding]]&lt;br /&gt;
The designers located the intake structure in a rock outcrop on the shore of Indian Bay adjacent to the north end of the dike.  Gathering dikes extend into the lake and a concrete structure in the rock cut controls the water entering the aqueduct. The structure includes the usual gates, trash screens, and stop log provisions that one might expect. Two features are noteworthy. The first is that the designers provided dual entrance chambers, each with its own screens and stop log facilities. In that way, one can be isolated for maintenance while the other was providing water to the aqueduct. The second feature had to do with preventing cold air from entering the system in the winter. The lower edge of the front wall of the structure, which is the top of the water opening, was constructed 1.9 m below the lake’s lowest level. In that way, it was below the bottom of the ice and cold air could not enter the system, thereby preventing the formation of ice in the intake.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The capacity of the intake structure was 85,000,000 gpd (386,400,000 L/d) at low water level. Chace suggested that at the high water level of Lake of the Woods established by the IJC in 1917, the intake could accommodate 100,000,000 gpd (454,600,000 L/d). Figure 9 shows the completed intake structure before flooding. The operating water level would be below the letters in the photo at a distance of approximately one and one-half times the height of those letters.  To put the capacities of the intake and the aqueduct in perspective, the peak levels of water ever used by Winnipeg was 300,000,000 L/d (66,000,000 gpd) in 1988. That was just less than 500 litres per person per day. Since then, through the City’s water conservation program, that figure has been reduced, and in 2000, it was approximately 380 litres (84 gallons) per person per day. There is still plenty of unused capacity in the Winnipeg Aqueduct.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Red River Valley Siphon===&lt;br /&gt;
From a point approximately 27 km east of Winnipeg (Mile 17) to the McPhillips Reservoir, the aqueduct is designed as an inverted siphon, which means that the entire length of conduit is under pressure.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This siphon was by no means of a constant configuration. A significant change point was at the site of the future Deacon Reservoir. The other change point was at the crossing of the Red River.  The section from the east end, “Mile 17”, to the Deacon Reservoir is an 8' (2.4 m) diameter round cast-in-place reinforced concrete pipe. The section from the Deacon reservoir to the Red River is a 5'-6&amp;quot; (1.7 m) “Lock Joint” precast concrete pipe. The crossing of the Red River is a 5ft (1.5 m) diameter cast iron pipe, and the section from the Red River to the McPhillips Reservoir is a 4 ft (1.2 m) diameter Lock Joint precast concrete pipe.   The section between Deacon and the Red River incorporated the service connections to supply some of the partners in the GWWD: Transcona, St. Vital, St. Boniface, and Fort Garry. The section west of the Red River included a service connection to supply the James Avenue High Pressure Pumping Station, eliminating the need for Red River water.  While there was an overflow provision at the east end of the siphon (Mile 17), the only pressure relief facility in the entire siphon section itself, as initially constructed, was a surge tank with a weir on the east side of the Red River.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Red River Crossing====&lt;br /&gt;
The crossing of the Red River is a siphon within a siphon.  The conduit crosses the river in the limestone bedrock some 24m below the banks and 6m below the river bottom.  The core drilling that established the depth and nature of the rock was one of the earlier contracts tendered by the District. One presumes that the engineers were comfortable with the resulting information as the reports of the Chief Engineer in the minutes of the Administration Board meetings do not mention concerns.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, the conduit is a cast iron pipe. The configuration is a vertical section on each river bank built in a shaft and a horizontal section built in a tunnel in the rock. The 16m vertical shafts were 5 m in diameter and lined with a 600 mm reinforced concrete wall. The upper portion serves as housing for the valving system. The annular space for the portion below the valve house floor down to the bedrock was backfilled with gravel. The tunnel for the horizontal section was nominally 3 m by 3 m and the pipe was centred on that opening. The cast iron pipe sections were specially fabricated so that they could be caulked from within. The material used for the caulking was hemp and lead. Once the cast iron pipe had been finished the space between the rock and the pipe was filled with concrete. Remarkably, this section has functioned since 1918 without ever being dewatered.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Red River Siphon and Surge Tank====&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 10.jpg|thumb|Figure 10: Red River Crossing Surge Tank]]&lt;br /&gt;
Perhaps the most vital component of the Red River siphon system is the surge tank located on the east side of the Red River adjacent to the river crossing on the corner of Tache Avenue and Rue Messager. It is also the most visible in that it stands the equivalent of a four-story building above the ground level. Figure 10 provides a view of its external structure in 2010.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, the design of the tank provided the only pressure relief and overflow facility on the Red River siphon. That is significant because the inlet to the McPhillips Reservoir was controlled by valves which could have been inadvertently closed. Chace noted that “it must be kept in mind that there is ''(water)'' flowing constantly west of Mile 17 at considerable velocity a solid volume of water of huge weight. It is a serious matter to suddenly disturb the rate of flow of such a body of water.” As such, since the rate of flow out of the McPhillips reservoir would vary many times during the day, any excess arriving at the reservoir had to be accommodated. The engineers’ solution was that reinforced concrete surge tank designed to serve two purposes.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
They were, overflow to relieve pressure caused by too much water entering the siphon at Mile 17, and to spill the excess that might be created at the entrance of the McPhillips Reservoir. To do that, a closed circular structure was built with a concentric internal circular weir. The lip of the weir was at a fixed elevation. In that way, it spilled the excess water from either or both of the two causes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The supply line from Deacon enters the base of the structure in a chamber at the bottom of the internal weir and a separate line leaves the chamber to bring water to the cast iron line that crosses the Red River. Both these lines are under pressure with the maximum head determined by the lip elevation of the weir. That elevation was about 9m above the ground line or 14m above the centre line elevation of the two pipelines. To collect the water that spilled over the weir, a second concentric wall of the same height was built outside of the weir wall leaving an annular space of 760mm. The excess water collected in that space was then taken away by a drainage line that discharged into the nearby Red River. Primarily for protecting the system from frost and secondarily for aesthetic reasons, the wall was faced with brick as is shown in Figure 10.  Significantly, there was no valve between the 1.7 m incoming line and the surge tank. In that way, the pressure in the siphon to the east of the Red River could not be inadvertently increased to the point where it would damage the line. The system was operated so that there was always some water flowing over the weir.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The structural features are also notable. Given the need to ensure that the pressure relief system would never have to be taken out of service, structural integrity was important. Unlike with the conduit, it seems to have been designed on the principle of “no risk.” The base of the structure was supported on a series of caissons under the walls, excavated to the bedrock. On top of the caissons were grillages made of steel beams and four steel beams spanned from grillage to grillage around the base. The entire system was then encased in concrete. The concrete too was heavily reinforced once again using twisted square bars like those in some of the main aqueduct sections.  This time, however, the drawings included bending diagrams for the reinforcing steel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Conclusion==&lt;br /&gt;
The engineers, administrators, and contractors on the Winnipeg Aqueduct executed a unique project that is remarkable for its scope and its lasting ability to serve the needs of The City of Winnipeg. In so doing they were confronted with and overcame unique physical and environmental conditions using creative design, testing and construction processes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The project was completed on time and quite close to budget by December of 1918. However, because of a concern that there might be an adverse effect on the industrial boilers in the City due to the change from hard to soft water during the height of the heating season, the changeover was delayed. Water started to flow into the McPhillips Reservoir on March 29, 1919.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Key Players==&lt;br /&gt;
* Charles S. Slichter – consulting engineer &lt;br /&gt;
* James H. Fuertes – consulting engineer (New York) &lt;br /&gt;
* Hugh A. Robson (Judge) – Public Works Commissioner, Province of Manitoba &lt;br /&gt;
* James H. Ashdown (Mayor of Winnipeg) &lt;br /&gt;
* Thomas Russell Deacon (Mayor of Winnipeg) &lt;br /&gt;
* William  G. Chace – Chief Engineer, GWWD &lt;br /&gt;
* Douglas L. McLean – Assistant to Chief Engineer, GWWD  &lt;br /&gt;
* Henry N. Ruttan – Winnipeg City Engineer – later a consultant; also General and Commanding Officer of Military District NO. 10&lt;br /&gt;
* John G. Sullivan – CPR – also a consultant  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==National Recognition==&lt;br /&gt;
The project was recognized by the '''Canadian Society for Civil Engineering''' as a ''National Historic Civil Engineering Site'' with a plaque and ceremony in 1994. The project was identified as one of the many significant historic civil engineering achievements within Canada.  The plaque serves to preserve the heritage of the people of Canada, and in esteem of the civil engineers and others who worked alongside them on projects such as this. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994 Shoal Lake Aquaduct CSCE National Historic Site.jpg|thumb|none|500px|CSCE National Historic Civil Engineering Site Monument]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Reference - https://cscehistory.ca/national/red-river-floodway-winnipeg-mb/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Supplemental Information Sources==&lt;br /&gt;
The lead up to the concept and the political process that brought the aqueduct about is documented in the thesis “Developing a domestic water supply for Winnipeg from Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods: the Greater Winnipeg Water District Aqueduct, 1905 – 1919” http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457, and in the Manitoba Historical Society’s Journal article Pressure to Act: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (No. 72, Spring-Summer 2013) http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/72/aqueduct.shtml. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additional and more detailed engineering information is provided at http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457 and in the Manitoba Historical Society’s Journal article Not All Down Hill From There: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (No. 75 Summer 2014) http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/75/aqueduct.shtml &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
===Printed===&lt;br /&gt;
# Canadian Public Works Association Manitoba Chapter (CPWA). 2000. Greater Winnipeg Water District’s Shoal Lake Aqueduct Nomination for the American Public Works Association’s Top Ten Public Works Projects of the 20th Century. Winnipeg MB: Self Published.&lt;br /&gt;
# Chace W.G., M.V. Sauer. 1917a. The aqueduct for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers. Volume XXX Part II: 375-395.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace W.G., D.L. McLean. 1917b. Studies regarding concrete mixtures employed in the work: Supplement to the aqueduct for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers. Volume XXX Part II: 396-424.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. 1917c. Sands and consistency of concrete. The Canadian Engineer 33: 282&lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. Chace. 1920a. Construction features of the water works of the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Volume VII: 931-949. &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. 1920b. Notes and Instructions for the Guidance of the Staff Responsible for the Care and Operation of Aqueduct Supplying Water to the Communities Comprising the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department. &lt;br /&gt;
# Cherney, B. 2009. 90th anniversary of Shoal Lake aqueduct — first phase was construction of GWWD Railway. Winnipeg Real Estate News, October 16, 2009. www.winnipegrealestatenews.com/Editorials.aspx?id=968 (2010/11/29) &lt;br /&gt;
# Fuertes, James H. 1920. The basic principles used in the designs for the new water supply works of Winnipeg Manitoba. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Volume VII: 693-748. &lt;br /&gt;
# Greater Winnipeg Water District. 1918. Aqueduct Construction Scheme: What it Is What It Means. Winnipeg MB: Telegram Job Printers Ltd. &lt;br /&gt;
# Herring, R., F. P. Stearns and J. H. Fuertes. 1913. Report on a water supply from Shoal Lake for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. New York NY: Stovel Company Limited Winnipeg. &lt;br /&gt;
# Landon, C.S. 1918. The Greater Winnipeg Water District. The Canadian Engineer. 34: 290-301, 315-317.  &lt;br /&gt;
# Library and Archives Canada, Canada. n.d. Mining Lands &amp;amp; Yukon Branch of the Department of the Interior, File 116619     &lt;br /&gt;
# Mclean, D.L. 1919. Earth Slides in Winnipeg Aqueduct Construction. The Canadian Engineer. 37: 469-471.&lt;br /&gt;
# Prodan C.S. 1979. The building of the Winnipeg Aqueduct. Manitoba Pageant. www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/pageant/24/winnipegaqueduct.shtml  &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N. 1909. Winnipeg’s water works: Visit to the City water works High Pressure Plant and artesian well system. British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1-8. Winnipeg, MB.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N. 1913. Untitled report to the Mayor and City Council of Winnipeg dated May 8, 1913. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.  &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N., J.G. Sullivan and R.S. Lea. 1916. Report on the Aqueduct of the Greater Winnipeg Water District by the Special Board of Consulting Engineers. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Scott, W. M. 1938. The Water Supply of Greater Winnipeg. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Vol. 30 No. 11: 1872-1885. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.&lt;br /&gt;
# Scott, W. M. n.d. The Water Supply of The Greater Winnipeg Water District. Unbound paper labelled as presented at a meeting of the American Water Works Association in March, 1938. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.&lt;br /&gt;
# Shoal Lake Watershed Working Group. 2002. Shoal Lake Watershed Management Plan. Manitoba Water Stewardship, Winnipeg MB. www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/water_quality/quality/shoal_lake_wsmp.html (2010/12/28)&lt;br /&gt;
# Shropshire, L. 1994 (January 7). Mayor Battles Critics. Winnipeg Real Estate News. Winnipeg MB: self published. &lt;br /&gt;
# Siamandas, G. n.d. Winnipeg’s Shoal Lake Aqueduct. timemachine.siamandas.com/PAGES/winnipeg_stories/SHOAL_LAKE_AQUEDUCT.htm (2011/02/7)  &lt;br /&gt;
# Slichter, C.S. 1912. The Water Supply of the City of Winnipeg to Public Utilities Commissioner, Province of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB. &lt;br /&gt;
# The Canadian Engineer. 1917. Winnipeg Aqueduct Excavation. The Canadian Engineer. 32: 149-151.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Web links related to the topic===&lt;br /&gt;
# University of Manitoba – MSpace - Developing a domestic water supply for Winnipeg from Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods: the Greater Winnipeg Water District Aqueduct, 1905 – 1919 https://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457 Accessed December 17, 2016.&lt;br /&gt;
# Manitoba History No. 72, Spring-Summer 2013. Pressure to Act: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/72/aqueduct.shtml Accessed December 19, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# Manitoba History No. 75, Summer 2014. Not All Down Hill From There: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District [http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/75/aqueduct.shtml http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_histor]29, 2022&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - https://www.winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/water/shoalLake.stm Accessed December 18, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - https://www.winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/dept/railway.stm Accessed December 18, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - http://winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/water/freedomRoad.stm &lt;br /&gt;
# The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering https://csce.ca/en/historic-site/shoal-lake-aqueduct/ Accessed October 29, 2022.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Shoal_Lake_Aqueduct&amp;diff=2835</id>
		<title>Shoal Lake Aqueduct</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Shoal_Lake_Aqueduct&amp;diff=2835"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T22:06:43Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: /* Web links related to the topic */ http to https changes&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Shoal Lake Aqueduct is a 155 km concrete conduit that delivers water from the Shoal Lake/Lake of the Woods watersheds to a reservoir in The City of Winnipeg. Like the aqueducts built by the early Romans, it is powered entirely by gravity. Built between 1914 and 1918, the conduit conveys water primarily as a covered open-channel flow conduit. There are seven river crossings where it is operated under pressure as an inverted siphon. The construction of the conduit and the post-construction operation of the system was accomplished by an adjoining railway built specifically for these purposes.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The aqueduct is known variously as the Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (GWWD) Aqueduct. The GWWD was an inter-municipal corporation owned by eight, but not all, of the civic entities in the areas around the Red and Assiniboine Rivers. While the project was spearheaded by The City of Winnipeg, the corporation’s Board of Directors was not dominated by Winnipeg. The project impetus, as stated in the campaign promise of the 1913 elected mayor of Winnipeg, Thomas Deacon (an engineer), was to provide “at once for the people of Winnipeg an ample and permanent supply of pure soft water which will forever remove the menace now hanging over Winnipeg of a water famine”.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article is confined to the engineering involved in the design and implementation of the aqueduct and not the social and political processes involved in the lead up to the approval of the project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Initial Investigations==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Shoal Lake Area===&lt;br /&gt;
The source of water for the Winnipeg Aqueduct is Shoal Lake, a tributary of Lake of the Woods. The intake location on Shoal Lake is on Indian Bay on the lake’s western edge – about 3km west of the Manitoba-Ontario boundary (see Figure 1). The longer dimension of Indian Bay is east-west. On the south side is an east-west oriented promontory of land. The settlement of the members of the Ojibway First Nation that occupy Shoal Lake Indian Reserve No. 40 is located on that promontory. On its south side is another bay of Shoal Lake known as Snowshoe Bay. The narrowest portion of the land between the two bays is about 840m and is close to the western shore of Indian Bay. A stream known as the Falcon River discharges into Indian Bay immediately south of where the water for the aqueduct is withdrawn. The Falcon River is the outlet of Falcon Lake, some 10 km to the northwest, and also drains much of the muskeg area in between. The height of land forming the western boundary of Shoal Lake along the route of the aqueduct is 6km west of Indian Bay.  The general layout of the area is shown in Figure 1. Note that the scheme involves a channel that diverts the water of the Falcon River away from Indian Bay thereby leaving the indigenous community of Shoal Lake Band 40 on an island with its only vehicular access being seasonal service by a ferry to the east side of the bay and an ice road in the winter months. Years of advocacy by the community protesting that isolation has attracted the attention of three levels of government (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada) and in 2016 there was agreement by the three to fund a 27 km all-season road, with three bridges, that will connect the community “to Canada” at the Trans-Canada Highway North-West of the intake. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Early Engineering===&lt;br /&gt;
In the run up to the decision to build the aqueduct The City of Winnipeg commissioned a 1913 report from a ‘Board’ of New York based consulting engineers, R. Herring, F. P. Stearns and J. H. Fuertes “on a water supply from Shoal Lake for the Greater Winnipeg Water District”. The report relied upon survey work undertaken by the City Engineer H.N. Ruttan in the winter of 1913 and provided a conceptual design and an estimate of the costs ($13,045,600). The report from Ruttan’s survey included topographical information about both a possible route and for the area around Indian Bay and Snowshoe Bay. Soundings were also taken in both bays. It also included for the first time a precise figure for the difference in elevation between Shoal Lake and the McPhillips Reservoir, namely 293.19 ft. (89.42 m).   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Hydraulic Feasibility===&lt;br /&gt;
As noted earlier, Shoal Lake is a tributary of Lake of the Woods. The feasibility of using Shoal Lake as a water source was enhanced by earlier hydrological interventions on Lake of the Woods. A history of the modifications to the water levels of Lake of the Woods as provided by the Shoal Lake Watershed Working Group reads as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''&amp;quot;Shoal Lake is connected to Lake of the Woods at a location known as Ash Rapids. Construction of a control dam at the outlet of Lake of the Woods in the 1880s raised the level of the lake by about a metre above its natural condition. In turn, this brought water levels in Shoal Lake into approximate balance with levels in the much larger Lake of the Woods, at least over an extended portion of the year. The channel at Ash Rapids was deepened and widened from its natural state, through blasting, around the turn of the century [1900]. This was reportedly done to provide a water based transportation route to serve both timber and mining operations in the Shoal Lake area.&amp;quot;''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An aerial perspective of the area surrounding the aqueduct intake is shown in Figure 1, and hydraulic data on Shoal Lake is provided in Table 1. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Figure 1: Indian Bay and Aqueduct Inlet area]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In testimony by three engineers and one hydrologist at the 1914 International Joint Commission hearing on the project, agreed that withdraw of the equivalent of years volume at 85,000,000 imperial gallons per day in a single day, i.e. with no inflow, the draw down of the level of Lake of the Woods would be less than 1.50 inches.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; style=&amp;quot;margin: auto;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
|+Table 1: Lake of The Woods and Shoal Lake Watershed Statistics&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
! !!Lake of the Woods!!Shoal Lake&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!Aspect!!sq. Miles (km2)!!sq. Miles (km2)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Drainage Area||27 000 (69 000)||360 (930)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Surface Area||1250 (3200)||107 (280)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Ratio of Drainage to Surface Area||21.6||3.5&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Major Features of the Aqueduct==&lt;br /&gt;
The overall scheme of the Winnipeg Aqueduct, following in the direction of flow, entailed:&lt;br /&gt;
* a soft water source that required no treatment for potability, colour, or hardness,&lt;br /&gt;
* a 2.4 km dike across a portion of Indian Bay and a 840 m channel excavated between Indian Bay and Snowshoe Bay to divert the water of the Falcon River,&lt;br /&gt;
* an intake structure on the edge of Indian Bay,&lt;br /&gt;
* a 155 km gravity fed enclosed conduit that conveys water, primarily in an unconfined channel, but with some portions under pressure, from the inlet to The City of Winnipeg’s McPhillips Street water reservoir,&lt;br /&gt;
* provision for an equalizing and storage reservoir (Deacon) approximately 21 km east of the McPhillips reservoir,&lt;br /&gt;
* metering facilities for the measurement of the volume of water flowing at vital points, and&lt;br /&gt;
* a railway that facilitated the initial construction and the on-going operation and maintenance of the system.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Features of the enclosed conduit include:&lt;br /&gt;
* a design capacity of 85,000,000 gpd (386,400,000 L/d) per day,&lt;br /&gt;
* cutting through the height of land that forms the boundary of the Shoal Lake watershed,&lt;br /&gt;
* provision for delivery of water into a future second conduit that could increase the combined design capacity to at least 100,000,000 gpd (454,600,00 L/d),&lt;br /&gt;
* seven rivers crossings by means of inverted siphons, &lt;br /&gt;
* a system for water and air pressure relief during operations, &lt;br /&gt;
* a means for inspection during partial operation and for isolation and dewatering of sections for maintenance, and &lt;br /&gt;
* maintained the integrity of local surface drainage systems.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Engineering &amp;amp; Design==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Field Studies for Final Design===&lt;br /&gt;
The GWWD had an in-house engineering department. The Chief Engineer was W.G. Chace, a McGill graduate who had also worked on the Pointe du Bois generating station. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the October 1913 vote authorizing the project to proceed was settled, the GWWD engineers set about the detailed design aided by J. H. Fuertes (a co-author of the Board of Consulting Engineers report) as an ongoing consultant. The first order of business was for the GWWD engineers to determine the final route selection so that the right of way could be established and the railway started. Doing so required more precise and extensive survey information than had been provided by Ruttan. Survey parties were dispatched with one important task, that being to establish a precise set of benchmarks. During the winter of 1913-1914, the survey parties accomplished the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 95 miles of precise levels,&lt;br /&gt;
* 362 miles of transit lines,&lt;br /&gt;
* 1,317 miles of levels, and &lt;br /&gt;
* 380 square miles of topography.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, some 12,000 ft of bore holes were made to assess the foundation conditions and determine the depths of muskeg. Anyone who has surveyed during a Manitoba winter with survey instruments of that era will recognize the accomplishment and appreciate the ordeal that those surveyors endured.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Billy Von Koen in his book Definition of the Engineering Method defines it as “the strategy for causing the best change in a poorly understood or uncertain situation within available resources.” There is little doubt that those engineers responsible for the implementation of the Winnipeg Aqueduct, in seeking to cause the best change, were faced with uncertain situations and finite resources. While they had access to the experiences of other aqueduct designers, they also had to deal with factors that were specific to the locality of the project and that were not well understood. There were two in particular. One was the issue of selecting the most all-round economical route for the conduit. The other was developing a design for the concrete mixture for use in the conduit utilizing the available local aggregates that would meet the necessary compressive strength, permeability, and durability requirements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Designing for the Terrain===&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; style=&amp;quot;float:right; margin-left:10px;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
|+Table 2: Slopes of the Winnipeg Aqueduct for Various Cross Sections &lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!Slope of Aqueduct!!Dimension of Section&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!inches per 100 ft!!(Height x Width)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.11||10’-9” x 9’-0’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.279||10’-9” x 9’-0”&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.300||8’-9” x 7’-45/8’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.382||8’-31/4” x 7’-0’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.480||7’-111/2” x 6’-81/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.600||7’-71/2” x 6’-51/4’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.684||7’-51/2” x 6’-31/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.744||7’-4” x 6’-21/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|1.290||6’-7” x 5’-61/8’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|1.537||6’-41/2” x 5’-41/4’’&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The terrain between Shoal Lake and the prairie country just east of Winnipeg is treed, has a number of rivers, and contains some 80 km2 of muskeg or swamp. It is also for the most part uninhabited and did not lend itself to access or communication. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In approaching the route selection task, the GWWD engineers had available the preliminary design that was provided as part of the report from the Board of Consulting Engineers (Hering et al, 1913) that included details of typical conduit arch sections. With that information, and on-going refinements of the sections, curves were developed showing cost variations for typical aqueduct cross-sections based on depths of excavation and for a range of slopes. With that information available, field staff could make on-site decisions in choosing an alignment that would minimize the costs and the line length while striving to maintain the average slope of 0.57 ft per 1,000 ft of length. By that process, an alignment was established by March of 1914 on which over 30% of its length was very close to the average slope. The final average gradient was 0.62 ft per 1,000 ft at a length that was only 8% longer than the straight-line distance. Table 2 provides a listing of the slopes for each aqueduct cross section.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An early start to the railway was essential to the project, and once the route was decided, the right-of-way could be established and the railway construction could get underway. The right-of-way selected was generally 300 ft (91 m) wide with the railway located 40 ft (12 m) from the south boundary. At the easterly end, which had more construction challenges such as the depth of excavation, the width was increased to 500 ft (152 m).    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Concrete Mix Design===&lt;br /&gt;
The GWWD engineers were keenly aware of the effect that the amount of Portland cement used in a cubic yard of concrete would have on the cost of the project. Their awareness would have been heightened by the knowledge that cement in Canada cost 45% to 50% more than in the US or Great Britain. The cement component eventually selected for the aqueduct concrete, based on their testing program, was 430.5 lbs/cy (255 kg/m3) vs. 549.5 in the mixtures commonly used and recommended for watertight work by other authorities of the time. Chief Engineer Chace reported that the savings achieved by relying on the recommendations of the GWWD engineers were projected to be $350,000 for 400,000 cy (306,000 m3) of concrete. That savings figure was based on a 1915 cement cost of $0.0079 per pound. To put that in 2010 dollars, with cement then at $255 per metric tonne ($0.1158 per pound), the saving would be $5,500,000. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In achieving that economy, the GWWD engineers relied on their own methods. Knowing the sources of granular material available as due to the ongoing 1914 railway construction, and other exploratory work, they undertook an extensive program of analysis and testing of materials from those sources. The program consisted of five tests:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a mechanical analysis of the aggregates from the available natural deposits,&lt;br /&gt;
* the weight per cubic foot of the various gradations and combinations of materials,&lt;br /&gt;
* volumetric tests of the materials for density,&lt;br /&gt;
* tests for compression and tension of various sand-cement mortar mixtures,&lt;br /&gt;
* tests for both permeability and compression of concrete with various mix proportions of stone and sand when selected by using the data derived from the other tests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 2.jpg|thumb|upright=0.75|Figure 2: Permeability Testing Apparatus]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The testing program involved two lots of Portland cement, with the major difference between them being the time interval to final set after mixing. The cement used was manufactured locally by the Canada Cement Company Limited, which began production in Winnipeg in 1913. The specimens for the program were made from 28 distinct concrete mixes. There were 29 tests of permeability and 47 in compression.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The compression testing program, with specimens 8&amp;quot; (20 cm) in diameter and 16&amp;quot; (40 cm) long, seems to have followed standard procedures. However, the permeability test, if not unique, was at a minimum innovative. The concrete specimens were 13&amp;quot; (33 cm) in diameter and 14.5&amp;quot; (37 cm) long and cast with a small internal chamber connected to a metal injection pipe with an external water-stop. The test apparatus forced water into the chamber at a constant pressure with a gauge to measure the water entering the specimen with a means of measuring the amounts passing through the concrete, and a separate measure of any leakage from around the pipe used for the injection. A photo of the apparatus used in the test is shown in Figure 2.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a 1917 paper, the GWWD concluded from their testing program, ''“that with lean mixtures and the gravel materials available, the addition of fine sand would give the work contemplated impenetrable concrete of the desired strength.”'' Their opinion was borne out by tests of the performance of the completed conduit.  Chace also reported in that mixes adopted on the basis of those tests would develop ''“a strength of 2,800 pounds per square inch and a six-inch wall of concrete will be watertight against a hydrostatic pressure of 200 feet of head.”'' &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Cross Section Design===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 3.jpg|thumb|Figure 3: Test Sections Built in Winnipeg, Summer of 1914]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the work on the aggregate supply and the mix details was ongoing, the other step was to finalize the shape and dimensions of the conduit sections. As part of that process, test sections were built and loaded as shown in Figure 3. It is of interest to note that W.M. Scott, the contractor for the test sections, seems to have been the same W.M. Scott (an engineer) who sometime later became the Chief Commissioner of the GWWD. He was also later the President of the first Council (provisional) of the Association of Professional Engineers of the Province of Manitoba in 1920.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The cost significance of the volume of concrete to be incorporated in the project was also a priority. It was estimated that a one-inch increase in the sectional thickness would have cost $400,000. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 4.jpg|thumb|Figure 4: Chief Engineer W.G. Chace at a Typical Arch Section on an Invert]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 5.jpg|thumb|Figure 5: Circular Pressure Section, West End of Brokenhead River Slough]]&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 6.jpg|thumb|Figure 6: Method of Bending Reinforcing Steel]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The engineers were also cognizant of the durability of reinforcing steel should it become exposed to water through cracking of the concrete. With that in mind, they elected to use the unreinforced self-supporting arch type cross-section for the cut-and-cover portions that comprised most of the aqueduct. The arch rested on the edges of a previously cast invert section as seen in Figure 4. The invert had a circular concave upper surface with the radius of the curve somewhat greater than the height of the arch. As an example, the radius for a section with a 2.25 m interior height was 3.4 m. The term “invert” refers to the lowest point in the internal cross-section of an artificial channel, and is thought to have originated from describing an inverted arch. Ruttan et al comment on the function of an invert in the chosen system as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''&amp;quot;Although, as actually constructed, the side walls of the arch rest upon the ends of the invert, the greater part of the load, in a section like the one shown, may be assumed to be borne by those portions of the trench bottom directly beneath the side walls, because the central part of this relatively thin unreinforced type of invert is not considered to provide much in the way of support, but rather to serve merely as a firm water-tight bottom to the aqueduct.&amp;quot;''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
These typically unreinforced arch sections were configured such that, under all loading conditions, the concrete in the arch would be in compression and thereby resistant to cracking. The situations where reinforcing steel was required in the arch section are as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* at road crossings and undeveloped road allowances,&lt;br /&gt;
* for railway crossings, and&lt;br /&gt;
* in the arches where the weight of the backfill material was so light that there was a risk of deformation from outward ground water pressure and separation from the invert. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In each of those cases the concrete thickness was increased to protect the steel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the conduit crossed a river as a siphon, it was under internal pressure, and as the concrete would then be in hoop tension, those sections were reinforced with steel and the wall sections thickened for protection purposes. The same treatment was used for the 6.7 km cast-in-place pressure section east of the Deacon Reservoir location. The circular sections were also built in two castings with the edges of the invert section thicker than the nominal thickness in the upper portion. The reinforcing steel was circular and crossed the construction joint where the steel was lapped. Figure 5 shows one end of a circular section.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Aside from its cost, the use of reinforcing steel was an issue because at the time it did not come prefabricated. It was manufactured and delivered as a straight twisted square bar that had to be bent on site. Figure 6 shows an example of the bending process.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Falcon River Dike and Diversion===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 7.jpg|thumb|Figure 7: Construction of the Falcon River Dike (GWWD No. 84)]]&lt;br /&gt;
As previously noted the Falcon River drains much of the muskeg area west of Indian Bay, and had a brown colour. The dike and channel that diverted the water of the Falcon River to Snowshoe Bay was built to dilute that water with the much clearer, greater Shoal Lake water (see Figure 1).  In that way before the diverted water could reach the intake of the aqueduct, it would have to make its way around the promontory and back into Indian Bay – a distance of 14 km. No doubt the opportunity of the diversion scheme was recognized because of the topographical work and soundings undertaken by City Engineer Ruttan’s staff in 1912 and early 1913. The alternative to the diversion would have been to extend the aqueduct considerably further into Shoal Lake so that it accessed unaffected water. The District’s cost for the dike and diversion work was $147,000. In a paper, Fuertes indicated that the cost to extend the aqueduct a further 8 km would have been $1,000,000.  Figure 7 provides an indication of the scope of the dike construction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 8.jpg|thumb|Figure 8: Falcon River Diversion Channel Excavation]]&lt;br /&gt;
The dike was built using the scow and bridge method. Significantly, as shown by the date on the photo, it was built before the GWWD railway reached Indian Bay. Figure 8 shows excavation of the diversion channel in 1915.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Intake Works===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 9.jpg|thumb|Figure 9: Intake Structure Before Flooding]]&lt;br /&gt;
The designers located the intake structure in a rock outcrop on the shore of Indian Bay adjacent to the north end of the dike.  Gathering dikes extend into the lake and a concrete structure in the rock cut controls the water entering the aqueduct. The structure includes the usual gates, trash screens, and stop log provisions that one might expect. Two features are noteworthy. The first is that the designers provided dual entrance chambers, each with its own screens and stop log facilities. In that way, one can be isolated for maintenance while the other was providing water to the aqueduct. The second feature had to do with preventing cold air from entering the system in the winter. The lower edge of the front wall of the structure, which is the top of the water opening, was constructed 1.9 m below the lake’s lowest level. In that way, it was below the bottom of the ice and cold air could not enter the system, thereby preventing the formation of ice in the intake.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The capacity of the intake structure was 85,000,000 gpd (386,400,000 L/d) at low water level. Chace suggested that at the high water level of Lake of the Woods established by the IJC in 1917, the intake could accommodate 100,000,000 gpd (454,600,000 L/d). Figure 9 shows the completed intake structure before flooding. The operating water level would be below the letters in the photo at a distance of approximately one and one-half times the height of those letters.  To put the capacities of the intake and the aqueduct in perspective, the peak levels of water ever used by Winnipeg was 300,000,000 L/d (66,000,000 gpd) in 1988. That was just less than 500 litres per person per day. Since then, through the City’s water conservation program, that figure has been reduced, and in 2000, it was approximately 380 litres (84 gallons) per person per day. There is still plenty of unused capacity in the Winnipeg Aqueduct.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Red River Valley Siphon===&lt;br /&gt;
From a point approximately 27 km east of Winnipeg (Mile 17) to the McPhillips Reservoir, the aqueduct is designed as an inverted siphon, which means that the entire length of conduit is under pressure.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This siphon was by no means of a constant configuration. A significant change point was at the site of the future Deacon Reservoir. The other change point was at the crossing of the Red River.  The section from the east end, “Mile 17”, to the Deacon Reservoir is an 8' (2.4 m) diameter round cast-in-place reinforced concrete pipe. The section from the Deacon reservoir to the Red River is a 5'-6&amp;quot; (1.7 m) “Lock Joint” precast concrete pipe. The crossing of the Red River is a 5ft (1.5 m) diameter cast iron pipe, and the section from the Red River to the McPhillips Reservoir is a 4 ft (1.2 m) diameter Lock Joint precast concrete pipe.   The section between Deacon and the Red River incorporated the service connections to supply some of the partners in the GWWD: Transcona, St. Vital, St. Boniface, and Fort Garry. The section west of the Red River included a service connection to supply the James Avenue High Pressure Pumping Station, eliminating the need for Red River water.  While there was an overflow provision at the east end of the siphon (Mile 17), the only pressure relief facility in the entire siphon section itself, as initially constructed, was a surge tank with a weir on the east side of the Red River.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Red River Crossing====&lt;br /&gt;
The crossing of the Red River is a siphon within a siphon.  The conduit crosses the river in the limestone bedrock some 24m below the banks and 6m below the river bottom.  The core drilling that established the depth and nature of the rock was one of the earlier contracts tendered by the District. One presumes that the engineers were comfortable with the resulting information as the reports of the Chief Engineer in the minutes of the Administration Board meetings do not mention concerns.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, the conduit is a cast iron pipe. The configuration is a vertical section on each river bank built in a shaft and a horizontal section built in a tunnel in the rock. The 16m vertical shafts were 5 m in diameter and lined with a 600 mm reinforced concrete wall. The upper portion serves as housing for the valving system. The annular space for the portion below the valve house floor down to the bedrock was backfilled with gravel. The tunnel for the horizontal section was nominally 3 m by 3 m and the pipe was centred on that opening. The cast iron pipe sections were specially fabricated so that they could be caulked from within. The material used for the caulking was hemp and lead. Once the cast iron pipe had been finished the space between the rock and the pipe was filled with concrete. Remarkably, this section has functioned since 1918 without ever being dewatered.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Red River Siphon and Surge Tank====&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 10.jpg|thumb|Figure 10: Red River Crossing Surge Tank]]&lt;br /&gt;
Perhaps the most vital component of the Red River siphon system is the surge tank located on the east side of the Red River adjacent to the river crossing on the corner of Tache Avenue and Rue Messager. It is also the most visible in that it stands the equivalent of a four-story building above the ground level. Figure 10 provides a view of its external structure in 2010.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, the design of the tank provided the only pressure relief and overflow facility on the Red River siphon. That is significant because the inlet to the McPhillips Reservoir was controlled by valves which could have been inadvertently closed. Chace noted that “it must be kept in mind that there is ''(water)'' flowing constantly west of Mile 17 at considerable velocity a solid volume of water of huge weight. It is a serious matter to suddenly disturb the rate of flow of such a body of water.” As such, since the rate of flow out of the McPhillips reservoir would vary many times during the day, any excess arriving at the reservoir had to be accommodated. The engineers’ solution was that reinforced concrete surge tank designed to serve two purposes.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
They were, overflow to relieve pressure caused by too much water entering the siphon at Mile 17, and to spill the excess that might be created at the entrance of the McPhillips Reservoir. To do that, a closed circular structure was built with a concentric internal circular weir. The lip of the weir was at a fixed elevation. In that way, it spilled the excess water from either or both of the two causes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The supply line from Deacon enters the base of the structure in a chamber at the bottom of the internal weir and a separate line leaves the chamber to bring water to the cast iron line that crosses the Red River. Both these lines are under pressure with the maximum head determined by the lip elevation of the weir. That elevation was about 9m above the ground line or 14m above the centre line elevation of the two pipelines. To collect the water that spilled over the weir, a second concentric wall of the same height was built outside of the weir wall leaving an annular space of 760mm. The excess water collected in that space was then taken away by a drainage line that discharged into the nearby Red River. Primarily for protecting the system from frost and secondarily for aesthetic reasons, the wall was faced with brick as is shown in Figure 10.  Significantly, there was no valve between the 1.7 m incoming line and the surge tank. In that way, the pressure in the siphon to the east of the Red River could not be inadvertently increased to the point where it would damage the line. The system was operated so that there was always some water flowing over the weir.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The structural features are also notable. Given the need to ensure that the pressure relief system would never have to be taken out of service, structural integrity was important. Unlike with the conduit, it seems to have been designed on the principle of “no risk.” The base of the structure was supported on a series of caissons under the walls, excavated to the bedrock. On top of the caissons were grillages made of steel beams and four steel beams spanned from grillage to grillage around the base. The entire system was then encased in concrete. The concrete too was heavily reinforced once again using twisted square bars like those in some of the main aqueduct sections.  This time, however, the drawings included bending diagrams for the reinforcing steel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Conclusion==&lt;br /&gt;
The engineers, administrators, and contractors on the Winnipeg Aqueduct executed a unique project that is remarkable for its scope and its lasting ability to serve the needs of The City of Winnipeg. In so doing they were confronted with and overcame unique physical and environmental conditions using creative design, testing and construction processes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The project was completed on time and quite close to budget by December of 1918. However, because of a concern that there might be an adverse effect on the industrial boilers in the City due to the change from hard to soft water during the height of the heating season, the changeover was delayed. Water started to flow into the McPhillips Reservoir on March 29, 1919.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Key Players==&lt;br /&gt;
* Charles S. Slichter – consulting engineer &lt;br /&gt;
* James H. Fuertes – consulting engineer (New York) &lt;br /&gt;
* Hugh A. Robson (Judge) – Public Works Commissioner, Province of Manitoba &lt;br /&gt;
* James H. Ashdown (Mayor of Winnipeg) &lt;br /&gt;
* Thomas Russell Deacon (Mayor of Winnipeg) &lt;br /&gt;
* William  G. Chace – Chief Engineer, GWWD &lt;br /&gt;
* Douglas L. McLean – Assistant to Chief Engineer, GWWD  &lt;br /&gt;
* Henry N. Ruttan – Winnipeg City Engineer – later a consultant; also General and Commanding Officer of Military District NO. 10&lt;br /&gt;
* John G. Sullivan – CPR – also a consultant  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==National Recognition==&lt;br /&gt;
The project was recognized by the '''Canadian Society for Civil Engineering''' as a ''National Historic Civil Engineering Site'' with a plaque and ceremony in 1994. The project was identified as one of the many significant historic civil engineering achievements within Canada.  The plaque serves to preserve the heritage of the people of Canada, and in esteem of the civil engineers and others who worked alongside them on projects such as this. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994 Shoal Lake Aquaduct CSCE National Historic Site.jpg|thumb|none|500px|CSCE National Historic Civil Engineering Site Monument]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Reference - https://cscehistory.ca/national/red-river-floodway-winnipeg-mb/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Supplemental Information Sources==&lt;br /&gt;
The lead up to the concept and the political process that brought the aqueduct about is documented in the thesis “Developing a domestic water supply for Winnipeg from Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods: the Greater Winnipeg Water District Aqueduct, 1905 – 1919” http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457, and in the Manitoba Historical Society’s Journal article Pressure to Act: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (No. 72, Spring-Summer 2013) http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/72/aqueduct.shtml. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additional and more detailed engineering information is provided at http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457 and in the Manitoba Historical Society’s Journal article Not All Down Hill From There: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (No. 75 Summer 2014) http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/75/aqueduct.shtml &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
===Printed===&lt;br /&gt;
# Canadian Public Works Association Manitoba Chapter (CPWA). 2000. Greater Winnipeg Water District’s Shoal Lake Aqueduct Nomination for the American Public Works Association’s Top Ten Public Works Projects of the 20th Century. Winnipeg MB: Self Published.&lt;br /&gt;
# Chace W.G., M.V. Sauer. 1917a. The aqueduct for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers. Volume XXX Part II: 375-395.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace W.G., D.L. McLean. 1917b. Studies regarding concrete mixtures employed in the work: Supplement to the aqueduct for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers. Volume XXX Part II: 396-424.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. 1917c. Sands and consistency of concrete. The Canadian Engineer 33: 282&lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. Chace. 1920a. Construction features of the water works of the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Volume VII: 931-949. &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. 1920b. Notes and Instructions for the Guidance of the Staff Responsible for the Care and Operation of Aqueduct Supplying Water to the Communities Comprising the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department. &lt;br /&gt;
# Cherney, B. 2009. 90th anniversary of Shoal Lake aqueduct — first phase was construction of GWWD Railway. Winnipeg Real Estate News, October 16, 2009. www.winnipegrealestatenews.com/Editorials.aspx?id=968 (2010/11/29) &lt;br /&gt;
# Fuertes, James H. 1920. The basic principles used in the designs for the new water supply works of Winnipeg Manitoba. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Volume VII: 693-748. &lt;br /&gt;
# Greater Winnipeg Water District. 1918. Aqueduct Construction Scheme: What it Is What It Means. Winnipeg MB: Telegram Job Printers Ltd. &lt;br /&gt;
# Herring, R., F. P. Stearns and J. H. Fuertes. 1913. Report on a water supply from Shoal Lake for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. New York NY: Stovel Company Limited Winnipeg. &lt;br /&gt;
# Landon, C.S. 1918. The Greater Winnipeg Water District. The Canadian Engineer. 34: 290-301, 315-317.  &lt;br /&gt;
# Library and Archives Canada, Canada. n.d. Mining Lands &amp;amp; Yukon Branch of the Department of the Interior, File 116619     &lt;br /&gt;
# Mclean, D.L. 1919. Earth Slides in Winnipeg Aqueduct Construction. The Canadian Engineer. 37: 469-471.&lt;br /&gt;
# Prodan C.S. 1979. The building of the Winnipeg Aqueduct. Manitoba Pageant. www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/pageant/24/winnipegaqueduct.shtml  &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N. 1909. Winnipeg’s water works: Visit to the City water works High Pressure Plant and artesian well system. British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1-8. Winnipeg, MB.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N. 1913. Untitled report to the Mayor and City Council of Winnipeg dated May 8, 1913. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.  &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N., J.G. Sullivan and R.S. Lea. 1916. Report on the Aqueduct of the Greater Winnipeg Water District by the Special Board of Consulting Engineers. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Scott, W. M. 1938. The Water Supply of Greater Winnipeg. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Vol. 30 No. 11: 1872-1885. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.&lt;br /&gt;
# Scott, W. M. n.d. The Water Supply of The Greater Winnipeg Water District. Unbound paper labelled as presented at a meeting of the American Water Works Association in March, 1938. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.&lt;br /&gt;
# Shoal Lake Watershed Working Group. 2002. Shoal Lake Watershed Management Plan. Manitoba Water Stewardship, Winnipeg MB. www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/water_quality/quality/shoal_lake_wsmp.html (2010/12/28)&lt;br /&gt;
# Shropshire, L. 1994 (January 7). Mayor Battles Critics. Winnipeg Real Estate News. Winnipeg MB: self published. &lt;br /&gt;
# Siamandas, G. n.d. Winnipeg’s Shoal Lake Aqueduct. timemachine.siamandas.com/PAGES/winnipeg_stories/SHOAL_LAKE_AQUEDUCT.htm (2011/02/7)  &lt;br /&gt;
# Slichter, C.S. 1912. The Water Supply of the City of Winnipeg to Public Utilities Commissioner, Province of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB. &lt;br /&gt;
# The Canadian Engineer. 1917. Winnipeg Aqueduct Excavation. The Canadian Engineer. 32: 149-151.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Web links related to the topic===&lt;br /&gt;
# University of Manitoba – MSpace - Developing a domestic water supply for Winnipeg from Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods: the Greater Winnipeg Water District Aqueduct, 1905 – 1919 https://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457 Accessed December 17, 2016.&lt;br /&gt;
# Manitoba History No. 72, Spring-Summer 2013. Pressure to Act: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/72/aqueduct.shtml Accessed December 19, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# Manitoba History No. 75, Summer 2014. Not All Down Hill From There: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District [http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/75/aqueduct.shtml http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_histor]29, 2022&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - https://www.winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/water/shoalLake.stm Accessed December 18, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - https://www.winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/dept/railway.stm Accessed December 18, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - http://winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/water/freedomRoad.stm &lt;br /&gt;
# The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering (through Ryerson University) http://www.ryerson.ca/~amackenz/history/national/w.html Accessed December 17, 2016.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Shoal_Lake_Aqueduct&amp;diff=2834</id>
		<title>Shoal Lake Aqueduct</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Shoal_Lake_Aqueduct&amp;diff=2834"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T22:05:06Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: /* Web links related to the topic */ Fixed broken link to Adele Perry book&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Shoal Lake Aqueduct is a 155 km concrete conduit that delivers water from the Shoal Lake/Lake of the Woods watersheds to a reservoir in The City of Winnipeg. Like the aqueducts built by the early Romans, it is powered entirely by gravity. Built between 1914 and 1918, the conduit conveys water primarily as a covered open-channel flow conduit. There are seven river crossings where it is operated under pressure as an inverted siphon. The construction of the conduit and the post-construction operation of the system was accomplished by an adjoining railway built specifically for these purposes.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The aqueduct is known variously as the Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (GWWD) Aqueduct. The GWWD was an inter-municipal corporation owned by eight, but not all, of the civic entities in the areas around the Red and Assiniboine Rivers. While the project was spearheaded by The City of Winnipeg, the corporation’s Board of Directors was not dominated by Winnipeg. The project impetus, as stated in the campaign promise of the 1913 elected mayor of Winnipeg, Thomas Deacon (an engineer), was to provide “at once for the people of Winnipeg an ample and permanent supply of pure soft water which will forever remove the menace now hanging over Winnipeg of a water famine”.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article is confined to the engineering involved in the design and implementation of the aqueduct and not the social and political processes involved in the lead up to the approval of the project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Initial Investigations==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Shoal Lake Area===&lt;br /&gt;
The source of water for the Winnipeg Aqueduct is Shoal Lake, a tributary of Lake of the Woods. The intake location on Shoal Lake is on Indian Bay on the lake’s western edge – about 3km west of the Manitoba-Ontario boundary (see Figure 1). The longer dimension of Indian Bay is east-west. On the south side is an east-west oriented promontory of land. The settlement of the members of the Ojibway First Nation that occupy Shoal Lake Indian Reserve No. 40 is located on that promontory. On its south side is another bay of Shoal Lake known as Snowshoe Bay. The narrowest portion of the land between the two bays is about 840m and is close to the western shore of Indian Bay. A stream known as the Falcon River discharges into Indian Bay immediately south of where the water for the aqueduct is withdrawn. The Falcon River is the outlet of Falcon Lake, some 10 km to the northwest, and also drains much of the muskeg area in between. The height of land forming the western boundary of Shoal Lake along the route of the aqueduct is 6km west of Indian Bay.  The general layout of the area is shown in Figure 1. Note that the scheme involves a channel that diverts the water of the Falcon River away from Indian Bay thereby leaving the indigenous community of Shoal Lake Band 40 on an island with its only vehicular access being seasonal service by a ferry to the east side of the bay and an ice road in the winter months. Years of advocacy by the community protesting that isolation has attracted the attention of three levels of government (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada) and in 2016 there was agreement by the three to fund a 27 km all-season road, with three bridges, that will connect the community “to Canada” at the Trans-Canada Highway North-West of the intake. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Early Engineering===&lt;br /&gt;
In the run up to the decision to build the aqueduct The City of Winnipeg commissioned a 1913 report from a ‘Board’ of New York based consulting engineers, R. Herring, F. P. Stearns and J. H. Fuertes “on a water supply from Shoal Lake for the Greater Winnipeg Water District”. The report relied upon survey work undertaken by the City Engineer H.N. Ruttan in the winter of 1913 and provided a conceptual design and an estimate of the costs ($13,045,600). The report from Ruttan’s survey included topographical information about both a possible route and for the area around Indian Bay and Snowshoe Bay. Soundings were also taken in both bays. It also included for the first time a precise figure for the difference in elevation between Shoal Lake and the McPhillips Reservoir, namely 293.19 ft. (89.42 m).   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Hydraulic Feasibility===&lt;br /&gt;
As noted earlier, Shoal Lake is a tributary of Lake of the Woods. The feasibility of using Shoal Lake as a water source was enhanced by earlier hydrological interventions on Lake of the Woods. A history of the modifications to the water levels of Lake of the Woods as provided by the Shoal Lake Watershed Working Group reads as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''&amp;quot;Shoal Lake is connected to Lake of the Woods at a location known as Ash Rapids. Construction of a control dam at the outlet of Lake of the Woods in the 1880s raised the level of the lake by about a metre above its natural condition. In turn, this brought water levels in Shoal Lake into approximate balance with levels in the much larger Lake of the Woods, at least over an extended portion of the year. The channel at Ash Rapids was deepened and widened from its natural state, through blasting, around the turn of the century [1900]. This was reportedly done to provide a water based transportation route to serve both timber and mining operations in the Shoal Lake area.&amp;quot;''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An aerial perspective of the area surrounding the aqueduct intake is shown in Figure 1, and hydraulic data on Shoal Lake is provided in Table 1. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Figure 1: Indian Bay and Aqueduct Inlet area]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In testimony by three engineers and one hydrologist at the 1914 International Joint Commission hearing on the project, agreed that withdraw of the equivalent of years volume at 85,000,000 imperial gallons per day in a single day, i.e. with no inflow, the draw down of the level of Lake of the Woods would be less than 1.50 inches.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; style=&amp;quot;margin: auto;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
|+Table 1: Lake of The Woods and Shoal Lake Watershed Statistics&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
! !!Lake of the Woods!!Shoal Lake&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!Aspect!!sq. Miles (km2)!!sq. Miles (km2)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Drainage Area||27 000 (69 000)||360 (930)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Surface Area||1250 (3200)||107 (280)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Ratio of Drainage to Surface Area||21.6||3.5&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Major Features of the Aqueduct==&lt;br /&gt;
The overall scheme of the Winnipeg Aqueduct, following in the direction of flow, entailed:&lt;br /&gt;
* a soft water source that required no treatment for potability, colour, or hardness,&lt;br /&gt;
* a 2.4 km dike across a portion of Indian Bay and a 840 m channel excavated between Indian Bay and Snowshoe Bay to divert the water of the Falcon River,&lt;br /&gt;
* an intake structure on the edge of Indian Bay,&lt;br /&gt;
* a 155 km gravity fed enclosed conduit that conveys water, primarily in an unconfined channel, but with some portions under pressure, from the inlet to The City of Winnipeg’s McPhillips Street water reservoir,&lt;br /&gt;
* provision for an equalizing and storage reservoir (Deacon) approximately 21 km east of the McPhillips reservoir,&lt;br /&gt;
* metering facilities for the measurement of the volume of water flowing at vital points, and&lt;br /&gt;
* a railway that facilitated the initial construction and the on-going operation and maintenance of the system.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Features of the enclosed conduit include:&lt;br /&gt;
* a design capacity of 85,000,000 gpd (386,400,000 L/d) per day,&lt;br /&gt;
* cutting through the height of land that forms the boundary of the Shoal Lake watershed,&lt;br /&gt;
* provision for delivery of water into a future second conduit that could increase the combined design capacity to at least 100,000,000 gpd (454,600,00 L/d),&lt;br /&gt;
* seven rivers crossings by means of inverted siphons, &lt;br /&gt;
* a system for water and air pressure relief during operations, &lt;br /&gt;
* a means for inspection during partial operation and for isolation and dewatering of sections for maintenance, and &lt;br /&gt;
* maintained the integrity of local surface drainage systems.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Engineering &amp;amp; Design==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Field Studies for Final Design===&lt;br /&gt;
The GWWD had an in-house engineering department. The Chief Engineer was W.G. Chace, a McGill graduate who had also worked on the Pointe du Bois generating station. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the October 1913 vote authorizing the project to proceed was settled, the GWWD engineers set about the detailed design aided by J. H. Fuertes (a co-author of the Board of Consulting Engineers report) as an ongoing consultant. The first order of business was for the GWWD engineers to determine the final route selection so that the right of way could be established and the railway started. Doing so required more precise and extensive survey information than had been provided by Ruttan. Survey parties were dispatched with one important task, that being to establish a precise set of benchmarks. During the winter of 1913-1914, the survey parties accomplished the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 95 miles of precise levels,&lt;br /&gt;
* 362 miles of transit lines,&lt;br /&gt;
* 1,317 miles of levels, and &lt;br /&gt;
* 380 square miles of topography.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, some 12,000 ft of bore holes were made to assess the foundation conditions and determine the depths of muskeg. Anyone who has surveyed during a Manitoba winter with survey instruments of that era will recognize the accomplishment and appreciate the ordeal that those surveyors endured.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Billy Von Koen in his book Definition of the Engineering Method defines it as “the strategy for causing the best change in a poorly understood or uncertain situation within available resources.” There is little doubt that those engineers responsible for the implementation of the Winnipeg Aqueduct, in seeking to cause the best change, were faced with uncertain situations and finite resources. While they had access to the experiences of other aqueduct designers, they also had to deal with factors that were specific to the locality of the project and that were not well understood. There were two in particular. One was the issue of selecting the most all-round economical route for the conduit. The other was developing a design for the concrete mixture for use in the conduit utilizing the available local aggregates that would meet the necessary compressive strength, permeability, and durability requirements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Designing for the Terrain===&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; style=&amp;quot;float:right; margin-left:10px;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
|+Table 2: Slopes of the Winnipeg Aqueduct for Various Cross Sections &lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!Slope of Aqueduct!!Dimension of Section&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!inches per 100 ft!!(Height x Width)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.11||10’-9” x 9’-0’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.279||10’-9” x 9’-0”&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.300||8’-9” x 7’-45/8’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.382||8’-31/4” x 7’-0’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.480||7’-111/2” x 6’-81/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.600||7’-71/2” x 6’-51/4’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.684||7’-51/2” x 6’-31/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.744||7’-4” x 6’-21/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|1.290||6’-7” x 5’-61/8’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|1.537||6’-41/2” x 5’-41/4’’&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The terrain between Shoal Lake and the prairie country just east of Winnipeg is treed, has a number of rivers, and contains some 80 km2 of muskeg or swamp. It is also for the most part uninhabited and did not lend itself to access or communication. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In approaching the route selection task, the GWWD engineers had available the preliminary design that was provided as part of the report from the Board of Consulting Engineers (Hering et al, 1913) that included details of typical conduit arch sections. With that information, and on-going refinements of the sections, curves were developed showing cost variations for typical aqueduct cross-sections based on depths of excavation and for a range of slopes. With that information available, field staff could make on-site decisions in choosing an alignment that would minimize the costs and the line length while striving to maintain the average slope of 0.57 ft per 1,000 ft of length. By that process, an alignment was established by March of 1914 on which over 30% of its length was very close to the average slope. The final average gradient was 0.62 ft per 1,000 ft at a length that was only 8% longer than the straight-line distance. Table 2 provides a listing of the slopes for each aqueduct cross section.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An early start to the railway was essential to the project, and once the route was decided, the right-of-way could be established and the railway construction could get underway. The right-of-way selected was generally 300 ft (91 m) wide with the railway located 40 ft (12 m) from the south boundary. At the easterly end, which had more construction challenges such as the depth of excavation, the width was increased to 500 ft (152 m).    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Concrete Mix Design===&lt;br /&gt;
The GWWD engineers were keenly aware of the effect that the amount of Portland cement used in a cubic yard of concrete would have on the cost of the project. Their awareness would have been heightened by the knowledge that cement in Canada cost 45% to 50% more than in the US or Great Britain. The cement component eventually selected for the aqueduct concrete, based on their testing program, was 430.5 lbs/cy (255 kg/m3) vs. 549.5 in the mixtures commonly used and recommended for watertight work by other authorities of the time. Chief Engineer Chace reported that the savings achieved by relying on the recommendations of the GWWD engineers were projected to be $350,000 for 400,000 cy (306,000 m3) of concrete. That savings figure was based on a 1915 cement cost of $0.0079 per pound. To put that in 2010 dollars, with cement then at $255 per metric tonne ($0.1158 per pound), the saving would be $5,500,000. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In achieving that economy, the GWWD engineers relied on their own methods. Knowing the sources of granular material available as due to the ongoing 1914 railway construction, and other exploratory work, they undertook an extensive program of analysis and testing of materials from those sources. The program consisted of five tests:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a mechanical analysis of the aggregates from the available natural deposits,&lt;br /&gt;
* the weight per cubic foot of the various gradations and combinations of materials,&lt;br /&gt;
* volumetric tests of the materials for density,&lt;br /&gt;
* tests for compression and tension of various sand-cement mortar mixtures,&lt;br /&gt;
* tests for both permeability and compression of concrete with various mix proportions of stone and sand when selected by using the data derived from the other tests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 2.jpg|thumb|upright=0.75|Figure 2: Permeability Testing Apparatus]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The testing program involved two lots of Portland cement, with the major difference between them being the time interval to final set after mixing. The cement used was manufactured locally by the Canada Cement Company Limited, which began production in Winnipeg in 1913. The specimens for the program were made from 28 distinct concrete mixes. There were 29 tests of permeability and 47 in compression.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The compression testing program, with specimens 8&amp;quot; (20 cm) in diameter and 16&amp;quot; (40 cm) long, seems to have followed standard procedures. However, the permeability test, if not unique, was at a minimum innovative. The concrete specimens were 13&amp;quot; (33 cm) in diameter and 14.5&amp;quot; (37 cm) long and cast with a small internal chamber connected to a metal injection pipe with an external water-stop. The test apparatus forced water into the chamber at a constant pressure with a gauge to measure the water entering the specimen with a means of measuring the amounts passing through the concrete, and a separate measure of any leakage from around the pipe used for the injection. A photo of the apparatus used in the test is shown in Figure 2.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a 1917 paper, the GWWD concluded from their testing program, ''“that with lean mixtures and the gravel materials available, the addition of fine sand would give the work contemplated impenetrable concrete of the desired strength.”'' Their opinion was borne out by tests of the performance of the completed conduit.  Chace also reported in that mixes adopted on the basis of those tests would develop ''“a strength of 2,800 pounds per square inch and a six-inch wall of concrete will be watertight against a hydrostatic pressure of 200 feet of head.”'' &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Cross Section Design===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 3.jpg|thumb|Figure 3: Test Sections Built in Winnipeg, Summer of 1914]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the work on the aggregate supply and the mix details was ongoing, the other step was to finalize the shape and dimensions of the conduit sections. As part of that process, test sections were built and loaded as shown in Figure 3. It is of interest to note that W.M. Scott, the contractor for the test sections, seems to have been the same W.M. Scott (an engineer) who sometime later became the Chief Commissioner of the GWWD. He was also later the President of the first Council (provisional) of the Association of Professional Engineers of the Province of Manitoba in 1920.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The cost significance of the volume of concrete to be incorporated in the project was also a priority. It was estimated that a one-inch increase in the sectional thickness would have cost $400,000. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 4.jpg|thumb|Figure 4: Chief Engineer W.G. Chace at a Typical Arch Section on an Invert]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 5.jpg|thumb|Figure 5: Circular Pressure Section, West End of Brokenhead River Slough]]&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 6.jpg|thumb|Figure 6: Method of Bending Reinforcing Steel]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The engineers were also cognizant of the durability of reinforcing steel should it become exposed to water through cracking of the concrete. With that in mind, they elected to use the unreinforced self-supporting arch type cross-section for the cut-and-cover portions that comprised most of the aqueduct. The arch rested on the edges of a previously cast invert section as seen in Figure 4. The invert had a circular concave upper surface with the radius of the curve somewhat greater than the height of the arch. As an example, the radius for a section with a 2.25 m interior height was 3.4 m. The term “invert” refers to the lowest point in the internal cross-section of an artificial channel, and is thought to have originated from describing an inverted arch. Ruttan et al comment on the function of an invert in the chosen system as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''&amp;quot;Although, as actually constructed, the side walls of the arch rest upon the ends of the invert, the greater part of the load, in a section like the one shown, may be assumed to be borne by those portions of the trench bottom directly beneath the side walls, because the central part of this relatively thin unreinforced type of invert is not considered to provide much in the way of support, but rather to serve merely as a firm water-tight bottom to the aqueduct.&amp;quot;''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
These typically unreinforced arch sections were configured such that, under all loading conditions, the concrete in the arch would be in compression and thereby resistant to cracking. The situations where reinforcing steel was required in the arch section are as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* at road crossings and undeveloped road allowances,&lt;br /&gt;
* for railway crossings, and&lt;br /&gt;
* in the arches where the weight of the backfill material was so light that there was a risk of deformation from outward ground water pressure and separation from the invert. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In each of those cases the concrete thickness was increased to protect the steel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the conduit crossed a river as a siphon, it was under internal pressure, and as the concrete would then be in hoop tension, those sections were reinforced with steel and the wall sections thickened for protection purposes. The same treatment was used for the 6.7 km cast-in-place pressure section east of the Deacon Reservoir location. The circular sections were also built in two castings with the edges of the invert section thicker than the nominal thickness in the upper portion. The reinforcing steel was circular and crossed the construction joint where the steel was lapped. Figure 5 shows one end of a circular section.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Aside from its cost, the use of reinforcing steel was an issue because at the time it did not come prefabricated. It was manufactured and delivered as a straight twisted square bar that had to be bent on site. Figure 6 shows an example of the bending process.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Falcon River Dike and Diversion===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 7.jpg|thumb|Figure 7: Construction of the Falcon River Dike (GWWD No. 84)]]&lt;br /&gt;
As previously noted the Falcon River drains much of the muskeg area west of Indian Bay, and had a brown colour. The dike and channel that diverted the water of the Falcon River to Snowshoe Bay was built to dilute that water with the much clearer, greater Shoal Lake water (see Figure 1).  In that way before the diverted water could reach the intake of the aqueduct, it would have to make its way around the promontory and back into Indian Bay – a distance of 14 km. No doubt the opportunity of the diversion scheme was recognized because of the topographical work and soundings undertaken by City Engineer Ruttan’s staff in 1912 and early 1913. The alternative to the diversion would have been to extend the aqueduct considerably further into Shoal Lake so that it accessed unaffected water. The District’s cost for the dike and diversion work was $147,000. In a paper, Fuertes indicated that the cost to extend the aqueduct a further 8 km would have been $1,000,000.  Figure 7 provides an indication of the scope of the dike construction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 8.jpg|thumb|Figure 8: Falcon River Diversion Channel Excavation]]&lt;br /&gt;
The dike was built using the scow and bridge method. Significantly, as shown by the date on the photo, it was built before the GWWD railway reached Indian Bay. Figure 8 shows excavation of the diversion channel in 1915.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Intake Works===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 9.jpg|thumb|Figure 9: Intake Structure Before Flooding]]&lt;br /&gt;
The designers located the intake structure in a rock outcrop on the shore of Indian Bay adjacent to the north end of the dike.  Gathering dikes extend into the lake and a concrete structure in the rock cut controls the water entering the aqueduct. The structure includes the usual gates, trash screens, and stop log provisions that one might expect. Two features are noteworthy. The first is that the designers provided dual entrance chambers, each with its own screens and stop log facilities. In that way, one can be isolated for maintenance while the other was providing water to the aqueduct. The second feature had to do with preventing cold air from entering the system in the winter. The lower edge of the front wall of the structure, which is the top of the water opening, was constructed 1.9 m below the lake’s lowest level. In that way, it was below the bottom of the ice and cold air could not enter the system, thereby preventing the formation of ice in the intake.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The capacity of the intake structure was 85,000,000 gpd (386,400,000 L/d) at low water level. Chace suggested that at the high water level of Lake of the Woods established by the IJC in 1917, the intake could accommodate 100,000,000 gpd (454,600,000 L/d). Figure 9 shows the completed intake structure before flooding. The operating water level would be below the letters in the photo at a distance of approximately one and one-half times the height of those letters.  To put the capacities of the intake and the aqueduct in perspective, the peak levels of water ever used by Winnipeg was 300,000,000 L/d (66,000,000 gpd) in 1988. That was just less than 500 litres per person per day. Since then, through the City’s water conservation program, that figure has been reduced, and in 2000, it was approximately 380 litres (84 gallons) per person per day. There is still plenty of unused capacity in the Winnipeg Aqueduct.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Red River Valley Siphon===&lt;br /&gt;
From a point approximately 27 km east of Winnipeg (Mile 17) to the McPhillips Reservoir, the aqueduct is designed as an inverted siphon, which means that the entire length of conduit is under pressure.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This siphon was by no means of a constant configuration. A significant change point was at the site of the future Deacon Reservoir. The other change point was at the crossing of the Red River.  The section from the east end, “Mile 17”, to the Deacon Reservoir is an 8' (2.4 m) diameter round cast-in-place reinforced concrete pipe. The section from the Deacon reservoir to the Red River is a 5'-6&amp;quot; (1.7 m) “Lock Joint” precast concrete pipe. The crossing of the Red River is a 5ft (1.5 m) diameter cast iron pipe, and the section from the Red River to the McPhillips Reservoir is a 4 ft (1.2 m) diameter Lock Joint precast concrete pipe.   The section between Deacon and the Red River incorporated the service connections to supply some of the partners in the GWWD: Transcona, St. Vital, St. Boniface, and Fort Garry. The section west of the Red River included a service connection to supply the James Avenue High Pressure Pumping Station, eliminating the need for Red River water.  While there was an overflow provision at the east end of the siphon (Mile 17), the only pressure relief facility in the entire siphon section itself, as initially constructed, was a surge tank with a weir on the east side of the Red River.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Red River Crossing====&lt;br /&gt;
The crossing of the Red River is a siphon within a siphon.  The conduit crosses the river in the limestone bedrock some 24m below the banks and 6m below the river bottom.  The core drilling that established the depth and nature of the rock was one of the earlier contracts tendered by the District. One presumes that the engineers were comfortable with the resulting information as the reports of the Chief Engineer in the minutes of the Administration Board meetings do not mention concerns.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, the conduit is a cast iron pipe. The configuration is a vertical section on each river bank built in a shaft and a horizontal section built in a tunnel in the rock. The 16m vertical shafts were 5 m in diameter and lined with a 600 mm reinforced concrete wall. The upper portion serves as housing for the valving system. The annular space for the portion below the valve house floor down to the bedrock was backfilled with gravel. The tunnel for the horizontal section was nominally 3 m by 3 m and the pipe was centred on that opening. The cast iron pipe sections were specially fabricated so that they could be caulked from within. The material used for the caulking was hemp and lead. Once the cast iron pipe had been finished the space between the rock and the pipe was filled with concrete. Remarkably, this section has functioned since 1918 without ever being dewatered.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Red River Siphon and Surge Tank====&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 10.jpg|thumb|Figure 10: Red River Crossing Surge Tank]]&lt;br /&gt;
Perhaps the most vital component of the Red River siphon system is the surge tank located on the east side of the Red River adjacent to the river crossing on the corner of Tache Avenue and Rue Messager. It is also the most visible in that it stands the equivalent of a four-story building above the ground level. Figure 10 provides a view of its external structure in 2010.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, the design of the tank provided the only pressure relief and overflow facility on the Red River siphon. That is significant because the inlet to the McPhillips Reservoir was controlled by valves which could have been inadvertently closed. Chace noted that “it must be kept in mind that there is ''(water)'' flowing constantly west of Mile 17 at considerable velocity a solid volume of water of huge weight. It is a serious matter to suddenly disturb the rate of flow of such a body of water.” As such, since the rate of flow out of the McPhillips reservoir would vary many times during the day, any excess arriving at the reservoir had to be accommodated. The engineers’ solution was that reinforced concrete surge tank designed to serve two purposes.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
They were, overflow to relieve pressure caused by too much water entering the siphon at Mile 17, and to spill the excess that might be created at the entrance of the McPhillips Reservoir. To do that, a closed circular structure was built with a concentric internal circular weir. The lip of the weir was at a fixed elevation. In that way, it spilled the excess water from either or both of the two causes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The supply line from Deacon enters the base of the structure in a chamber at the bottom of the internal weir and a separate line leaves the chamber to bring water to the cast iron line that crosses the Red River. Both these lines are under pressure with the maximum head determined by the lip elevation of the weir. That elevation was about 9m above the ground line or 14m above the centre line elevation of the two pipelines. To collect the water that spilled over the weir, a second concentric wall of the same height was built outside of the weir wall leaving an annular space of 760mm. The excess water collected in that space was then taken away by a drainage line that discharged into the nearby Red River. Primarily for protecting the system from frost and secondarily for aesthetic reasons, the wall was faced with brick as is shown in Figure 10.  Significantly, there was no valve between the 1.7 m incoming line and the surge tank. In that way, the pressure in the siphon to the east of the Red River could not be inadvertently increased to the point where it would damage the line. The system was operated so that there was always some water flowing over the weir.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The structural features are also notable. Given the need to ensure that the pressure relief system would never have to be taken out of service, structural integrity was important. Unlike with the conduit, it seems to have been designed on the principle of “no risk.” The base of the structure was supported on a series of caissons under the walls, excavated to the bedrock. On top of the caissons were grillages made of steel beams and four steel beams spanned from grillage to grillage around the base. The entire system was then encased in concrete. The concrete too was heavily reinforced once again using twisted square bars like those in some of the main aqueduct sections.  This time, however, the drawings included bending diagrams for the reinforcing steel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Conclusion==&lt;br /&gt;
The engineers, administrators, and contractors on the Winnipeg Aqueduct executed a unique project that is remarkable for its scope and its lasting ability to serve the needs of The City of Winnipeg. In so doing they were confronted with and overcame unique physical and environmental conditions using creative design, testing and construction processes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The project was completed on time and quite close to budget by December of 1918. However, because of a concern that there might be an adverse effect on the industrial boilers in the City due to the change from hard to soft water during the height of the heating season, the changeover was delayed. Water started to flow into the McPhillips Reservoir on March 29, 1919.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Key Players==&lt;br /&gt;
* Charles S. Slichter – consulting engineer &lt;br /&gt;
* James H. Fuertes – consulting engineer (New York) &lt;br /&gt;
* Hugh A. Robson (Judge) – Public Works Commissioner, Province of Manitoba &lt;br /&gt;
* James H. Ashdown (Mayor of Winnipeg) &lt;br /&gt;
* Thomas Russell Deacon (Mayor of Winnipeg) &lt;br /&gt;
* William  G. Chace – Chief Engineer, GWWD &lt;br /&gt;
* Douglas L. McLean – Assistant to Chief Engineer, GWWD  &lt;br /&gt;
* Henry N. Ruttan – Winnipeg City Engineer – later a consultant; also General and Commanding Officer of Military District NO. 10&lt;br /&gt;
* John G. Sullivan – CPR – also a consultant  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==National Recognition==&lt;br /&gt;
The project was recognized by the '''Canadian Society for Civil Engineering''' as a ''National Historic Civil Engineering Site'' with a plaque and ceremony in 1994. The project was identified as one of the many significant historic civil engineering achievements within Canada.  The plaque serves to preserve the heritage of the people of Canada, and in esteem of the civil engineers and others who worked alongside them on projects such as this. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994 Shoal Lake Aquaduct CSCE National Historic Site.jpg|thumb|none|500px|CSCE National Historic Civil Engineering Site Monument]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Reference - https://cscehistory.ca/national/red-river-floodway-winnipeg-mb/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Supplemental Information Sources==&lt;br /&gt;
The lead up to the concept and the political process that brought the aqueduct about is documented in the thesis “Developing a domestic water supply for Winnipeg from Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods: the Greater Winnipeg Water District Aqueduct, 1905 – 1919” http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457, and in the Manitoba Historical Society’s Journal article Pressure to Act: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (No. 72, Spring-Summer 2013) http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/72/aqueduct.shtml. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additional and more detailed engineering information is provided at http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457 and in the Manitoba Historical Society’s Journal article Not All Down Hill From There: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (No. 75 Summer 2014) http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/75/aqueduct.shtml &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
===Printed===&lt;br /&gt;
# Canadian Public Works Association Manitoba Chapter (CPWA). 2000. Greater Winnipeg Water District’s Shoal Lake Aqueduct Nomination for the American Public Works Association’s Top Ten Public Works Projects of the 20th Century. Winnipeg MB: Self Published.&lt;br /&gt;
# Chace W.G., M.V. Sauer. 1917a. The aqueduct for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers. Volume XXX Part II: 375-395.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace W.G., D.L. McLean. 1917b. Studies regarding concrete mixtures employed in the work: Supplement to the aqueduct for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers. Volume XXX Part II: 396-424.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. 1917c. Sands and consistency of concrete. The Canadian Engineer 33: 282&lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. Chace. 1920a. Construction features of the water works of the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Volume VII: 931-949. &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. 1920b. Notes and Instructions for the Guidance of the Staff Responsible for the Care and Operation of Aqueduct Supplying Water to the Communities Comprising the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department. &lt;br /&gt;
# Cherney, B. 2009. 90th anniversary of Shoal Lake aqueduct — first phase was construction of GWWD Railway. Winnipeg Real Estate News, October 16, 2009. www.winnipegrealestatenews.com/Editorials.aspx?id=968 (2010/11/29) &lt;br /&gt;
# Fuertes, James H. 1920. The basic principles used in the designs for the new water supply works of Winnipeg Manitoba. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Volume VII: 693-748. &lt;br /&gt;
# Greater Winnipeg Water District. 1918. Aqueduct Construction Scheme: What it Is What It Means. Winnipeg MB: Telegram Job Printers Ltd. &lt;br /&gt;
# Herring, R., F. P. Stearns and J. H. Fuertes. 1913. Report on a water supply from Shoal Lake for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. New York NY: Stovel Company Limited Winnipeg. &lt;br /&gt;
# Landon, C.S. 1918. The Greater Winnipeg Water District. The Canadian Engineer. 34: 290-301, 315-317.  &lt;br /&gt;
# Library and Archives Canada, Canada. n.d. Mining Lands &amp;amp; Yukon Branch of the Department of the Interior, File 116619     &lt;br /&gt;
# Mclean, D.L. 1919. Earth Slides in Winnipeg Aqueduct Construction. The Canadian Engineer. 37: 469-471.&lt;br /&gt;
# Prodan C.S. 1979. The building of the Winnipeg Aqueduct. Manitoba Pageant. www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/pageant/24/winnipegaqueduct.shtml  &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N. 1909. Winnipeg’s water works: Visit to the City water works High Pressure Plant and artesian well system. British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1-8. Winnipeg, MB.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N. 1913. Untitled report to the Mayor and City Council of Winnipeg dated May 8, 1913. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.  &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N., J.G. Sullivan and R.S. Lea. 1916. Report on the Aqueduct of the Greater Winnipeg Water District by the Special Board of Consulting Engineers. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Scott, W. M. 1938. The Water Supply of Greater Winnipeg. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Vol. 30 No. 11: 1872-1885. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.&lt;br /&gt;
# Scott, W. M. n.d. The Water Supply of The Greater Winnipeg Water District. Unbound paper labelled as presented at a meeting of the American Water Works Association in March, 1938. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.&lt;br /&gt;
# Shoal Lake Watershed Working Group. 2002. Shoal Lake Watershed Management Plan. Manitoba Water Stewardship, Winnipeg MB. www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/water_quality/quality/shoal_lake_wsmp.html (2010/12/28)&lt;br /&gt;
# Shropshire, L. 1994 (January 7). Mayor Battles Critics. Winnipeg Real Estate News. Winnipeg MB: self published. &lt;br /&gt;
# Siamandas, G. n.d. Winnipeg’s Shoal Lake Aqueduct. timemachine.siamandas.com/PAGES/winnipeg_stories/SHOAL_LAKE_AQUEDUCT.htm (2011/02/7)  &lt;br /&gt;
# Slichter, C.S. 1912. The Water Supply of the City of Winnipeg to Public Utilities Commissioner, Province of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB. &lt;br /&gt;
# The Canadian Engineer. 1917. Winnipeg Aqueduct Excavation. The Canadian Engineer. 32: 149-151.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Web links related to the topic===&lt;br /&gt;
# University of Manitoba – MSpace - Developing a domestic water supply for Winnipeg from Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods: the Greater Winnipeg Water District Aqueduct, 1905 – 1919 https://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457 Accessed December 17, 2016.&lt;br /&gt;
# Manitoba History No. 72, Spring-Summer 2013. Pressure to Act: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/72/aqueduct.shtml Accessed December 19, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# Manitoba History No. 75, Summer 2014. Not All Down Hill From There: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District [http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/75/aqueduct.shtml http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_histor]29, 2022&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - http://www.winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/water/shoalLake.stm Accessed December 18, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - http://www.winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/dept/railway.stm Accessed December 18, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - http://winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/water/freedomRoad.stm &lt;br /&gt;
# The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering (through Ryerson University) http://www.ryerson.ca/~amackenz/history/national/w.html Accessed December 17, 2016.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Shoal_Lake_Aqueduct&amp;diff=2833</id>
		<title>Shoal Lake Aqueduct</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Shoal_Lake_Aqueduct&amp;diff=2833"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T22:02:15Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: /* Web links related to the topic */ http to https change&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Shoal Lake Aqueduct is a 155 km concrete conduit that delivers water from the Shoal Lake/Lake of the Woods watersheds to a reservoir in The City of Winnipeg. Like the aqueducts built by the early Romans, it is powered entirely by gravity. Built between 1914 and 1918, the conduit conveys water primarily as a covered open-channel flow conduit. There are seven river crossings where it is operated under pressure as an inverted siphon. The construction of the conduit and the post-construction operation of the system was accomplished by an adjoining railway built specifically for these purposes.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The aqueduct is known variously as the Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (GWWD) Aqueduct. The GWWD was an inter-municipal corporation owned by eight, but not all, of the civic entities in the areas around the Red and Assiniboine Rivers. While the project was spearheaded by The City of Winnipeg, the corporation’s Board of Directors was not dominated by Winnipeg. The project impetus, as stated in the campaign promise of the 1913 elected mayor of Winnipeg, Thomas Deacon (an engineer), was to provide “at once for the people of Winnipeg an ample and permanent supply of pure soft water which will forever remove the menace now hanging over Winnipeg of a water famine”.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article is confined to the engineering involved in the design and implementation of the aqueduct and not the social and political processes involved in the lead up to the approval of the project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Initial Investigations==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Shoal Lake Area===&lt;br /&gt;
The source of water for the Winnipeg Aqueduct is Shoal Lake, a tributary of Lake of the Woods. The intake location on Shoal Lake is on Indian Bay on the lake’s western edge – about 3km west of the Manitoba-Ontario boundary (see Figure 1). The longer dimension of Indian Bay is east-west. On the south side is an east-west oriented promontory of land. The settlement of the members of the Ojibway First Nation that occupy Shoal Lake Indian Reserve No. 40 is located on that promontory. On its south side is another bay of Shoal Lake known as Snowshoe Bay. The narrowest portion of the land between the two bays is about 840m and is close to the western shore of Indian Bay. A stream known as the Falcon River discharges into Indian Bay immediately south of where the water for the aqueduct is withdrawn. The Falcon River is the outlet of Falcon Lake, some 10 km to the northwest, and also drains much of the muskeg area in between. The height of land forming the western boundary of Shoal Lake along the route of the aqueduct is 6km west of Indian Bay.  The general layout of the area is shown in Figure 1. Note that the scheme involves a channel that diverts the water of the Falcon River away from Indian Bay thereby leaving the indigenous community of Shoal Lake Band 40 on an island with its only vehicular access being seasonal service by a ferry to the east side of the bay and an ice road in the winter months. Years of advocacy by the community protesting that isolation has attracted the attention of three levels of government (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada) and in 2016 there was agreement by the three to fund a 27 km all-season road, with three bridges, that will connect the community “to Canada” at the Trans-Canada Highway North-West of the intake. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Early Engineering===&lt;br /&gt;
In the run up to the decision to build the aqueduct The City of Winnipeg commissioned a 1913 report from a ‘Board’ of New York based consulting engineers, R. Herring, F. P. Stearns and J. H. Fuertes “on a water supply from Shoal Lake for the Greater Winnipeg Water District”. The report relied upon survey work undertaken by the City Engineer H.N. Ruttan in the winter of 1913 and provided a conceptual design and an estimate of the costs ($13,045,600). The report from Ruttan’s survey included topographical information about both a possible route and for the area around Indian Bay and Snowshoe Bay. Soundings were also taken in both bays. It also included for the first time a precise figure for the difference in elevation between Shoal Lake and the McPhillips Reservoir, namely 293.19 ft. (89.42 m).   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Hydraulic Feasibility===&lt;br /&gt;
As noted earlier, Shoal Lake is a tributary of Lake of the Woods. The feasibility of using Shoal Lake as a water source was enhanced by earlier hydrological interventions on Lake of the Woods. A history of the modifications to the water levels of Lake of the Woods as provided by the Shoal Lake Watershed Working Group reads as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''&amp;quot;Shoal Lake is connected to Lake of the Woods at a location known as Ash Rapids. Construction of a control dam at the outlet of Lake of the Woods in the 1880s raised the level of the lake by about a metre above its natural condition. In turn, this brought water levels in Shoal Lake into approximate balance with levels in the much larger Lake of the Woods, at least over an extended portion of the year. The channel at Ash Rapids was deepened and widened from its natural state, through blasting, around the turn of the century [1900]. This was reportedly done to provide a water based transportation route to serve both timber and mining operations in the Shoal Lake area.&amp;quot;''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An aerial perspective of the area surrounding the aqueduct intake is shown in Figure 1, and hydraulic data on Shoal Lake is provided in Table 1. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Figure 1: Indian Bay and Aqueduct Inlet area]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In testimony by three engineers and one hydrologist at the 1914 International Joint Commission hearing on the project, agreed that withdraw of the equivalent of years volume at 85,000,000 imperial gallons per day in a single day, i.e. with no inflow, the draw down of the level of Lake of the Woods would be less than 1.50 inches.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; style=&amp;quot;margin: auto;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
|+Table 1: Lake of The Woods and Shoal Lake Watershed Statistics&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
! !!Lake of the Woods!!Shoal Lake&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!Aspect!!sq. Miles (km2)!!sq. Miles (km2)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Drainage Area||27 000 (69 000)||360 (930)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Surface Area||1250 (3200)||107 (280)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|Ratio of Drainage to Surface Area||21.6||3.5&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Major Features of the Aqueduct==&lt;br /&gt;
The overall scheme of the Winnipeg Aqueduct, following in the direction of flow, entailed:&lt;br /&gt;
* a soft water source that required no treatment for potability, colour, or hardness,&lt;br /&gt;
* a 2.4 km dike across a portion of Indian Bay and a 840 m channel excavated between Indian Bay and Snowshoe Bay to divert the water of the Falcon River,&lt;br /&gt;
* an intake structure on the edge of Indian Bay,&lt;br /&gt;
* a 155 km gravity fed enclosed conduit that conveys water, primarily in an unconfined channel, but with some portions under pressure, from the inlet to The City of Winnipeg’s McPhillips Street water reservoir,&lt;br /&gt;
* provision for an equalizing and storage reservoir (Deacon) approximately 21 km east of the McPhillips reservoir,&lt;br /&gt;
* metering facilities for the measurement of the volume of water flowing at vital points, and&lt;br /&gt;
* a railway that facilitated the initial construction and the on-going operation and maintenance of the system.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Features of the enclosed conduit include:&lt;br /&gt;
* a design capacity of 85,000,000 gpd (386,400,000 L/d) per day,&lt;br /&gt;
* cutting through the height of land that forms the boundary of the Shoal Lake watershed,&lt;br /&gt;
* provision for delivery of water into a future second conduit that could increase the combined design capacity to at least 100,000,000 gpd (454,600,00 L/d),&lt;br /&gt;
* seven rivers crossings by means of inverted siphons, &lt;br /&gt;
* a system for water and air pressure relief during operations, &lt;br /&gt;
* a means for inspection during partial operation and for isolation and dewatering of sections for maintenance, and &lt;br /&gt;
* maintained the integrity of local surface drainage systems.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Engineering &amp;amp; Design==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Field Studies for Final Design===&lt;br /&gt;
The GWWD had an in-house engineering department. The Chief Engineer was W.G. Chace, a McGill graduate who had also worked on the Pointe du Bois generating station. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the October 1913 vote authorizing the project to proceed was settled, the GWWD engineers set about the detailed design aided by J. H. Fuertes (a co-author of the Board of Consulting Engineers report) as an ongoing consultant. The first order of business was for the GWWD engineers to determine the final route selection so that the right of way could be established and the railway started. Doing so required more precise and extensive survey information than had been provided by Ruttan. Survey parties were dispatched with one important task, that being to establish a precise set of benchmarks. During the winter of 1913-1914, the survey parties accomplished the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 95 miles of precise levels,&lt;br /&gt;
* 362 miles of transit lines,&lt;br /&gt;
* 1,317 miles of levels, and &lt;br /&gt;
* 380 square miles of topography.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, some 12,000 ft of bore holes were made to assess the foundation conditions and determine the depths of muskeg. Anyone who has surveyed during a Manitoba winter with survey instruments of that era will recognize the accomplishment and appreciate the ordeal that those surveyors endured.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Billy Von Koen in his book Definition of the Engineering Method defines it as “the strategy for causing the best change in a poorly understood or uncertain situation within available resources.” There is little doubt that those engineers responsible for the implementation of the Winnipeg Aqueduct, in seeking to cause the best change, were faced with uncertain situations and finite resources. While they had access to the experiences of other aqueduct designers, they also had to deal with factors that were specific to the locality of the project and that were not well understood. There were two in particular. One was the issue of selecting the most all-round economical route for the conduit. The other was developing a design for the concrete mixture for use in the conduit utilizing the available local aggregates that would meet the necessary compressive strength, permeability, and durability requirements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Designing for the Terrain===&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; style=&amp;quot;float:right; margin-left:10px;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
|+Table 2: Slopes of the Winnipeg Aqueduct for Various Cross Sections &lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!Slope of Aqueduct!!Dimension of Section&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
!inches per 100 ft!!(Height x Width)&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.11||10’-9” x 9’-0’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.279||10’-9” x 9’-0”&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.300||8’-9” x 7’-45/8’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.382||8’-31/4” x 7’-0’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.480||7’-111/2” x 6’-81/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.600||7’-71/2” x 6’-51/4’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.684||7’-51/2” x 6’-31/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|0.744||7’-4” x 6’-21/2’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|1.290||6’-7” x 5’-61/8’’&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
|1.537||6’-41/2” x 5’-41/4’’&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The terrain between Shoal Lake and the prairie country just east of Winnipeg is treed, has a number of rivers, and contains some 80 km2 of muskeg or swamp. It is also for the most part uninhabited and did not lend itself to access or communication. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In approaching the route selection task, the GWWD engineers had available the preliminary design that was provided as part of the report from the Board of Consulting Engineers (Hering et al, 1913) that included details of typical conduit arch sections. With that information, and on-going refinements of the sections, curves were developed showing cost variations for typical aqueduct cross-sections based on depths of excavation and for a range of slopes. With that information available, field staff could make on-site decisions in choosing an alignment that would minimize the costs and the line length while striving to maintain the average slope of 0.57 ft per 1,000 ft of length. By that process, an alignment was established by March of 1914 on which over 30% of its length was very close to the average slope. The final average gradient was 0.62 ft per 1,000 ft at a length that was only 8% longer than the straight-line distance. Table 2 provides a listing of the slopes for each aqueduct cross section.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An early start to the railway was essential to the project, and once the route was decided, the right-of-way could be established and the railway construction could get underway. The right-of-way selected was generally 300 ft (91 m) wide with the railway located 40 ft (12 m) from the south boundary. At the easterly end, which had more construction challenges such as the depth of excavation, the width was increased to 500 ft (152 m).    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Concrete Mix Design===&lt;br /&gt;
The GWWD engineers were keenly aware of the effect that the amount of Portland cement used in a cubic yard of concrete would have on the cost of the project. Their awareness would have been heightened by the knowledge that cement in Canada cost 45% to 50% more than in the US or Great Britain. The cement component eventually selected for the aqueduct concrete, based on their testing program, was 430.5 lbs/cy (255 kg/m3) vs. 549.5 in the mixtures commonly used and recommended for watertight work by other authorities of the time. Chief Engineer Chace reported that the savings achieved by relying on the recommendations of the GWWD engineers were projected to be $350,000 for 400,000 cy (306,000 m3) of concrete. That savings figure was based on a 1915 cement cost of $0.0079 per pound. To put that in 2010 dollars, with cement then at $255 per metric tonne ($0.1158 per pound), the saving would be $5,500,000. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In achieving that economy, the GWWD engineers relied on their own methods. Knowing the sources of granular material available as due to the ongoing 1914 railway construction, and other exploratory work, they undertook an extensive program of analysis and testing of materials from those sources. The program consisted of five tests:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a mechanical analysis of the aggregates from the available natural deposits,&lt;br /&gt;
* the weight per cubic foot of the various gradations and combinations of materials,&lt;br /&gt;
* volumetric tests of the materials for density,&lt;br /&gt;
* tests for compression and tension of various sand-cement mortar mixtures,&lt;br /&gt;
* tests for both permeability and compression of concrete with various mix proportions of stone and sand when selected by using the data derived from the other tests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 2.jpg|thumb|upright=0.75|Figure 2: Permeability Testing Apparatus]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The testing program involved two lots of Portland cement, with the major difference between them being the time interval to final set after mixing. The cement used was manufactured locally by the Canada Cement Company Limited, which began production in Winnipeg in 1913. The specimens for the program were made from 28 distinct concrete mixes. There were 29 tests of permeability and 47 in compression.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The compression testing program, with specimens 8&amp;quot; (20 cm) in diameter and 16&amp;quot; (40 cm) long, seems to have followed standard procedures. However, the permeability test, if not unique, was at a minimum innovative. The concrete specimens were 13&amp;quot; (33 cm) in diameter and 14.5&amp;quot; (37 cm) long and cast with a small internal chamber connected to a metal injection pipe with an external water-stop. The test apparatus forced water into the chamber at a constant pressure with a gauge to measure the water entering the specimen with a means of measuring the amounts passing through the concrete, and a separate measure of any leakage from around the pipe used for the injection. A photo of the apparatus used in the test is shown in Figure 2.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a 1917 paper, the GWWD concluded from their testing program, ''“that with lean mixtures and the gravel materials available, the addition of fine sand would give the work contemplated impenetrable concrete of the desired strength.”'' Their opinion was borne out by tests of the performance of the completed conduit.  Chace also reported in that mixes adopted on the basis of those tests would develop ''“a strength of 2,800 pounds per square inch and a six-inch wall of concrete will be watertight against a hydrostatic pressure of 200 feet of head.”'' &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Cross Section Design===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 3.jpg|thumb|Figure 3: Test Sections Built in Winnipeg, Summer of 1914]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the work on the aggregate supply and the mix details was ongoing, the other step was to finalize the shape and dimensions of the conduit sections. As part of that process, test sections were built and loaded as shown in Figure 3. It is of interest to note that W.M. Scott, the contractor for the test sections, seems to have been the same W.M. Scott (an engineer) who sometime later became the Chief Commissioner of the GWWD. He was also later the President of the first Council (provisional) of the Association of Professional Engineers of the Province of Manitoba in 1920.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The cost significance of the volume of concrete to be incorporated in the project was also a priority. It was estimated that a one-inch increase in the sectional thickness would have cost $400,000. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 4.jpg|thumb|Figure 4: Chief Engineer W.G. Chace at a Typical Arch Section on an Invert]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 5.jpg|thumb|Figure 5: Circular Pressure Section, West End of Brokenhead River Slough]]&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 6.jpg|thumb|Figure 6: Method of Bending Reinforcing Steel]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The engineers were also cognizant of the durability of reinforcing steel should it become exposed to water through cracking of the concrete. With that in mind, they elected to use the unreinforced self-supporting arch type cross-section for the cut-and-cover portions that comprised most of the aqueduct. The arch rested on the edges of a previously cast invert section as seen in Figure 4. The invert had a circular concave upper surface with the radius of the curve somewhat greater than the height of the arch. As an example, the radius for a section with a 2.25 m interior height was 3.4 m. The term “invert” refers to the lowest point in the internal cross-section of an artificial channel, and is thought to have originated from describing an inverted arch. Ruttan et al comment on the function of an invert in the chosen system as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''&amp;quot;Although, as actually constructed, the side walls of the arch rest upon the ends of the invert, the greater part of the load, in a section like the one shown, may be assumed to be borne by those portions of the trench bottom directly beneath the side walls, because the central part of this relatively thin unreinforced type of invert is not considered to provide much in the way of support, but rather to serve merely as a firm water-tight bottom to the aqueduct.&amp;quot;''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
These typically unreinforced arch sections were configured such that, under all loading conditions, the concrete in the arch would be in compression and thereby resistant to cracking. The situations where reinforcing steel was required in the arch section are as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* at road crossings and undeveloped road allowances,&lt;br /&gt;
* for railway crossings, and&lt;br /&gt;
* in the arches where the weight of the backfill material was so light that there was a risk of deformation from outward ground water pressure and separation from the invert. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In each of those cases the concrete thickness was increased to protect the steel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the conduit crossed a river as a siphon, it was under internal pressure, and as the concrete would then be in hoop tension, those sections were reinforced with steel and the wall sections thickened for protection purposes. The same treatment was used for the 6.7 km cast-in-place pressure section east of the Deacon Reservoir location. The circular sections were also built in two castings with the edges of the invert section thicker than the nominal thickness in the upper portion. The reinforcing steel was circular and crossed the construction joint where the steel was lapped. Figure 5 shows one end of a circular section.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Aside from its cost, the use of reinforcing steel was an issue because at the time it did not come prefabricated. It was manufactured and delivered as a straight twisted square bar that had to be bent on site. Figure 6 shows an example of the bending process.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Falcon River Dike and Diversion===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 7.jpg|thumb|Figure 7: Construction of the Falcon River Dike (GWWD No. 84)]]&lt;br /&gt;
As previously noted the Falcon River drains much of the muskeg area west of Indian Bay, and had a brown colour. The dike and channel that diverted the water of the Falcon River to Snowshoe Bay was built to dilute that water with the much clearer, greater Shoal Lake water (see Figure 1).  In that way before the diverted water could reach the intake of the aqueduct, it would have to make its way around the promontory and back into Indian Bay – a distance of 14 km. No doubt the opportunity of the diversion scheme was recognized because of the topographical work and soundings undertaken by City Engineer Ruttan’s staff in 1912 and early 1913. The alternative to the diversion would have been to extend the aqueduct considerably further into Shoal Lake so that it accessed unaffected water. The District’s cost for the dike and diversion work was $147,000. In a paper, Fuertes indicated that the cost to extend the aqueduct a further 8 km would have been $1,000,000.  Figure 7 provides an indication of the scope of the dike construction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 8.jpg|thumb|Figure 8: Falcon River Diversion Channel Excavation]]&lt;br /&gt;
The dike was built using the scow and bridge method. Significantly, as shown by the date on the photo, it was built before the GWWD railway reached Indian Bay. Figure 8 shows excavation of the diversion channel in 1915.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Intake Works===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 9.jpg|thumb|Figure 9: Intake Structure Before Flooding]]&lt;br /&gt;
The designers located the intake structure in a rock outcrop on the shore of Indian Bay adjacent to the north end of the dike.  Gathering dikes extend into the lake and a concrete structure in the rock cut controls the water entering the aqueduct. The structure includes the usual gates, trash screens, and stop log provisions that one might expect. Two features are noteworthy. The first is that the designers provided dual entrance chambers, each with its own screens and stop log facilities. In that way, one can be isolated for maintenance while the other was providing water to the aqueduct. The second feature had to do with preventing cold air from entering the system in the winter. The lower edge of the front wall of the structure, which is the top of the water opening, was constructed 1.9 m below the lake’s lowest level. In that way, it was below the bottom of the ice and cold air could not enter the system, thereby preventing the formation of ice in the intake.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The capacity of the intake structure was 85,000,000 gpd (386,400,000 L/d) at low water level. Chace suggested that at the high water level of Lake of the Woods established by the IJC in 1917, the intake could accommodate 100,000,000 gpd (454,600,000 L/d). Figure 9 shows the completed intake structure before flooding. The operating water level would be below the letters in the photo at a distance of approximately one and one-half times the height of those letters.  To put the capacities of the intake and the aqueduct in perspective, the peak levels of water ever used by Winnipeg was 300,000,000 L/d (66,000,000 gpd) in 1988. That was just less than 500 litres per person per day. Since then, through the City’s water conservation program, that figure has been reduced, and in 2000, it was approximately 380 litres (84 gallons) per person per day. There is still plenty of unused capacity in the Winnipeg Aqueduct.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Red River Valley Siphon===&lt;br /&gt;
From a point approximately 27 km east of Winnipeg (Mile 17) to the McPhillips Reservoir, the aqueduct is designed as an inverted siphon, which means that the entire length of conduit is under pressure.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This siphon was by no means of a constant configuration. A significant change point was at the site of the future Deacon Reservoir. The other change point was at the crossing of the Red River.  The section from the east end, “Mile 17”, to the Deacon Reservoir is an 8' (2.4 m) diameter round cast-in-place reinforced concrete pipe. The section from the Deacon reservoir to the Red River is a 5'-6&amp;quot; (1.7 m) “Lock Joint” precast concrete pipe. The crossing of the Red River is a 5ft (1.5 m) diameter cast iron pipe, and the section from the Red River to the McPhillips Reservoir is a 4 ft (1.2 m) diameter Lock Joint precast concrete pipe.   The section between Deacon and the Red River incorporated the service connections to supply some of the partners in the GWWD: Transcona, St. Vital, St. Boniface, and Fort Garry. The section west of the Red River included a service connection to supply the James Avenue High Pressure Pumping Station, eliminating the need for Red River water.  While there was an overflow provision at the east end of the siphon (Mile 17), the only pressure relief facility in the entire siphon section itself, as initially constructed, was a surge tank with a weir on the east side of the Red River.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Red River Crossing====&lt;br /&gt;
The crossing of the Red River is a siphon within a siphon.  The conduit crosses the river in the limestone bedrock some 24m below the banks and 6m below the river bottom.  The core drilling that established the depth and nature of the rock was one of the earlier contracts tendered by the District. One presumes that the engineers were comfortable with the resulting information as the reports of the Chief Engineer in the minutes of the Administration Board meetings do not mention concerns.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, the conduit is a cast iron pipe. The configuration is a vertical section on each river bank built in a shaft and a horizontal section built in a tunnel in the rock. The 16m vertical shafts were 5 m in diameter and lined with a 600 mm reinforced concrete wall. The upper portion serves as housing for the valving system. The annular space for the portion below the valve house floor down to the bedrock was backfilled with gravel. The tunnel for the horizontal section was nominally 3 m by 3 m and the pipe was centred on that opening. The cast iron pipe sections were specially fabricated so that they could be caulked from within. The material used for the caulking was hemp and lead. Once the cast iron pipe had been finished the space between the rock and the pipe was filled with concrete. Remarkably, this section has functioned since 1918 without ever being dewatered.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Red River Siphon and Surge Tank====&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aqueduct 10.jpg|thumb|Figure 10: Red River Crossing Surge Tank]]&lt;br /&gt;
Perhaps the most vital component of the Red River siphon system is the surge tank located on the east side of the Red River adjacent to the river crossing on the corner of Tache Avenue and Rue Messager. It is also the most visible in that it stands the equivalent of a four-story building above the ground level. Figure 10 provides a view of its external structure in 2010.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, the design of the tank provided the only pressure relief and overflow facility on the Red River siphon. That is significant because the inlet to the McPhillips Reservoir was controlled by valves which could have been inadvertently closed. Chace noted that “it must be kept in mind that there is ''(water)'' flowing constantly west of Mile 17 at considerable velocity a solid volume of water of huge weight. It is a serious matter to suddenly disturb the rate of flow of such a body of water.” As such, since the rate of flow out of the McPhillips reservoir would vary many times during the day, any excess arriving at the reservoir had to be accommodated. The engineers’ solution was that reinforced concrete surge tank designed to serve two purposes.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
They were, overflow to relieve pressure caused by too much water entering the siphon at Mile 17, and to spill the excess that might be created at the entrance of the McPhillips Reservoir. To do that, a closed circular structure was built with a concentric internal circular weir. The lip of the weir was at a fixed elevation. In that way, it spilled the excess water from either or both of the two causes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The supply line from Deacon enters the base of the structure in a chamber at the bottom of the internal weir and a separate line leaves the chamber to bring water to the cast iron line that crosses the Red River. Both these lines are under pressure with the maximum head determined by the lip elevation of the weir. That elevation was about 9m above the ground line or 14m above the centre line elevation of the two pipelines. To collect the water that spilled over the weir, a second concentric wall of the same height was built outside of the weir wall leaving an annular space of 760mm. The excess water collected in that space was then taken away by a drainage line that discharged into the nearby Red River. Primarily for protecting the system from frost and secondarily for aesthetic reasons, the wall was faced with brick as is shown in Figure 10.  Significantly, there was no valve between the 1.7 m incoming line and the surge tank. In that way, the pressure in the siphon to the east of the Red River could not be inadvertently increased to the point where it would damage the line. The system was operated so that there was always some water flowing over the weir.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The structural features are also notable. Given the need to ensure that the pressure relief system would never have to be taken out of service, structural integrity was important. Unlike with the conduit, it seems to have been designed on the principle of “no risk.” The base of the structure was supported on a series of caissons under the walls, excavated to the bedrock. On top of the caissons were grillages made of steel beams and four steel beams spanned from grillage to grillage around the base. The entire system was then encased in concrete. The concrete too was heavily reinforced once again using twisted square bars like those in some of the main aqueduct sections.  This time, however, the drawings included bending diagrams for the reinforcing steel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Conclusion==&lt;br /&gt;
The engineers, administrators, and contractors on the Winnipeg Aqueduct executed a unique project that is remarkable for its scope and its lasting ability to serve the needs of The City of Winnipeg. In so doing they were confronted with and overcame unique physical and environmental conditions using creative design, testing and construction processes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The project was completed on time and quite close to budget by December of 1918. However, because of a concern that there might be an adverse effect on the industrial boilers in the City due to the change from hard to soft water during the height of the heating season, the changeover was delayed. Water started to flow into the McPhillips Reservoir on March 29, 1919.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Key Players==&lt;br /&gt;
* Charles S. Slichter – consulting engineer &lt;br /&gt;
* James H. Fuertes – consulting engineer (New York) &lt;br /&gt;
* Hugh A. Robson (Judge) – Public Works Commissioner, Province of Manitoba &lt;br /&gt;
* James H. Ashdown (Mayor of Winnipeg) &lt;br /&gt;
* Thomas Russell Deacon (Mayor of Winnipeg) &lt;br /&gt;
* William  G. Chace – Chief Engineer, GWWD &lt;br /&gt;
* Douglas L. McLean – Assistant to Chief Engineer, GWWD  &lt;br /&gt;
* Henry N. Ruttan – Winnipeg City Engineer – later a consultant; also General and Commanding Officer of Military District NO. 10&lt;br /&gt;
* John G. Sullivan – CPR – also a consultant  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==National Recognition==&lt;br /&gt;
The project was recognized by the '''Canadian Society for Civil Engineering''' as a ''National Historic Civil Engineering Site'' with a plaque and ceremony in 1994. The project was identified as one of the many significant historic civil engineering achievements within Canada.  The plaque serves to preserve the heritage of the people of Canada, and in esteem of the civil engineers and others who worked alongside them on projects such as this. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994 Shoal Lake Aquaduct CSCE National Historic Site.jpg|thumb|none|500px|CSCE National Historic Civil Engineering Site Monument]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Reference - https://cscehistory.ca/national/red-river-floodway-winnipeg-mb/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Supplemental Information Sources==&lt;br /&gt;
The lead up to the concept and the political process that brought the aqueduct about is documented in the thesis “Developing a domestic water supply for Winnipeg from Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods: the Greater Winnipeg Water District Aqueduct, 1905 – 1919” http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457, and in the Manitoba Historical Society’s Journal article Pressure to Act: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (No. 72, Spring-Summer 2013) http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/72/aqueduct.shtml. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additional and more detailed engineering information is provided at http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457 and in the Manitoba Historical Society’s Journal article Not All Down Hill From There: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District (No. 75 Summer 2014) http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/75/aqueduct.shtml &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
===Printed===&lt;br /&gt;
# Canadian Public Works Association Manitoba Chapter (CPWA). 2000. Greater Winnipeg Water District’s Shoal Lake Aqueduct Nomination for the American Public Works Association’s Top Ten Public Works Projects of the 20th Century. Winnipeg MB: Self Published.&lt;br /&gt;
# Chace W.G., M.V. Sauer. 1917a. The aqueduct for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers. Volume XXX Part II: 375-395.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace W.G., D.L. McLean. 1917b. Studies regarding concrete mixtures employed in the work: Supplement to the aqueduct for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers. Volume XXX Part II: 396-424.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. 1917c. Sands and consistency of concrete. The Canadian Engineer 33: 282&lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. Chace. 1920a. Construction features of the water works of the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Volume VII: 931-949. &lt;br /&gt;
# Chace, W.G. 1920b. Notes and Instructions for the Guidance of the Staff Responsible for the Care and Operation of Aqueduct Supplying Water to the Communities Comprising the Greater Winnipeg Water District. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department. &lt;br /&gt;
# Cherney, B. 2009. 90th anniversary of Shoal Lake aqueduct — first phase was construction of GWWD Railway. Winnipeg Real Estate News, October 16, 2009. www.winnipegrealestatenews.com/Editorials.aspx?id=968 (2010/11/29) &lt;br /&gt;
# Fuertes, James H. 1920. The basic principles used in the designs for the new water supply works of Winnipeg Manitoba. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Volume VII: 693-748. &lt;br /&gt;
# Greater Winnipeg Water District. 1918. Aqueduct Construction Scheme: What it Is What It Means. Winnipeg MB: Telegram Job Printers Ltd. &lt;br /&gt;
# Herring, R., F. P. Stearns and J. H. Fuertes. 1913. Report on a water supply from Shoal Lake for the Greater Winnipeg Water District. New York NY: Stovel Company Limited Winnipeg. &lt;br /&gt;
# Landon, C.S. 1918. The Greater Winnipeg Water District. The Canadian Engineer. 34: 290-301, 315-317.  &lt;br /&gt;
# Library and Archives Canada, Canada. n.d. Mining Lands &amp;amp; Yukon Branch of the Department of the Interior, File 116619     &lt;br /&gt;
# Mclean, D.L. 1919. Earth Slides in Winnipeg Aqueduct Construction. The Canadian Engineer. 37: 469-471.&lt;br /&gt;
# Prodan C.S. 1979. The building of the Winnipeg Aqueduct. Manitoba Pageant. www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/pageant/24/winnipegaqueduct.shtml  &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N. 1909. Winnipeg’s water works: Visit to the City water works High Pressure Plant and artesian well system. British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1-8. Winnipeg, MB.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N. 1913. Untitled report to the Mayor and City Council of Winnipeg dated May 8, 1913. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.  &lt;br /&gt;
# Ruttan, H.N., J.G. Sullivan and R.S. Lea. 1916. Report on the Aqueduct of the Greater Winnipeg Water District by the Special Board of Consulting Engineers. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.   &lt;br /&gt;
# Scott, W. M. 1938. The Water Supply of Greater Winnipeg. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Vol. 30 No. 11: 1872-1885. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.&lt;br /&gt;
# Scott, W. M. n.d. The Water Supply of The Greater Winnipeg Water District. Unbound paper labelled as presented at a meeting of the American Water Works Association in March, 1938. Winnipeg MB: The City of Winnipeg Water and Waste Department.&lt;br /&gt;
# Shoal Lake Watershed Working Group. 2002. Shoal Lake Watershed Management Plan. Manitoba Water Stewardship, Winnipeg MB. www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/water_quality/quality/shoal_lake_wsmp.html (2010/12/28)&lt;br /&gt;
# Shropshire, L. 1994 (January 7). Mayor Battles Critics. Winnipeg Real Estate News. Winnipeg MB: self published. &lt;br /&gt;
# Siamandas, G. n.d. Winnipeg’s Shoal Lake Aqueduct. timemachine.siamandas.com/PAGES/winnipeg_stories/SHOAL_LAKE_AQUEDUCT.htm (2011/02/7)  &lt;br /&gt;
# Slichter, C.S. 1912. The Water Supply of the City of Winnipeg to Public Utilities Commissioner, Province of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB. &lt;br /&gt;
# The Canadian Engineer. 1917. Winnipeg Aqueduct Excavation. The Canadian Engineer. 32: 149-151.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Web links related to the topic===&lt;br /&gt;
# University of Manitoba – MSpace - Developing a domestic water supply for Winnipeg from Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods: the Greater Winnipeg Water District Aqueduct, 1905 – 1919 https://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/4457 Accessed December 17, 2016.&lt;br /&gt;
# Manitoba History No. 72, Spring-Summer 2013. Pressure to Act: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/72/aqueduct.shtml Accessed December 19, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# Manitoba History No. 75, Summer 2014. Not All Down Hill From There: The Shoal Lake Aqueduct and the Greater Winnipeg Water District http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/75/aqueduct.shtml Accessed December 19, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# Aqueduct: Colonialism, Resources, and the Histories We Remember, Adele Perry; ARP Books, Winnipeg Manitoba. http://arpbooks.org/books/detail/aqueduct Accessed December 19, 2016 &lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - http://www.winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/water/shoalLake.stm Accessed December 18, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - http://www.winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/dept/railway.stm Accessed December 18, 2016&lt;br /&gt;
# City of Winnipeg - http://winnipeg.ca/waterandwaste/water/freedomRoad.stm &lt;br /&gt;
# The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering (through Ryerson University) http://www.ryerson.ca/~amackenz/history/national/w.html Accessed December 17, 2016.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Whiteshell_Laboratories_-_Nuclear_Research&amp;diff=2832</id>
		<title>Whiteshell Laboratories - Nuclear Research</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Whiteshell_Laboratories_-_Nuclear_Research&amp;diff=2832"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T22:00:34Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: /* References */ Updated link from apegm.mb.ca to enggeomb.ca&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;big&amp;gt;{{FULLPAGENAME}}&amp;lt;/big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/big&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/big&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Introduction==&lt;br /&gt;
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) established a role in Manitoba in 1963 when the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment (WNRE; later renamed Whiteshell Laboratories) first took shape. WNRE was Canada’s second nuclear science research and development laboratory and the first facility of its kind in western Canada. Through its years of operation, the people of the WNRE made significant contributions to the science and engineering knowledge of Canada’s nuclear industry. This article highlights just a few of these many accomplishments.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whiteshell Laboratories contribution to nuclear engineering progress in Canada has been impressive. Although this article does not include all of the contributions that have been made over the past 50 years, it does illustrate the depth and breathe of the engineering accomplishments that have made Manitoba an important part of the Canada’s nuclear engineering family. As the industry moves forward, these contributions are expected to continue, particularly in the areas of facility decommissioning and waste storage technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Whiteshell2.jpg|thumb|300px|centre|Whiteshell Laboratories]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==In the Beginning==&lt;br /&gt;
In the late 1950s AECL’s managers thought Chalk River Laboratories (CRL) was nearing the saturation point. A quick survey indicated that three provinces were lacking federal research facilities: Newfoundland, Alberta and Manitoba. Newfoundland, it was felt was not an option at the time, having joined Canada less than ten years previously in 1949. Alberta had no need of atomic energy, blessed as it was with abundant oil and gas. So it would be Manitoba.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Whiteshell 1.jpg|thumb|Whiteshell Nuclear Reasearch Establishment in 1965]] &lt;br /&gt;
AECL wanted this new research laboratory to develop the organically cooled reactor.  A preliminary survey went forward under the supervision of Shawinigan Engineering. AECL president J.L. Gray journeyed to Manitoba to meet with premier Duff Roblin. In November, 1959, he reported progress to the board: a probable site near the Seven Sisters Falls on the Winnipeg River; and an opinion by the federal government's housing agency that a new town would be developed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:WR1-Drawing.jpg|thumb|left|Whiteshell Reactor No. 1]] &lt;br /&gt;
Negotiations with Manitoba were complicated. The new research centre would not be costless for the province. It would have to look after some of the infrastructure, such as roads and a bridge across the Winnipeg River, as well as housekeeping details. With help from the federal government, an agreement was approved by cabinet on July 21, 1960 and the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment (WNRE) was born. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Final agreement was reached on joint facilities, between AECL and Manitoba, just as the company was finalizing their plans for demonstrating organic cooled reactors.  It was called simply OTR for Organic Test Reactor. A design would be ready for the start of the construction season in April 1962.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Whiteshell Reactor #1 – A Manitoba Milestone==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Early Whiteshell.jpg|thumb|Construction in 1965]] &lt;br /&gt;
The Whiteshell Reactor #1 (WR-1), WNRE’s signature facility, was built starting in 1962.  The 60 Megawatt reactor was designed and built by Canadian General Electric for $14.5 million in only three years. By June 1965, WR-1 was substantially complete.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
WR-1 was built to test the concept of using an organic fluid to cool the reactor. The expected advantage was that they   they can operate hotter and at lower pressures than water-cooled reactors. This was because the organic coolant had a lower vapour pressure than water.   Higher operating temperatures increase the thermal efficiency of the attached turbine system (the amount of electricity produced divided by the amount of heat produced in the reactor core). Lower pressures reduce maintenance costs and pressure vessel design requirements. It allowed WR-1 designers to use thinner-walled pressure tubes, which reduced the number of neutrons absorbed in the tubes, giving the reactor a high neutron flux.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:calandria.jpg|thumb|Installing the Reactor Vessel]]   &lt;br /&gt;
The reactor had vertical fuel channels. Neutrons were moderated by heavy water in a large calandria vessel surrounding the fuel channels.  This calandria was a stainless steel tank approximately 5 m high and 2.75 m in diameter. Fifty-four aluminum tubes penetrate the calandria vessel. Pressure tubes, which contained the fuel and circulating organic coolant, were located inside these calandria tubes.  The fuel was compacted and sintered uranium dioxide, slightly enriched to provide a useful neutron flux (2.4% U-235 in natural uranium, clad in zirconium-2.5% niobium alloy).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:transfer flask.jpg|thumb|left|WR-1's Fuel Transfer Flask]] &lt;br /&gt;
The vessel was divided into an upper and lower section.  The upper section contained the fuel and, when the reactor was operating, the heavy water moderator.  The lower section contained helium gas and collected the moderator spillage from the upper section. The reactor control system maintained the moderator level in the upper section by varying the differential helium pressure between the two reactor sections. When the reactor tripped, the helium gas pressure in the lower section was equalized with the upper section allowing the lower section to rapidly receive the moderator from the upper section and drain to the moderator dump tank.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The annuli between the fuel channels and the calandria tubes were purged with CO2 gas to insulate the hot fuel channels from the moderator.  Sampling of the CO2 gas provided a means of detecting moderator or organic coolant leaks between the fuel channel and calandria tube.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactor was surrounded by heavy concrete shielding (&amp;gt; 2 m thick), which formed the reactor vault walls.  Heavy concrete (density of 3,500 kg/m3) was also used in the vicinity of the upper and lower access rooms and the shutdown shields.  Stepped pipe chases through the concrete provided access for heavy water and helium lines and for the reactor vault exhaust duct.  There were also three penetrations for the ion chambers.  The inner surfaces of the concrete walls were cooled by embedded cooling coils.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Wr-1-colour.jpg|thumb|left|Whiteshell's WR-1 Reactor]]  &lt;br /&gt;
The top deck plates provide an operational shield between the upper access space and the reactor hall.  The deck plates also supported the fuel transfer flask and provided the necessary radiation shielding during fuelling operations.  It consisted of two rotating plates and an outer stationary ring.  The plates were comprised of cast steel (0.45 m thick) topped by wood fibre hardboard (Masonite; 9 cm thick) and a steel cover plate (0.5 cm thick).  The inner (small) rotating plate was supported by the large rotating plate on large ball bearings.  The large plate was similarly supported on the stationary outer ring, which, in turn, was supported by the shielding walls of the upper access space.  The rotating plates were driven by pinion gears located on the stationary ring and on the large rotating plate, which meshed with gears located at the outer periphery of the large and small rotating plates, respectively.  The small rotating plate had two holes for fuelling operations and periscope viewing in the upper access space.&lt;br /&gt;
  &lt;br /&gt;
The Primary Heat Transport System (PHT) was designed to remove the heat produced in the reactor core.  The system was divided into three circuits.  The removed heat was dissipated to the Winnipeg River through three conventional tube-and-shell heat exchangers. River water was used as the secondary coolant.  The PHT system had three similar circuits to achieve flexibility for experimental research.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:WR01 Control Room.jpg|thumb|WR-1 Control Room]]  &lt;br /&gt;
To the outside world the most noticeable feature of the WR-1 reactor was the ventilation stack.   The stack was known as the &amp;quot;stank&amp;quot; - a combination emergency coolant tank and ventilation stack.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Control Room 2.jpg|thumb|WR-1 Operations: Dick Meeker and Phil Roy]]&lt;br /&gt;
The WR-1 reactor was housed in a building that had 7 floors, 5 of which were below grade.  The building was divided into two areas: the lower 4 levels (with restricted access) contained shutdown reactor components, while the upper 3 floors provided office space or laboratory space for experimental programs.  The reliability of the WR-1 safety systems was achieved by means of instrument triplication, parameter duplication and frequent testing.  Each trip parameter was monitored by three independent sets of instrumentation.  Used fuel, irradiated fuel channels and equipment could be safely transferred from the reactor to water-filled storage facilities.  After the fuel or equipment had been cleaned or decayed sufficiently, it would be transferred to long-term site storage.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Experimental Loops==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Control Room 3.jpg|thumb|Frank Orvec and Alex Robertson in WR-1 Control Room]]&lt;br /&gt;
A unique feature of WR-1 was its four experimental loops and one out-of-reactor hydraulic test loop.  Each in-reactor loop consisted of a fuelled test section in a reactor lattice position and piping equipment and instrumentation in an adjacent loop room to maintain required operating conditions of flow, pressure and temperature in the test section.  A fuel position was converted to a loop by disconnecting the inlet and outlet feeders from the PHT and connecting the feeders to the loop inlet and outlet piping. The out-of-reactor hydraulic test facility was capable of handling full-sized fuel channels and fuel assemblies.  The loop consisted of a circulation pump, a pressurizing pump, three test sections, three electric heaters, a make-up tank/degassifier, a condenser circuit, a purification circuit, a loop cooler, piping and instrumentation.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==November 1, 1965 – Manitoba History==&lt;br /&gt;
WR-1 commissioning proceeded smoothly. As might be expected with a new reactor design, some modifications were required in the pre-critical phase to make the various systems function as intended. For example, to prevent gas-locking of the moderator pumps during a moderator dump, it was necessary to extend the discharge pipe across the dump tank and install baffles to keep the entrained helium from the pump inlet. It was also necessary to re-route the ion-chamber cables to eliminate false signals due to &amp;quot;cross-talk&amp;quot; from the crane control circuitry. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:WR1 Team.jpg|thumb|AECL’s WR-1 Commissioning and Operations Team - Frank Oravec, Del Tegert, Jim Biggs, Bernie Gordon, Bernie Pannell, Vinny McCarthy, Grant Unsworth, Mickey Donnelly, Art Summach, Dick Meeker, Roy Barnsdale, Mike Barry, Al Nelson, Wilf Campbell, and Larry Gauthier]]&lt;br /&gt;
WR-1 went critical on November 1, 1965. The start-up was smooth and uneventful; the low-power commissioning continued throughout the month, with WR-1 operating almost continuously at 0.01% of full power. This allowed for measurements of nuclear coefficients, neutron fluxes, coolant dosimetry, and regulating-system performance. The main problems encountered during high-power commissioning of WR-1 were difficulties in obtaining satisfactory response from the automatic temperature control system, and in obtaining satisfactory performance from the thermal power control system. The use of standard- modules in a relatively complex control circuit proved to be unsatisfactory, and many were replaced by higher quality versions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Going Critical.jpg|thumb|left|Whiteshell’s WR-1 Reactor Goes Critical in 1965]]&lt;br /&gt;
WR-l operators concluded that the commissioning and operating of an organic cooled reactor was more trouble-free and straightforward than that of a pressurized-water-cooled system. They attributed this to two characteristics of the organic system: high coolant-outlet temperature was attainable with relatively low operating pressure in the primary system, and the radiation fields near the primary piping, feeders and headers were very low, minimizing the problems of access to these areas for normal operation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:AT the Controls.jpg|thumb|WR-1 Operator Bernie Pannell at the Controls, with Jim Biggs and Warner Brown on November 1, 1965]]&lt;br /&gt;
With WR-1 operating well, there was considerable incentive to make improvements that would demonstrate the feasibility of a CANDU-based Organically Cooled Reactor (OCR), provide better conditions for experimenters and lower the fueling costs. Towards this goal a number of changes were made in 1975, including:&lt;br /&gt;
*the stainless-steel pressure tubes (relatively high absorbers of neutrons) were all replaced by zirconium-alloy tubes, &lt;br /&gt;
*a third organic primary coolant circuit was added to service seventeen of the remaining sites, which were then commissioned as fuel sites. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
WR-1 operated with uranium dioxide driver fuel from start-up in 1965 until 1973, when uranium dioxide was gradually phased out in favour of uranium carbide fuel.  The overall average string burn-up for all the uranium-dioxide fuel irradiated in WR-1 (about 1,100 bundles) was 128 MWh/kgU, which satisfied the original target of 120 MWh/kgU. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Experimental irradiations of uranium-carbide fuel started in 1966, and in 1973 the irradiation of uranium carbide as the reactor-driver fuel, in quantities sufficient to obtain statistical information, commenced. Conversion of WR-1 to uranium-carbide driver fuel was completed by the end of 1977. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The performance of the uranium-carbide fuel was excellent both from the viewpoint of burn-up achieved and failure rate. Average burn-up of the first 125 bundles retired was 253 MWh/ kgU, (original target burn-up was 240 MWh/ kgU). Not only was the failure frequency low, but the consequences of failure were not serious. It was found that while activity releases were high enough to detect failure, they remained low for a long enough period (six weeks or more) to continue operation of the failed fuel until the next scheduled shutdown before removing it. One identified problem was hydrogen migration to the bundle end plates that caused their embrittlement, and six bundles had to be retired due to end-plate breakage during shuffling operations. The problem was solved by using larger hydrogen-sink volumes in the end-plate region. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
WR-1 was a most useful research facility, testing experimental fuels, reactor materials, and other coolants for 20 years. The reactor was a busy place, usually working around the clock.  It had an availability of 85% over its lifetime, which was exceptionally high for a research reactor.    &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
WR­1 was shut down for the last time on May 17, 1985, its place in history secured as the world's only operating heavy water-moderated reactor cooled by an organic fluid. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nuclear Safety Research – Another Contribution to Nuclear Engineering==&lt;br /&gt;
The safety of nuclear reactors has been a matter of major interest from the beginning of Canada's nuclear program. CANDU power plant design and the related safety philosophy have evolved in parallel and continue to evolve today. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the early days (the late fifties and early sixties) of the nuclear power program, safety analysis dealt mainly with the consequences of the failure of individual critical process systems and/or pieces of equipment, as identified during the design process. However, as the program developed and the plants became larger, more attention was paid to dual failures, situations that could occur much less frequently but could have much greater consequences.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Reactor safety R&amp;amp;D programs all over the world expanded greatly in the seventies, and concentrated more and more on investigating the consequences of low-frequency, worst-case accident scenarios. This thrust for more detailed safety analysis tended to be self-ratcheting; i.e., the more detailed the model, the more questions that are raised, requiring more R&amp;amp;D to answer them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
From the outset, the objectives of the CANDU reactor safety R&amp;amp;D program was to develop a thorough understanding of the phenomena that might occur during reactor accidents, and to develop and verify the mathematical simulations used in the plant safety analyses. Whiteshell staff focused on:&lt;br /&gt;
===Reactor Corrosion and Activity Transport=== &lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Hot cells.jpg|thumb|Fuel Testing at Whiteshell in the 1970s]]&lt;br /&gt;
Perhaps the most important concerns related to safety in any reactor are the fraction of the fission products that will escape from the fuel during an accident, and where they will go. Thus, from the beginning, an important part of the safety R&amp;amp;D program has been to investigate how fission products escape from the uranium oxide fuel matrix and how they migrate throughout the plant.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A program was started at Whiteshell in the mid-1970s to study iodine and cesium compounds and their stability. The kinetics of the relevant thermodynamic relationships were derived and incorporated into a computer code. The subsequent analysis showed that under accident conditions iodine and cesium combine to form cesium iodide and cesium hydroxide. Since these salts dissolve in water, and water-cooled reactors (such as AECL’s CANDU) had plenty of water present during an accident, only a small fraction of these fission products should be released to the atmosphere. The results of this work explained the fission-product behaviour observed during the Three Mile Island accident. It is now believed that even in a worst-case accident the majority of the fission products that would escape from the fuel would be dissolved in water and that any release to the environment would be extremely small. In addition, all CANDU plants have well-engineered, highly reliable containment systems.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Fuel Behaviour=== &lt;br /&gt;
In the early years of nuclear power development, little was known about the behaviour of power reactor fuel of the CANDU design at any level of irradiation. At that time, the research programs were directed at obtaining a basic understanding of fuel behaviour under normal operating conditions and establishing limits for safe operation of the fuel. Again, the question was asked how fuels would react in accident conditions. In series of tests at Whiteshell in the 1970s, CANDU fuel bundles were heated in vacuum to up to 1600oC to study their mechanical behaviour at elevated temperatures. In these tests the bundles slumped into contact with the pressure tube and bundle elements slumped into contact with their neighbours. However, there were no sheath failures and the bundle end-plate’s end-cap welds remained intact.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Thermal Hydraulics=== &lt;br /&gt;
One of the most important safety-related issues was the rate of coolant loss from the Primary Heat Transfer (PHT) system in the event of a major pipe break. A unique feature of the CANDU design was the flow-distribution headers. Flow stratification in the headers could affect the distribution to the feeders during emergency coolant injection. To investigate this effect, a full-scale header facility representative of the reactor in Pickering, Ontario, was constructed at Whiteshell in 1974. In this facility, which had 110 feeder pipes, the header temperature could be brought to the desired value using electrical heaters, and water injection was initiated using a quick-acting valve. During coolant injection the liquid level and pressure were measured at several positions along the header, and feeder flow rates were monitored, for a range of conditions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To test the model used in the overall plant simulation, a series of experiments were performed at Whiteshell in the early 1970s. These tests explored: &lt;br /&gt;
*steady-state operating parameters with both single-phase (water) and two--phase (steam plus water) flow conditions at the primary side inlet;&lt;br /&gt;
*boiler water level;&lt;br /&gt;
*secondary-side steam/water ratio; &lt;br /&gt;
*recirculation flow rate, in response to changes in the primary and secondary circuit conditions; and&lt;br /&gt;
*the characteristics of the flow oscillations within individual boiler tubes operating with two-phase inlet conditions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All of these separate-effects tests greatly improved understanding of what might occur during an accident. However, to check the complete analysis code, integrated tests were required. The first such test was performed in the RD-4 facility at Whiteshell, built by 1974. This was a small-scale recirculating water loop containing two pumps, two tubular heated sections (to simulate fuel channels), and two heat exchangers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The RD-4 facility was succeeded in 1977 by the much larger RD-12 facility, which had heated sections four metres long with electrically heated elements to simulate the fuel. This facility also had recirculating U-tube type boilers, with an interacting secondary circuit and a much wider range of operation than RD-4.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A pressurized cold-water injection system was also provided, to supply water simultaneously to the four headers when the loop pressure fell below a preset value, thereby simulating a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) with emergency coolant injection. The experimental program included tests with various pipe-break sizes, located at different points in the loop circuit, various cold-water injection pressures, and several modes of boiler cooling. In all of these experiments detailed measurements were made to determine coolant flow rate, pressure, temperature and density distribution throughout the loop, as well as fuel-element surface temperatures, and differential pressures across various loop components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The RD-12 facility was followed in 1983 by an even larger facility, called RD-14, which was a model of a primary coolant loop with the various components arranged to reproduce the gravitational effects in a CANDU plant. It consisted of two full-scale, full-power (6 MW each) fuel channels, each containing a full-length 37-element, electrically-heated bundle to simulate the fuel, plus full-size feeders and two full-height steam generators, all arranged in the CANDU figure-eight configuration. The steam generators had full-size U-tubes, but the number of tubes was reduced in proportion to the number of heated channels, to give the correct heat transfer area per fuel channel. The loop was designed so that fluid mass-flow rate, transit times and pressure/enthalpy terms in the primary system of the loop were the same as those in a typical CANDU under both forced- and natural-circulation conditions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:RD-14M.jpg|thumb|RD-14M Loop]]&lt;br /&gt;
The RD-14M Facility was established in 1984. The experiments performed there simulated the behaviour of the entire primary heat transport system of a reactor. RD-14M was the key facility needed in the safety analysis for the licensing of CANDU reactors. The facility was one of the largest of its kind in the world, with an overall height of about 34 m. It was used to investigate many LOCA related phenomena, such as:&lt;br /&gt;
*blowdown tests for many different pipe break sizes, including the critical break size, where the pressure difference across the reactor core becomes close to zero, resulting in a stagnant flow condition in the fuel channels for an extended period (tens of seconds); and&lt;br /&gt;
*two-phase thermo syphoning tests, to study the situation that would arise from a loss of the coolant pumps, or during small-break LOCAs, where the fuel channels are cooled mainly by natural circulation. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Many useful results were obtained from the tests done with the RD-14 and RD-14M facilities and these were used to refine and verify the computer codes. The results of these tests showed that for all LOCAs, of any break size, with or without power to the coolant pumps, fuel sheath temperature would not exceed about 600oC, hence fuel should not fail, as long as the emergency coolant system was available. RD-14M remains operational today and is supporting both operating plants and new CANDU designs.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nuclear Waste Disposal Research and the Underground Research Laboratory==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:url.jpg|thumb|]]&lt;br /&gt;
In the early 1970s nuclear power stations were operating well in Canada but the social climate had changed. There was significant public opposition to nuclear power and one of the major focuses of this opposition was nuclear wastes. Critics claimed that there was no safe way of disposing of the wastes from the used fuel; the early glass block experiments were deemed insufficient and irrelevant because there had been essentially no accompanying geologic work and there were now no plans to reprocess the used fuel. Accordingly, in 1974, AECL initiated a major program to prove that wastes from the used fuel could be managed safely. It would be necessary to shield the fuel for several hundred years, while the bulk of the gamma emitting radionuclides decayed, and to isolate the fuel for a much longer period, to ensure that long-lived radionuclides did not escape in significant concentrations to drinking water. The challenge was to prove that long-term isolation was possible. The program was centred at Whiteshell and was to occupy a major portion of the laboratory's efforts for the next 30 years.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It was decided that underground disposal was the best option for Canada; it was deemed the method whose safety could most readily be proven &amp;quot;beyond reasonable doubt.&amp;quot; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of AECL’s major achievements was the preparation and public defense of a ten-volume Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a conceptual deep geologic repository. Completion of this document on the characterization, construction and performance modelling of a conceptual repository in the granite rock of the Canadian Shield was largely based on work conducted at the Underground Research Laboratory (URL).&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
The URL was situated in a granite batholith towards the western edge of the Canadian Shield, about 50 km northeast of Whiteshell. AECL constructed the facility to provide a representative geological setting for conducting research activities in support of the Canadian nuclear fuel waste management program. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Excavation of the URL shaft to a depth of 255 m was in 1984. The main shaft was extended to a depth of 443 m in 1988, followed by the excavation of the 420 level and the ventilation shaft over the following three years. &lt;br /&gt;
The programs at the URL included experiments on solute transport, grouting, buffers, containers, shaft sealing and in situ stress studies. The URL completed its mission in 2010. The comprehensive and multidisciplinary URL research program contributed to defining a robust conceptual design for an underground repository. Results from research at the URL were used in the assessment of the feasibility and safety of deep geological disposal. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Other Contributions to Nuclear Engineering==&lt;br /&gt;
Over the 50 years of operation, Whiteshell Laboratories has contributed to a number of other important nuclear engineering programs, including:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Containment Test Facility (CTF)=== &lt;br /&gt;
[[File:CTF.jpg|thumb|Containment Test Facility]]&lt;br /&gt;
The CTF was used to determine the conditions under which hydrogen combustion could occur within containment. There are two main sources of hydrogen in a CANDU power plant: the exothermic reaction between the Zircaloy fuel sheathing and steam and radiolysis of the heavy-water coolant and moderator. The CTF had two large-scale vessels that simulated containment structures. These studies showed that it was extremely unlikely that conditions could arise where hydrogen combustion could threaten the integrity of a CANDU containment system, if proper precautions are taken.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Large-Scale Vented Combustion Test Facility (LSVCTF)===&lt;br /&gt;
To complement the CTF, the LSVCTF was built at Whiteshell in the 1980s to study flame propagation and pressure development during vented combustion and to test Passive Autocatalytic Recombiners (PARs) to control hydrogen in nuclear reactors.  The PARS are a commercial product for AECL with world-wide sales in excess of $100 Million. Both the CTF and the LSVCTF are also still operational on a commercial basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Storage Options for Used Fuel===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LSVCTF.jpg|thumb|left|Large-Scale Vented Combustion Test Facility]]&lt;br /&gt;
Whiteshell Laboratories experimented with dry storage of used fuel in reinforced concrete canisters with walls thick enough to provide the required shielding. The attraction of the canisters was that they could be built as needed, avoiding the large up-front cost for new fuel storage bays at existing CANDU reactor sites. The objective of the program was not only to demonstrate that used fuel could be stored in this way, but to develop and verify prediction methods that would allow future designs to be optimized. Tests on the electrically heated canisters showed that both cylindrical and square designs were practical and conservative. These tests confirmed the viability of the concept and it was quickly adopted for the storage of excess WR-1 fuel. Optimized designs have since been used for the storage of Gentilly-l, Douglas Point and NPD fuel when those reactors were shut down. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===SLOWPOKE Demostration Reactor (SDR)=== &lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Slowpoke.jpg|thumb|SLOWPOKE Demonstration Reactor]]&lt;br /&gt;
The Safe Low-Power Critical Experiment was a low-energy, pool-type nuclear research reactor conceived in 1967 at Whiteshell. In 1970 a prototype unit was built at Chalk River Laboratories. The first commercial version of the SLOWPOKE reactor was started up in 1971 at AECL's Commercial Products Division in Ottawa; and in 1976 a commercial design, named SLOWPOKE-2, was installed at the University of Toronto. Between 1976 and 1984, seven SLOWPOKE-2 reactors with Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) fuel were commissioned in six Canadian cities and in Kingston, Jamaica. In the early 1980s AECL also designed and built a scaled-up version called SLOWPOKE-3 for district heating at Whiteshell. The economics of a district-heating system based on SLOWPOKE-3 technology were initially competitive with conventional fossil fuels for use in remote communities; however the market interest in the SLOWPOKE heating system eventually dwindled due to the low price of natural gas. The SDR was shut down in 1990.  &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Nuclear Battery=== &lt;br /&gt;
The Nuclear Battery program began in 1984 as a joint project with the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) to develop a small nuclear power supply for unattended short-range radar stations in the new North Warning System (NWS).  In hardware development programs at Whiteshell, a toluene organic Rankine cycle engine was commissioned and operated with a propane heat source. An experiment to study graphite oxidation during an air ingress accident was also performed. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Life Sciences===&lt;br /&gt;
Research into the life sciences focused on the biological effects of radiation, the behaviour of radionuclides in the environment, the use of radionuclides for biological research, and developing instruments for radiation protection. Work at Whiteshell has greatly improved our understanding of how radiation produces biological changes in living organisms and how best to protect nuclear workers and the general public. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Environmental Protection===&lt;br /&gt;
AECL's environmental research program has always been concerned with two key issues; how radioactive materials move through the environment, and how radiation interacts with the environment. Whiteshell was a world leader in environmental protection, using the many unique facilities at the laboratory, such as the Field-Irradiator Gamma (FIG) area, the Zoological Environment Under Stress (ZEUS) area, and the Cesium Pond experiment to examine these fundenmaental questions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Important People for the Development of Whiteshell Laboratories==&lt;br /&gt;
===J.L. Gray===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Grey.JPG|thumb|100px|J.L. Grey]]&lt;br /&gt;
James Lorne Gray was born in Brandon, Manitoba in 1913. After public school in Winnipeg, he graduated with a Masters in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Saskatchewan in 1938. He joined the Royal Canadian Air Force in 1939.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr. Gray’s scientific career began at the National Research Council in 1948. He was assigned to the “Chalk River” project. He advanced to become President of AECL in 1958. For the next 16 years he led the corporation through an impressive growth period that saw Canada become a leader in nuclear engineering and technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr. Gray was appointed a Companion of the Order of Canada in 1969 and was awarded the Professional Engineers Gold Medal by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario in 1973.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===F.W. Gilbert===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Gilbert.jpg|thumb|100px|F.W. Gilbert]]&lt;br /&gt;
Fred Gilbert was the forefather of AECL in Manitoba. He was the first manager at the WNRE.&lt;br /&gt;
He was also tasked with creating the town site for the employees.&lt;br /&gt;
Fred Gilbert was born in 1910 in Winnipeg. He obtained his B.Sc. in Engineering Physics from Queens University in Kingston in 1936. He was at the forefront of nuclear industry when he arrived at Chalk River, Ontario.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
He oversaw the construction and criticality of NRX (1947) and NRU (1957) at the Chalk River site, as well as CIR in India in 1960. Gilbert was involved in every facet of WNRE and Pinawa, and was a key member of several of the town’s first organizations, including the Pinawa Club.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Ara Mooradian===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Mooradian.jpg|100px|left|thumb|Ara Mooradian]]&lt;br /&gt;
Born in 1922 in Hamilton, Ontario, Ara Mooradian gained his early training as an engineer and scientist at the University of Saskatchewan and the University of Missouri. His career began at the Consolidated Mining &amp;amp; Smelting Company before joining the staff at the Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
At Chalk River he was Head of the Development Engineering and Fuel Development Branches. In 1964 Ara became the Managing Director of the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment and later the Vice-President. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ara Mooradian was noted for his contributions to the development of low cost fuel for CANDU nuclear power generating stations.  His honours included the Canada Medal, the W.B. Lewis Award and Fellowships of the Royal Society of Canada and the Chemical Institute of Canada. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Archie Aikin===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Aikin.jpg|thumb|100px|Archie Aikin]]&lt;br /&gt;
Dr. Archie Aikin was born in Saskatoon and attended schools in Winnipeg and Montreal. He obtained a B.Sc. (honours chemistry) from McGill University in 1941, served in the Canadian Army, then returned to McGill to gain his PhD. in chemistry.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Dr. Aikin joined the staff at Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories in 1949 and served there in a series of positions that included work in chemical engineering, nuclear fuels and economic evaluations of nuclear power systems. In 1968 he was appointed to Head Office, Ottawa, to set up the nuclear power marketing section as general manager. He was appointed vice-president, Whiteshell nuclear Research Establishment, on January 1, 1971. He moved to be Vice-President, Commercial Products, for AECL in 1974.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Robert Hart===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Hart.jpg|thumb|100px|left|Robert Hart]]&lt;br /&gt;
Robert (Bob) Hart arrived to Chalk River Laboratories in 1948. After working on various projects including purification of heavy water in a reactor system, reprocessing of nuclear fuels and studying the physical properties of these fuels, he moved to Whiteshell Laboratories in 1965 as head of the Reactor Core Technology Branch.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
He was appointed director of the Applied Science Division in 1969, managing director of the Whiteshell Site in 1973 and a vice president of AECL in 1974. In 1978 he became executive vice-president in charge of the Research Company, AECL.  Bob was awarded the W.B. Lewis medal by the Canadian Nuclear Association in 1981, with the following citation: &amp;quot;For giving the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment world recognition in such fields as organic heat transport technology, thermalhydraulic technology for nuclear safety technology analysis, radioactive waste management. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Stanley Hatcher===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Hatcher.jpg|thumb|100px|Stanley Hatcher]]&lt;br /&gt;
After graduating from the University of Birmingham in England and obtaining a M.Sc. in Chemical Engineering, he taught at the University of Toronto and obtained a PhD. He joined AECL's nuclear R&amp;amp;D program at Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories and worked on the chemistry of CANDU coolant and moderator systems.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1963 he headed to the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment at Pinawa, Manitoba. In 1985, Dr. Hatcher became President of AECL Research, responsible for Canada's nuclear science and technology R&amp;amp;D programs. He became President and CEO of AECL in 1989 and for three years led the restructuring of the corporation towards its new emphasis on support of CANDU. Dr. Stanley Hatcher was also past President and Chief Executive Officer of AECL.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Ralph Green===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Green.jpg|thumb|100px|Ralph Green]]&lt;br /&gt;
Ralph Green (B.Sc., M.Sc. (Dalhousie), Ph.D. (McGill)) joined AECL at the Chalk River Laboratories in 1956, working first in reactor physics at Canada's first research reactor ZEEP, then in accelerator physics, and later as head of the Reactor Control Branch.&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
In 1979 he transferred to AECL's head office in Ottawa as a senior advisor. In 1982 Ralph was appointed vice-president and general manager of the Whiteshell site. In 1986 he was appointed vice-president of Reactor Development, responsible for all reactor-related R&amp;amp;D in AECL.&lt;br /&gt;
After retiring in 1991, he contributed to the 1997 book on the history of AECL, “Canada Enters the Nuclear Age. Ralph was a charter member of the Canadian Nuclear Society, having joined in 1980. Since his retirement, Ralph has been active in the Ottawa Branch of CNS.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Terry Rummery===&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Rummery.jpg|thumb|100px|left|Terry Rummery]]&lt;br /&gt;
Terry Rummery’s academic achievements began with an Honours B.Sc. in Engineering Chemistry, Queen’s University, 1961; a Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry, Queen’s University, 1966; and a National Research Council Overseas Post-Doctoral Fellowship, University College, London, UK, 1966-67. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As President of Atomic Energy Canada (Research), Terry led the program to develop the safe disposal of used nuclear fuel. For his work he was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Science degree from Queen’s University in 1993. A year later he was the recipient of the W.B. Lewis Medal presented by the Canadian Nuclear Society for contributions to nuclear science and engineering. His other accomplishments include Chairman of the Board for the Chemical Institute of Canada, 1998, and Fellowships in the Canadian Academy of Engineering. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br clear=all&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
Original article by Chris Saunders, P. Eng. and Ray Sochaski, P.Eng: https://heritage.enggeomb.ca/index.php/File:Whiteshell_-_Manitoba's_Contribution_to_Nuclear_Energy_-_March_18,_2015.pdf&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category: Nuclear Engineering]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Kettle_Generating_Station&amp;diff=2831</id>
		<title>Kettle Generating Station</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Kettle_Generating_Station&amp;diff=2831"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T21:57:30Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Fixed broken link to RCEA paper&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;For a high level overview of this and other hydro projects see [[Hydroelectric Development in Northern Manitoba]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Background==&lt;br /&gt;
Studies in the 1960s and early 1970s envisioned a four phase development at Kettle Rapids and downstream, namely the sites at Kettle Rapids, Long Spruce Rapids, Lower Limestone Rapids and Gillam Island to harness the abundant hydroelectric potential of the Nelson River. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The first phase of development was initiated in the spring of 1966 and included the following components: &lt;br /&gt;
* a generating station at Kettle Rapids; &lt;br /&gt;
* a High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission line from Kettle Rapids to the City of Winnipeg; &lt;br /&gt;
* control works to divert the Churchill River into the Nelson River via the Rat and Burntwood Rivers; and &lt;br /&gt;
* control works to regulate the outflow of Lake Winnipeg into the Nelson River.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The long range view was that the Kettle Generating Station (GS) would be the first in a series of generating stations intended for the lower Nelson River.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Location== &lt;br /&gt;
The Kettle GS is located at the site of the former Kettle Rapids on the lower Nelson River. It is approximately 4.4 mi (7 km) west of the Town of Gillam and 1.9 mi (3 km) upstream from the Canadian National Railway's (CNR) river crossing near the town. The distance from the City of Winnipeg to the Kettle GS is over 460 mi (740 km) by air. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Kettle Map1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=4.0|Map 1: Kettle Generating Station General Arrangement]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Components== &lt;br /&gt;
===Principal Works===&lt;br /&gt;
The station spans a total of 0.9 mi (1.5 km) across the Nelson River and consists of a close-coupled intake/powerhouse with 12 turbine generator units (units), concrete wing walls, non-overflow dam, two main earthfill dams (north and south), ancillary dams and dykes, and an eight bay gated spillway (Photos 1 and 2, Map 1). A series of dams and dykes flank the Nelson River to reduce the extent of flooding from the project (Photo 3). &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Kettle Photo 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 1: Kettle Generating Station]] &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Kettle 2.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 2: Kettle Generating Station - View from the South Shore]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Kettle - Batnau Dam Dyke.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 3: Batnau Dam Dyke]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Kettle - Operating Spillway.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 4: Operating Spillway at Kettle Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Data===&lt;br /&gt;
* Turbine generator units: &lt;br /&gt;
** Type: 12 vertical shaft fixed blade propeller turbines &lt;br /&gt;
** Capacity: 1220 MW (63rd Annual Report, March 2014) &lt;br /&gt;
* Powerhouse: &lt;br /&gt;
** Length: 1200 ft (365.76 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Waterfall drop (head): 101.0 ft (30.8 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Discharge capacity: 155,900 ft3/s (4,415 m3/s) &lt;br /&gt;
* Main dams (North and South dams): &lt;br /&gt;
** Length: North Dam = 2,400 ft (730.0 m); South Dam = 1,000 ft (300.0 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Maximum height: North Dam = 164.0 ft (50.0 m); South Dam = 167.0 ft (51.0 m) &lt;br /&gt;
* Spillway: &lt;br /&gt;
** Number of bays: 8 &lt;br /&gt;
** Length (8 bays): 394.0 ft (120.09 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Discharge capacity: 360,210 ft3/s (10,200 m3/s) &lt;br /&gt;
* Reservoir/forebay elevation: &lt;br /&gt;
** Full supply level (maximum): 463.0 ft (141.122 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Normal minimum operating forebay elevation: 453.0 ft (138.074 m ) &lt;br /&gt;
** Flooded Area: 85.2 mi2 (220.6 km2) &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Supporting Infrastructure===&lt;br /&gt;
Main access to the region during construction was by the Hudson Bay Railway line (now HBR; CNR at the time) which had a rail station and siding at the Town of Gillam. A 1.0 mi (1.6 km) rail spur was added near the generating station site. A new 4.4 mi (7 km) permanent gravel road was built from the Town of Gillam to the generating station site and the Radisson Converter Station site to link these projects to the community. The Town of Gillam was not connected to the provincial road network until well after completion of the project. The community had a permanent airstrip since 1967 that was utilized as required. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Generation Outlet Transmission===&lt;br /&gt;
The electricity generated at the Kettle GS is transmitted to the Radisson Converter Station which is located approximately 1.5 mi (2.4 km) south of the generating station. At the Radisson Converter Station the electricity is converted from alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) and is transmitted via the High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) Bipole I transmission line to the Dorsey Converter Station, by the City of Winnipeg. Once at the Dorsey Converter Station the electricity is converted back to AC before being fed into the provinces southern distribution system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Construction==&lt;br /&gt;
===Principal Works===&lt;br /&gt;
Beginning in the spring of 1966 construction was started on the access road, main camp, construction power station, and the Stage I cofferdam (Photo 5). Construction materials were sourced from locally available sites. Rock came from quarries upstream of the project site in the forebay area, granular materials came from the Gillam Esker east of the project site, and impervious materials came from local borrow areas.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Kettle Photo 3.jpg|thumb|center|upright=3.0|Photo 5:Kettle Generating Station During Construction]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Most of the construction workforce lived on site in camp while a small percentage lived and commuted from the Town of Gillam on a regular basis.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clearing of Kettle’s forebay was undertaken immediately upstream of the powerhouse with impoundment beginning in 1970. A dam at the outlet of the Butnau River along with a series of dykes along 15 mi (24 km) of the south shore of Stephens Lake (neer Moose Nose Lake) were built to contain flooding from the backwater effect from Kettle’s forebay. The Butnau River is a tributary of the Nelson River whose flows were cut off by one of these earthfilled dams at Stephens Lake. As a result, it was diverted into the adjacent Kettle River which flows north downstream of the Kettle GS into the Nelson River. To achieve this a 2.5 mi (4 km) long, 60 ft (18 m) wide channel was built from Cache Lake to the Kettle River to redirect the Butnau River.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The first unit went into service in December 1970 and by the time the generating station was officially opened in June 1973, seven units were in service. The twelfth and final unit was up and running in November 1974. With the completion of all its units the Kettle GS became Manitoba Hydro’s largest generating station in its system. It maintained this status for nearly two decades until the Limestone Generating Station came into full service in 1992. Development of the Kettle GS resulted in Moose Nose Lake forming part of the Kettle forebay which was subsequently named Stephens Lake. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Construction Infrastructure===&lt;br /&gt;
A temporary construction camp and associated work areas were established near the site. In 1966 and 1967, a 79 mi (127 km) 138 kV transmission line was built from the Kelsey GS to the site of the future Radisson Converter Station to provide power for upcoming construction activity. Short tie-ins from this line provided electrical power to the Kettle GS construction area and to the nearby Town of Gillam, which was about to undergo a major expansion. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Operations== &lt;br /&gt;
Access: Access to the Kettle GS is by road via PR 280 from the Town of Gillam or the City of Thompson. The Kettle GS can also be accessed by boat from the Town of Gillam.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Workforce: The station has approximately 30 to 35 staff comprised of the following: operating staff, maintenance staff (electrical, mechanical, utility), support staff (administration, stores) and supervisory staff. The station is fully staffed every day between 0700h and 1800h. Outside of normal business hours the Kettle GS is controlled by operating staff at the Long Spruce GS. The Kettle GS operating staff are on call and would be dispatched in case of an alarm or to initiate spill. Additional support and technical services are located in the nearby Town of Gillam.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Public Safety: The Kettle GS has a portage around the site and the following public safety features: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* downstream boat launch area; &lt;br /&gt;
* a water release siren is used before adjusting discharge to warn the public in the area; &lt;br /&gt;
* life rings are provided on the spillway; &lt;br /&gt;
* fencing is used as a barrier to dangerous areas; and &lt;br /&gt;
* warning signs are provided (in English and Cree) at sites to warn the public of: dangerous swift moving waters, steep drop off, overhead power lines, stay off Ice, falling ice, slippery rocks, and rapidly changing water conditions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Water Regime: The Kettle GS is operated in a daily and weekly cycling pattern that allows Manitoba Hydro to match energy production to consumption patterns. For more details on operating parameters and their effects on the water regime (see Water Regime, Section 4.3.4.3). &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
License: Manitoba Hydro operates the Kettle GS in accordance with a Province of Manitoba Water Power Act licence. For further information, see the Manitoba Government Water Power Licensing website at: http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/water_power_licensing.html&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro &amp;amp; the Province of Manitoba, December 2015, ''Regional Cumulative Effects Assessment Phase II: Part II Hydroelectric Development Project Description in the Region of Interest''. Retrieved April 1 2016 from, https://www.hydro.mb.ca/docs/regulatory_affairs/pdf/rcea/rcea_phase2_part_ii_hydroelectric_development_project_description.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=HVDC_Transmission_System&amp;diff=2830</id>
		<title>HVDC Transmission System</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=HVDC_Transmission_System&amp;diff=2830"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T21:29:34Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Fixed broken link to RCEA paper&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;For a high level overview of this and other Manitoba Hydro projects see [[Hydroelectric Development in Northern Manitoba]]. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Background== &lt;br /&gt;
As of 2015, a significant amount of the province’s electricity is produced by five hydroelectric generating stations located on the Nelson River in northern Manitoba. The electricity generated must travel over a long distance to southern Manitoba where most of the electricity demand is located. It is more efficient and economical to transmit electricity over such long distances as Direct Current (DC) than Alternating Current (AC) (see Background on the planning of the [[HVdc Transmission]]). A high percentage of the existing generation is connected to two northern converter stations which convert the AC electricity coming from the generating stations to DC electricity for transmission to southern Manitoba. Once there, the DC electricity is converted back to AC electricity. The southern converter station then uses transformers to step down the voltage for distribution to customers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Location==&lt;br /&gt;
Bipoles I and II transmission lines follow a 556 mi (895 km) route from the Town of Gillam southward through the Interlake region. Bipole I has its northern terminus at the Radisson Converter Station (CS) near the Town of Gillam. Bipole II extends another 26 mi (42 km) northeast to the Henday Converter Station (CS). The southern terminus of both transmission lines is the Dorsey Converter Station (CS), northwest of the City of Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Components==&lt;br /&gt;
Components of the existing HVdc transmission system are: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Bipoles I and II (±500kV HVdc transmission lines); &lt;br /&gt;
* Radisson Converter Station; and &lt;br /&gt;
* Henday Converter Station. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Bipoles I and II===&lt;br /&gt;
The HVdc transmission lines are a set of bipolar transmission systems called Bipole I and Bipole II. The term bipole refers to a positive (+) pole and a negative (−) pole on each Bipole transmission line. Each pole is further comprised of two 1.5 inches (4 cm) diameter conductors that are supported by steel transmission towers as shown in Photos 1 and 2.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Bipoles I and II deliver over 70% of the generating capacity from the Nelson River in northern Manitoba to southern Manitoba.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:HVDC 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 1: Bipoles I and II Right-of-Way]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:HVDC 2.jpg|thumb|center|upright=1.0|Photo 2: Bipoles I and II Typical Guyed Tower]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Bipoles I and II Project Data====&lt;br /&gt;
* Length of lines: &lt;br /&gt;
** Bipole I: 556 mi (895 km) &lt;br /&gt;
** Bipole II: 582 mil (937 km) &lt;br /&gt;
* Towers: &lt;br /&gt;
** Quantity: 4,103 &lt;br /&gt;
** Height: 111 ft (33.8 m) to 155 ft (47.2 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Average height: 125 ft (38 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Distance between towers: 1,400 ft (427 m) to 1,600 ft (488 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Right-of-way: width 449 ft (137 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Distance between lines I and II: 245 ft (74.7) m &lt;br /&gt;
** Clearing: 41.7 mi&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; (108 km&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Radisson Converter Station===&lt;br /&gt;
An aerial view of the Radisson CS is shown in Photo 3. The Radisson CS is the northern terminus of Bipole I and is located 1.2 mi (2 km) south of the Kettle Generating Station (GS) and about 460 mi (740 km) north of the City of Winnipeg by air (Map 1). It converts the AC electricity produced at the nearby Kettle GS and Long Spruce GS on the Nelson River to DC electricity for transmission south to the Dorsey CS. The Dorsey CS converts the power back to AC electricity then uses transformers to step down the voltage for distribution to customers.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:HVDC 3.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 3: Radisson Converter Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:HVDC Transmission System Map 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=4.0|Map 1: Radisson Converter Station General Arrangement]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Radisson Principal Structures====&lt;br /&gt;
AC switchyard: The electricity produced at the Kettle GS and one-half of that produced at Long Spruce GS enters Radisson CS at its 138 kV switchyard. The switchyard which contains the high voltage breakers, disconnect switches, and AC filters directs the incoming AC power to the converter transformers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Converter transformer area: The converter transformer changes the AC voltage to the required voltage level for the DC conversion equipment. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Valve halls: At the heart of the converter process are the converter valves, which are located in the valve halls within the converter building which also contains the maintenance shops, the control, mechanical, and electrical rooms. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
HVDC switchyard: Electricity converted to DC leaves Radisson CS from the HVDC switchyard and is transmitted south to Dorsey CS. This switchyard contains the necessary switches for isolation or connection of the poles from and to the DC transmission lines.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Henday Converter Station===&lt;br /&gt;
The Henday CS (Photo 4; Map 2) is the northern terminus for Bipole II. It is located next to the Limestone GS and is 26 mi (42 km) northeast of the Radisson CS.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:HVDC 5.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 4: Henday Converter Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:HVDC Transmission System Map 2.jpg|thumb|center|upright=4.0|Map 2: Henday Converter Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Henday Principal Structures====&lt;br /&gt;
AC switchyard: All of the electricity produced at the Limestone GS and one half of that produced at the Long Spruce GS enters Henday CS through its 230 kV switchyard, where the incoming AC electricity is directed to converter transformers.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Converter transformer area: The converter transformer changes the AC voltage to the required voltage level for the DC conversion equipment. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Valve Halls: The actual conversion process takes place in the valve halls. They are located in the converter building, which also contains the maintenance shops, the control, mechanical, and electrical rooms.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
HVDC switchyard: Electricity converted from AC to DC at Henday CS is transmitted south to Dorsey CS via the DC transmission line. The switchyard contains the necessary switches to shut off the current if Bipole II is not working, or to switch the current over to Bipole I, if enough room is available to carry the current.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Supporting Infrastructure===&lt;br /&gt;
====Radisson Converter Station====&lt;br /&gt;
Main access to the region during construction was by the Hudson Bay Railway line (now HBR; Canadian Pacific Railway (CNR) at the time) which had a rail station and siding at the Town of Gillam. A 0.6 mi (1 km) rail spur was added near the Kettle GS site to the Radisson CS site as part of construction. A new 4.4 mi (7 km) permanent gravel road was built from the Town of Gillam to the Kettle GS site and the Radisson CS site to link these projects to the community. The Town of Gillam was not connected to the provincial road network until after completion of the projects. The community has had a permanent airstrip since 1967, which was used as required during construction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Henday Converter Station====&lt;br /&gt;
Access to the site was by a 14 mi (23 km) extension of the permanent gravel access road at the Long Spruce GS and a 1.5 mi (2.5 km) rail spur from the Hudson Bay Railway line (now HBR; CNR at the time) to the Henday site. The access road was not connected to the provincial road network until just after completion of the converter station. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Construction==&lt;br /&gt;
===Bipole I===&lt;br /&gt;
Construction on Bipole I started in 1968 and was completed in 1971. Routing of the line included large tracks of muskeg country, providing difficulties for construction. For economic reasons, construction of the line had to be undertaken during winter months when the ground was frozen to allow for the passage of heavy equipment.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Radisson Converter Station===&lt;br /&gt;
Construction on the Radisson CS began in 1967 and was completed in 1977. The converter station was not ready when the first units at the Kettle GS were commissioned in the fall of 1970 so the DC line was used to transmit AC power to the south until early 1971 when the Radisson CS began operation. After 1978 the Radisson CS began converting power for half of the Long Spruce GS.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Bipole II===&lt;br /&gt;
The Bipole II transmission line was previously constructed along with the Bipole I transmission line as far north as the Radisson CS. Construction of the 26 mi (42 km) extension of the Bipole II transmission line to the new Henday CS started in 1977. The first stage of Bipole II was complete in 1978 and the second stage was completed in 1985. In 1992 a 6 mi (9 km) Bipole II back-up loop originating at the Henday CS was constructed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Henday Converter Station===&lt;br /&gt;
Construction started in 1970. It began transforming power from the Long Spruce GS in 1978 and from the Limestone GS in 1990. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Construction Infrastructure===&lt;br /&gt;
====Bipole I &amp;amp; II====&lt;br /&gt;
Various temporary mobile construction camps and access trails on or adjacent to the transmission line right-of-ways were used for the construction of Bipoles I and II.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Radisson Convertor Station====&lt;br /&gt;
The temporary construction camp for the Kettle GS was used for the Radisson CS. Work areas were established near the Radisson CS site. The workforce commuted from the Kettle GS camp to the Radisson CS site on a daily basis and lived there for several weeks at a time and travelled to their homes during their days off. A 79 mi (127 km) 138 kV transmission line was built from the Kelsey GS to the Radisson CS site to provide construction power for both the Radisson CS and the Kettle GS. To achieve this, short tie-ins from the line provided electrical power to the Kettle GS construction site and nearby Town of Gillam, which was about to undergo a major expansion.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Henday Convertor Station====&lt;br /&gt;
No on site construction camp was created as the workforce commuted from the Long Spruce GS construction camp. A 21.5 mi (34.6 km) extension of the 138 kV transmission line (KN36) called the Kettle Station Tap to the Limestone GS was built from the Kettle GS to the Henday Construction power station to provide construction power for both the Henday CS and ultimately for the Limestone GS.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Operations==&lt;br /&gt;
Access: The Provincial Road (PR) 280 to the Long Spruce area was constructed at the end of construction of the Long Spruce GS. It connected with the existing permanent roads used for construction of the Kettle GS, the Long Spruce GS, the Radisson CS and the Henday CS to become part of the provincial road network as seen today. PR 280 now goes to the Town of Gillam and the segment from the Long Spruce GS turnoff to the Limestone GS/Henday CS area is now designated as PR 290. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Communication System: An essential component of the HVdc transmission line system is a complex high-performance communications system that is used to protect and control the HVdc Transmission System. Prior to 2004, the communication system consisted of two microwave systems each linking the Radisson and Henday converter stations in the north to the Dorsey CS in southern Manitoba. This dual route microwave system was operated to protect and control the HVdc Transmission System and other facilities in the north, such as the Grand Rapids, Jenpeg, and Kelsey generating stations. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the microwave systems follows a route through Manitoba’s Interlake corridor while the other was located on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. In October 2004, Manitoba Hydro replaced the east of Lake Winnipeg microwave system with a new fibre optic cable system installed in the Interlake corridor. This new fibre optic cable works alongside the remaining Interlake digital microwave system, providing enhanced reliable communications for all major substations and generating stations along the 653 mi (1,050 km) route as well as facilitating voice and data communications at district offices and other Manitoba Hydro facilities.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Rehabilitation==&lt;br /&gt;
Radisson Converter Station: The former construction waste disposal ground was investigated in early 2001, with a subsurface drilling investigation (Phase II Environmental Site Assessment) conducted later in 2001 and into 2002. Groundwater monitoring and sampling has been conducted on an annual basis since 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro &amp;amp; the Province of Manitoba, December 2015, ''Regional Cumulative Effects Assessment Phase II: Part II Hydroelectric Development Project Description in the Region of Interest''. Retrieved April 1 2016 from, https://www.hydro.mb.ca/docs/regulatory_affairs/pdf/rcea/rcea_phase2_part_ii_hydroelectric_development_project_description.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=The_Keystone_Professional&amp;diff=2829</id>
		<title>The Keystone Professional</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=The_Keystone_Professional&amp;diff=2829"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T21:27:19Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Updated link from apegm.mb.ca to enggeomb.ca&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Keystone Professional is Engineers Geoscientists Manitoba's official publication. Copies were traditionally distributed to all members by mail.  The following archive has been compiled from the original file hard copies.  The most recent versions are posted on the Association main website at www.EngGeoMb.ca.  The publications include information on a range of topics of interest to it's membership such as;  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Reports from Council, various committees, and staff&lt;br /&gt;
* Event listings&lt;br /&gt;
* Feature articles&lt;br /&gt;
* Changes to membership&lt;br /&gt;
__NOTOC__&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Background ==&lt;br /&gt;
In the 1950's the engineering association had identified a need for a better means in which to communicate with it's members. An initial attempt at producing a publication was short lived and ceased production after two years when editorial information dried up. A second, more successful, attempt was undertaken a few years later in 1956 under the name of &amp;quot;The Manitoba Professional Engineer&amp;quot;. The association has successfully continued to produce this publication since then to the present time. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Starting in June 1999 &amp;quot;The Manitoba Professional Engineer&amp;quot; was renamed &amp;quot;The Keystone Professional&amp;quot;. This was primarily a result of the absorption of the geosciences professional association into the engineering professional association and the name no longer being inclusive of its new members. The new name has geographical, engineering, geoscientific, and professional symbolism which reflects the new Act under which association administers the professional registration of geoscientists as well as engineers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The name was selected for a number of reasons. Firstly, Manitoba is widely known as “The Keystone Province”. Secondly, a keystone is “the stone at the apex of an arch, the chief element or consummation, or that on which all else depends (Chamber's 20th. Century Dictionary). Thirdly, the noun “key” connotes that which leads to the solution of a problem and, in association with other words, is a common part of engineering parlance (e.g. turnkey project, computer-key, key-pin, key-plate, shear key). Fourthly and finally, “stone”  symbolizes the geoscience profession.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=='''The Manitoba Professional Engineer - 1956 to 1976'''==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1950 to 1959 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;div&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1956 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1956-07 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1956-07]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1956-09 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1956-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1956-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1956-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1957 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1957-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1957-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1957-07 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1957-07]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1957-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1957-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1957-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1957-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1958 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1958-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1958-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1958-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1958-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1959 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1959-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1959-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1959-09 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1959-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1959-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1959-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1960 to 1969 ==&lt;br /&gt;
==1960 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1960-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1960-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1960-05 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1960-05]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1960-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1960-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1960-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1960-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1961 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1961-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1961-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1961-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1961-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1961-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1961-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1962 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1962-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1962-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1962-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1962-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1962-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1962-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1962-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1962-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1963 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1963-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1963-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1963-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1963-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1963-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1963-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1963-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1963-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1964 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1964-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1964-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1964-07 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1964-07]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1964-10Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1964-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1964-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1964-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1965 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1965-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1965-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1965-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1965-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1965-09 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1965-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1965-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1965-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1966 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1966-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1966-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1966-07 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1966-07]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1966-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1966-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1966-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1966-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1967 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1967-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1967-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1967-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1967-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1967-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1967-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1967-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1967-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1968 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1968-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1968-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1968-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1968-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1968-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1968-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1968-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1968-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1969 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1969-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1969-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1969-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1969-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1969-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1969-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1969-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1969-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1970 to 1979 ==&lt;br /&gt;
==1970 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1970-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1970-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1970-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1970-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1970-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1970-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1970-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1970-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1971 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1971-03 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1971-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1971-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1971-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1971-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1971-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1971-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1971-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1971-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1971-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1971-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1971-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1972 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1972-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1972-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1972-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1972-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1972-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1972-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1972-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1972-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1972-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1972-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1973 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1973-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1973-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1973-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1973-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1973-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1973-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1973-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1973-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1973-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1973-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1973-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1973-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1974 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1974-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1974-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1974-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1974-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1974-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1974-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1974-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1974-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1974-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1974-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1974-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1974-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1975 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1975-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1975-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1975-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1975-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1975-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1975-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1975-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1975-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1975-11 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1975-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1976 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1976-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1976-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1976-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1976-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1976-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1976-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==Bulletin 1976 to 1985 ==&lt;br /&gt;
==1976 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1976-10 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1976-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1976-11 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1976-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1977 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1977-02 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1977-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1977-04 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1977-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1977-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1977-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1977-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1977-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1977-11 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1977-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1978 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1978-02 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1978-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1978-04 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1978-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1978-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1978-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1978-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1978-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1978-11 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1978-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1979 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1979-04 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1979-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1979-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1979-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1979-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1979-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1979-10 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1978-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1980 to 1989 ==&lt;br /&gt;
==1980 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1980-02 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1980-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1980-03 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1980-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1980-04 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1980-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1980-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1980-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1980-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1980-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1980-10 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1980-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1980-11 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1980-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1981 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1981-02 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1981-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1981-04 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1981-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1981-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1981-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1981-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1981-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1981-11 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1981-11]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1982 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1982-02 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1982-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1982-04 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1982-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1982-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1982-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1982-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1982-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1982-10 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1982-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1982-12 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1982-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1983 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1983-02 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1983-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1983-04 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1983-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1983-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1983-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1983-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1983-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1983-10 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1983-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1983-12 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1983-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1984 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1984-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1984-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1984-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1984-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1985 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1985-02 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1985-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1985-04 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1985-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1985-06 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1985-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1985-08 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1985-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1985-10 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1985-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1985-12 Bulletin.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Bulletin 1985-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
=='''Manitoba Professional Engineer 1986 - 1999 '''==&lt;br /&gt;
==1986 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1986-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1986-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1986-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1986-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1986-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1986-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1986-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1986-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1986-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1986-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1986-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1986-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1987 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1987-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1987-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1987-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1987-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1987-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1987-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1987-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1987-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1987-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1987-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1987-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1987-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1988 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1988-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1988-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1988-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1988-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1988-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1988-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1988-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1988-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1988-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1988-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1988-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1988-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1989 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1989-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1989-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1989-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1989-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1989-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1989-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1989-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1989-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1989-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1989-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1989-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1989-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1990 to Feb 1999 ==&lt;br /&gt;
==1990 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1990-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1990-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1990-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1990-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1990-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1990-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1990-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1990-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1990-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1990-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1990-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1990-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1991 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1991-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1991-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1991-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1991-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1991-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1991-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1991-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1991-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1991-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1991-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1991-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1991-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==1992 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1992-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1992-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1992-04 Manitoba Professional Enginner.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1992-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1992-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1992-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1992-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1992-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1992-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1992-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1992-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1992-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1993 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1993-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1993-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1993-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1993-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1993-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1993-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1993-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1993-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1993-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1993-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1993-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1993-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1994 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1994-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1994-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1994-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1994-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1994-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1994-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1994-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1995 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1995-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1995-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1995-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1995-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1995-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1995-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1995-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1995-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1995-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1995-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1995-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1995-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1996 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1996-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1996-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1996-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1996-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1996-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1996-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1996-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1996-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1996-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1996-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1996-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1996-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1997 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1997-02 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1997-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1997-04 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1997-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1997-06 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1997-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1997-08 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1997-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1997-10 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1997-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1997-12 Manitoba Professional Engineer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1997-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1998 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:98feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1998-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:98apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1998-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:98jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1998-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:98aug.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1998-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:98oct.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1998-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:98dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1998-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==1999 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:99feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1999-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:99apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Manitoba Professional Engineer 1999-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=='''The Keystone Professional'''==&lt;br /&gt;
==June 1999 to current ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==June 1999 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:99jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 1999-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:99aug.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 1999-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:99oct.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 1999-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:99dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 1999-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== 2000 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:00feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2000-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:00apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2000-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:00jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2000-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:00aug.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2000-08]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:00oct.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2000-10]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:00dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2000-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== 2001 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:01feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2001-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:01apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2001-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:01jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2001-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:01sep.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2001-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:01dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2001-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== 2002 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:02feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2002-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:02apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2002-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:02jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2002-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:02sep.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2002-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:02dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2002-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== 2003 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:03feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2003-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:03apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2003-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:03jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2003-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:03sept.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2003-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:03dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2003-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== 2004 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:04feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2004-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:04apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2004-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:04jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2004-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:04sep.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2004-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:04dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2004-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== 2005 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:05feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2005-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:05apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2005-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:05jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2005-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:05sep.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2005-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:05dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2005-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== 2006 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:06feb.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2006-02]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:06apr.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2006-04]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:06jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2006-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== 2007 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:07mar.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2007-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:07jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2007-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:07sep.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2007-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:07dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2007-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== 2008 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:08mar.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2008-03]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:08jun.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2008-06]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:08sep.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2008-09]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:08dec.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional 2008-12]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== 2009 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:09mar.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2009]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:09Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2009]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:09Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2009]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:09Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2009]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==2010 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:10Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2010]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:10Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2010]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:10Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2010]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:10Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2010]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2011 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:11Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2011]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:11Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2011]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:11Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2011]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:11Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2011]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2012 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:12Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2012]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:12Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2012]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:12Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2012]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:12Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2012]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2013 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:13Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2013]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:13Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2013]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:13Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2013]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:13Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2013]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2014 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:14Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2014]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:14Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2014]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:14Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2014]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:14Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2014]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2015 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:15Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2015]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:15Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2015]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:15Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2015]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:15Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2015]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2016 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:16Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2016]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:16Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2016]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:16Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2016]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:16Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2016]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2017 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:17Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2017]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:17Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2017]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:17Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2017]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:17Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2017]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2018 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:18Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2018]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:18Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2018]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:18Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2018]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:18Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2018]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2019 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:19Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2019]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:19Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2019]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:19Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2019]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:19Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2019]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
==2020 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:20Spring.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Spring 2020]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:20Summer.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Summer 2020]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:20Autumn.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Autumn 2020]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:20Winter.pdf|thumb|none|250px|Keystone Professional Winter 2020]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
[https://www.enggeomb.ca/Keystone.html Keystone Professional Main Page]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category: APEGM]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Limestone_Generating_Station&amp;diff=2828</id>
		<title>Limestone Generating Station</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Limestone_Generating_Station&amp;diff=2828"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T21:25:12Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Fixed broken link to RCEA paper&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;For a high level overview of this and other hydro projects see [[Hydroelectric Development in Northern Manitoba]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Background and Construction==&lt;br /&gt;
Background Studies in the 1960s and early 1970s envisioned a four phase development at Kettle Rapids and downstream, namely the sites at Kettle Rapids, Long Spruce Rapids, Lower Limestone Rapids and Gillam Island, to harness the abundant hydroelectric potential of the Nelson River. The first phase of development included the following components: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a generating station at Kettle Rapids;  &lt;br /&gt;
* a High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission line from Kettle Rapids to the City of Winnipeg;  &lt;br /&gt;
* control works to divert the Churchill River into the Nelson River via the Burntwood River; and&lt;br /&gt;
* control works to regulate the outflow of Lake Winnipeg into the Nelson River.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The second phase of development included the Long Spruce Generating Station (GS) which was Manitoba Hydro’s fourth generating station built on the Nelson River. The third phase of development included the Limestone GS.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Location==&lt;br /&gt;
The Limestone GS is located at a site previously known as Limestone Rapids or Upper Limestone Rapids (Photo 1), upstream of where the Limestone River empties into the Nelson River. It is approximately 14 mi (23 km) immediately downstream of the Long Spruce GS, 34 mi (55 km) from the Town of Gillam and 466 mi (750 km) north of the City of Winnipeg. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Limestone 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 1: Upper Limestone Rapids Looking Downstream at the North Shore, 1976]]&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
==Initial Construction==&lt;br /&gt;
Prior to the commencement of construction on the Limestone GS, a number of supporting infrastructure components were constructed as part of the adjacent Henday CS (see [[HVDC Transmission System]]). A permanent gravel access road and a construction power line were extended from the Long Spruce GS area to the Limestone GS area in the early 1970’s, with the road later becoming PR 290. A rail spur from the Hudson Bay Railway line (now HBR; Canadian National Railway [CNR] at the time) near the community of Bird (now Fox Lake Cree Nation [FLCN]) was also constructed to the Henday CS site. Construction of the Limestone GS Stage I cofferdam began in 1976. However, while the cofferdam construction was underway and nearly complete in 1978 (Photo 2), construction of the Limestone GS was suspended indefinitely by Manitoba Hydro as a result of a lower than expected forecast in the provincial demand for electricity. Cessation of the Limestone GS construction brought to an end the busiest period of electrical development activity ever to occur in Manitoba.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Limestone 2.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 2: Stage I Cofferdam Construction – 1978]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Reinitiated Construction==&lt;br /&gt;
In August 1985 construction of the Limestone GS was resumed by Manitoba Hydro as a result of the approval by the National Energy Board for an export sale for up to 500 MW of firm power from 1993 to 2005 to the Northern States Power Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota. As a result of the initial construction activities between 1976 and 1978, the project was able to re-commence development work directly on the principal structures as much of the supporting infrastructure required for construction activities was already in place. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A new rail spur extending the Henday rail spur was added to the Limestone GS work area. There was an airstrip in the community of Bird for some portions of the project but it was not used for construction. The temporary construction camp, work areas, a temporary townsite named Sundance, and the opening of the Limestone River Quarry as a source of rock fill for the Stage I cofferdam were re-established. The entire construction workforce either lived in camp or in the Sundance townsite. Those living in camp stayed for several weeks at a time and travelled to their homes during their days off. Solid waste was disposed of at a local solid waste disposal site and wastewater was treated at a local lagoon.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Stage I cofferdam constructed in 1978 was originally designed to an elevation of 70.0 m above sea level. During the period from 1979 to 1985 this cofferdam was overtopped on two occasions due to high water levels caused by ice jams (Photo 3). This new information led to the requirement to increase the height of the Stage I cofferdam to a nominal elevation of 73.0 m prior to re-commencing construction (Figure 1). The materials for construction came from local areas, rock came from the Limestone River Quarry and the site excavations, granular and impervious materials came from local borrow areas.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Limestone 3.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 3: Nelson River Overtopping the Stage I Cofferdam – 1979]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Limestone Figure 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=4.0|Figure 1: Limestone Generating Station during Construction]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The generating station was constructed in two primary stages, the first being the construction of the north dam, the powerhouse, and the spillway all contained within the Stage I cofferdam (Photo 4). The second stage began with the full closure of the river, the diversion of water through the spillway, and the completion of the south dam across the river (Photo 5). Following five years of construction activity the first unit went into service in 1990, with the station becoming fully operational by 1992 when the tenth and final unit went into service.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Limestone 5.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 4: Principal Works Construction – 1987]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Limestone 6.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 5: Stage II Closure – 1989]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Components==&lt;br /&gt;
===Principal Works===&lt;br /&gt;
The generating station spans a total of 0.8 mi (1.3 km ) across the Nelson River and consists of a closecoupled intake/powerhouse with ten generating units, concrete wing walls, two main earthfill dams (north and south) and a seven-bay gated spillway (Photos 6, 7; Map 1).  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Limestone 7.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 6: Limestone Generating Station Area – Looking South]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Limestone 8.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 7: Limestone Generating Station – 2009]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Limestone Map 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=4.0|Map 1: Limestone Generating Station General Arrangement]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Data===&lt;br /&gt;
* Turbine generator units: &lt;br /&gt;
** Type: 10 vertical-shaft fixed-blade propeller turbines  &lt;br /&gt;
** Capacity: 1350 MW (63rd Annual Report, March 2014) &lt;br /&gt;
* Powerhouse: &lt;br /&gt;
** Length: 948.2 ft (268.5 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Waterfall drop (head): 120.5 ft (31.2 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Discharge capacity: 176,573 ft3/s (5,000 m3/s) &lt;br /&gt;
* Main dams (North and South dams): &lt;br /&gt;
** Length: North Dam = 230 ft ( 70.0 m); South Dam = 2,362 ft (720 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Maximum Height: North and South dams = 131 ft (40.0 m) &lt;br /&gt;
* Spillway: &lt;br /&gt;
** Number of bays: 7 &lt;br /&gt;
** Length (7 bays): 444.9 ft (113 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Discharge capacity: 339,021 ft3/s (9,600 m3/s)  &lt;br /&gt;
* Reservoir/forebay elevation: &lt;br /&gt;
** Full supply level: (Maximum Operating Forebay Elevation, Open Water) - 279.9 ft (85.313 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Normal minimum operating forebay elevation: 270.0 ft (82.296 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Flooded Area: 0.8 mi2 (2.1 km2) &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Transmission Components===&lt;br /&gt;
In conjunction with the construction of the Limestone GS two transmission projects were undertaken, and are described below. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Related Transmission====&lt;br /&gt;
A 25 mi (40 km) 138 kV transmission line was built in 1989 from the Radisson Converter Station to the Limestone GS to act as an emergency backup to the generating station.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Generation Outlet Transmission====&lt;br /&gt;
The Limestone GS outlet transmission consists of five 138 kV transmission lines built in 1990 from the Limestone GS to the existing Henday Converter Station. This allowed the power to be moved from the Limestone GS onto the High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission system to southern Manitoba. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Mitigation and Rehabilitation==&lt;br /&gt;
As part of the re-initiation of construction activities for the Limestone GS, the project underwent the first environmental assessment for a Nelson River generating station. The environmental assessment included consultation with the Town of Gillam and the FLCN. Most of the recommendations for monitoring potential adverse effects on the biophysical environment and enhancing beneficial effects to the local area were implemented during project construction and operation. Only minimal mitigation was recommended because the environmental effects of the project were assessed to be minimal, largely because the Limestone GS resulted in a relatively small amount of flooding. Select borrow areas underwent pilot revegetation initiatives. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Limestone/Bird waste disposal ground was in use until approximately 1999. The site was cleaned up to meet regulatory requirements in 2000 and Manitoba Hydro planned to transfer the site to the FLCN, however, the transfer has not been finalized. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Operations==&lt;br /&gt;
Access: Access to the site is by PR 290, which was designated as a provincial road following construction. The rail spur line, stores work area, and various buildings remaining from construction continue to be used for operational purposes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Workforce: The station has approximately 30 to 35 staff comprised of the following: operating staff, maintenance staff (electrical, mechanical, utility), support staff (administration, stores) and supervisory staff. The operators are located on site for 24 hours per day, seven days per week. The remaining of the maintenance staff are on site during normal business hours during the weekdays. The majority of the staff working at the Limestone GS drive in from the Town of Gillam. There are no staff accommodations on site at the Limestone GS. Additional support and technical services are located in the nearby Town of Gillam.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Public Safety: The Limestone GS has a portage around the site and the following public safety features: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*  A water release siren is used before adjusting discharge to warn the public in the area;&lt;br /&gt;
*  Life rings are provided at the spillway; and &lt;br /&gt;
*  Warning signs are provided (in English and Cree) at site to warn the public of: dangerous swift moving waters, steep drop off, overhead power lines, stay off Ice, falling ice, slippery rocks, and rapidly changing water conditions. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Water Regime: The Limestone GS is operated as a run-of-river generating station with flow patterns matching water releases from the Long Spruce GS upstream, which are driven by water releases at the Kettle GS further upstream. The Kettle GS is operated with a daily and weekly cycling pattern that allows Manitoba Hydro to match energy production to consumption patterns. For more details on the Limestone GS, the Long Spruce GS, and the Kettle GS operations and their effects on the water regime, see Water Regime, Sections 4.3.4.3 and 4.3.4.4. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
License: Manitoba Hydro operates the Limestone GS in accordance with a Province of Manitoba Water Power Act license. For further information see the Manitoba Government Water Power Licensing website at: http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/water_power_licensing.html. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Rehabilitation==&lt;br /&gt;
The facilities built during construction were not totally decommissioned following construction. Several facilities remain and are used for operations or as potential future work areas. There has been some restoration work undertaken in the surrounding borrow areas. The former metal waste disposal ground was decommissioned in 1995.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro &amp;amp; the Province of Manitoba, December 2015, ''Regional Cumulative Effects Assessment Phase II: Part II Hydroelectric Development Project Description in the Region of Interest''. Retrieved April 1 2016 from, https://www.hydro.mb.ca/docs/regulatory_affairs/pdf/rcea/rcea_phase2_part_ii_hydroelectric_development_project_description.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Grosvenor_House&amp;diff=2827</id>
		<title>Grosvenor House</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Grosvenor_House&amp;diff=2827"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T21:06:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: http to https change on obit for Don Elliot&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== Overview ==&lt;br /&gt;
Grosvenor House Apartment Building is located at 811 Grosvenor Avenue in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Grosvenor House is an eight story apartment building with a precast concrete frame and floor system. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==When==	&lt;br /&gt;
Built in 1960. At the time it was the tallest all-precast concrete building in Canada. It continues to serve as a residential condominium building.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Where==&lt;br /&gt;
Grosvenor House is located in the vicinity of Osborn Village, River Heights, and the Corydon Strip in south Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
{{#display_map:811 Grosvenor Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada | height= 300px| width= 400px}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why==	&lt;br /&gt;
The precast concrete industry was emerging in Manitoba. The City of Winnipeg building permitting authority had just accepted precast concrete as building system, and an alternate to the original cast-in-place design was developed. The innovation of the project highlighted the versatility, economy, use of local products and potential of precast concrete for the building industry of Manitoba at a time when development was vital to the Province.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How==	&lt;br /&gt;
The consulting structural engineer was L. Cazaly on the basis of an architectural design prepared by Libling Michener and Associates (Leslie J. Stechesen). The precast concrete was fabricated and erected by Building Products &amp;amp; Coal Ltd. of Winnipeg (later PRECO, later Con-Force, and now Armtec). &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Building Details==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;gallery&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
File:GrosvenorHouseF1.jpg|General arrangement and detail of the precast concrete sections&lt;br /&gt;
File:GrosvenorHouseF2.jpg|Details of the column splices, spandrel connection and floor system&lt;br /&gt;
File:GrosvenorHouseF3.jpg|General view of the completed precast concrete work&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/gallery&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Key players== &lt;br /&gt;
*Don Elliot https://passages.winnipegfreepress.com/passage-details/id-205551/name-Donald_Elliott/&lt;br /&gt;
*L. Cazaly &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Web links:&lt;br /&gt;
*https://www.winnipegarchitecture.ca/811-grosvenor-avenue/ accessed 15 May 2014&lt;br /&gt;
*https://www.winnipegarchitecture.ca/leslie-stechesen/ accessed 15 May 2014&lt;br /&gt;
*https://archiseek.com/2012/1961-grosvenor-house-winnipeg/#.U3UJfdK2h8E accessed 15 May 2014&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Wuskwatim_Generating_Station&amp;diff=2826</id>
		<title>Wuskwatim Generating Station</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Wuskwatim_Generating_Station&amp;diff=2826"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T21:03:32Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Fixed broken link to RCEA paper&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;For a high level overview of this and other hydro projects see [[Hydroelectric Development in Northern Manitoba]]. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Background==&lt;br /&gt;
The Wuskwatim GS location was identified by Manitoba Hydro as a potential hydroelectric development site following the implementation of the Churchill River Diversion (CRD) in 1966. The site became a higher potential resource option once the CRD began operating in 1976. The project was committed to in the summer of 2006 to meet the needs of continued load growth following a rigorous regulatory review process. The Wuskwatim GS was developed, and is owned by, the Wuskwatim Power Limited Partnership (WPLP) a legal entity involving Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation (NCN) and Manitoba Hydro. Manitoba Hydro operates the Wuskwatim GS as part of the Manitoba power grid on behalf of WPLP. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Location==&lt;br /&gt;
The Wuskwatim Generating Station (GS) is located at a site previously known as Taskinigup Falls (Photo 1) on the Burntwood River, one mile (1.6 km) downstream of Wuskwatim Falls, which is the natural outlet of Wuskwatim Lake. The Wuskwatim GS is approximately 23 mi (37 km) southeast of community of Nelson House and 28 mi (45 km) southwest of the City of Thompson.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 1: Pre-Construction Looking Upstream toward Wuskwatim Lake, 2007]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Components==&lt;br /&gt;
===Principal Works===&lt;br /&gt;
Wuskwatim GS spans a total of 0.4 mi (0.6 km) across the Burntwood River and consists of a closecoupled intake/powerhouse with three units, a non-overflow concrete dam, a concrete wing wall, a main dam, a dyke to contain the immediate forebay, and a three-bay gated spillway (Photo 2; Map 1). The immediate forebay is the area between generating station principal works and Wuskwatim Falls. The immediate forebay area and Wuskwatim Lake together form a reservoir that is typically referred to as the forebay. Channel improvements were undertaken at Wuskwatim Falls to increase the outflow capability of the lake.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 2.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 2: Wuskwatim Generation Station – looking Upstream]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Wuskwatim Map 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=4.0|Map 1: General Arrangement]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Data===&lt;br /&gt;
* Turbine Generator Units: &lt;br /&gt;
** Type: 3 vertical shaft fixed blade propeller turbines &lt;br /&gt;
** Capacity: 214 MW (63rd Annual Report, Mar. 2014) &lt;br /&gt;
* Powerhouse: &lt;br /&gt;
** Length: 246.16 ft (75.03 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Waterfall drop: 70.2 ft (21.4 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Discharge capacity: 38,846 ft3/s (1,100 m3/s) &lt;br /&gt;
* Main Dam: &lt;br /&gt;
** Length: 1,056 ft (322 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Maximum height: 46.3 ft (14.1 m) &lt;br /&gt;
* Spillway: &lt;br /&gt;
** Number of bays: 3 &lt;br /&gt;
** Length (of all bays): 141.08 ft (43.0 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Discharge capacity: 81,577 ft3/s (2,310 m3/s) &lt;br /&gt;
* Reservoir/Forebay Elevation: &lt;br /&gt;
** Full supply level (maximum): 767.71 ft (234.0 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Normal minimum operating forebay elevation: 766.89 ft (233.75 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Flooded Area: 0.1 mi2 (0.4 km2)   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Supporting Infrastructure===&lt;br /&gt;
Access to the Wuskwatim GS site is from the north via a 29.8 mi (48 km) permanent gravel access road from PR 391, approximately 32 km west of the City of Thompson. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Generation Outlet Transmission===&lt;br /&gt;
Development of the Wuskwatim GS required the development of new transmission lines and transmission stations in order to deliver the generated electricity into the existing transmission system. The points of connection are to a new Birchtree Station at the City of Thompson and to the existing Herblet Lake Station north of the community of Snow Lake. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The new transmission facilities include the following: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a new 230 kilovolt (kV) switching station at the Wuskwatim GS site; &lt;br /&gt;
* a new switching station (Birchtree Station), just south of the City of Thompson; &lt;br /&gt;
* a new 230 kV transmission line (W76B) to connect the Wuskwatim Switching Station to the Birchtree Station. This line was the first built and was initially used to provide construction power for development of the proposed generating station (Figure 1); &lt;br /&gt;
* two new 230 kV transmission lines (W73H and W74H) between the Wuskwatim Switching Station and the existing Herblet Lake Station, to the north of the community of Snow Lake (Figure 1); and &lt;br /&gt;
* a new 230 kV transmission line from the Herblet Lake Station to the Rall’s Island Station at The Pas.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 7.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Figure 1: Illustrations of Transmission Lines and Clearing Requirements]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Construction==&lt;br /&gt;
===Principle Structures===&lt;br /&gt;
Construction began in 2006 when clearing for the site access road and start-up camp got underway. Over a two year period, the access road was constructed, borrow areas were developed, and the site construction camp built adjacent to the future location of the generating station. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Work on the generating station began in late 2007 with the opening up of a rock quarry, impervious and granular borrow areas, and construction of cofferdams to isolate the area for the spillway, powerhouse and exit channels to be built. River diversion through the completed spillway structure took place in 2010, allowing for construction of the Stage II cofferdams and the permanent main dam across Taskinigup Falls (Photo 3). The stations three generating units went into commercial service between June and October 2012 (Photo 4). &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All of the construction workforce lived in camp for several weeks at a time and travelled to their homes during their days off.  Decommissioning of construction facilities and restoration of the site continued through 2013 and 2014. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 5.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 3: Stage II Diversion - Construction of the Main Dam]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 6.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 4: Powerhouse and Spillway Looking Upstream]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Construction Infrastructure===&lt;br /&gt;
A temporary construction camp and work areas (Photo 5) were established near the site. The construction camp comprised of accommodations for upwards of 840 workers, a dining complex, a recreation centre, and a lounge. Construction power was brought in by pre-building the 230 kV transmission line (W76B) from the City of Thompson (Birchtree Station to Wuskwatim Switching Station) and would ultimately be used as outlet transmission once the project was complete.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 4.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 5: Construction Work Areas]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Operations==&lt;br /&gt;
Access: Access to the site is by the construction road, which was used to build the project and connect the site to PR 391. The access road is private and is not part of the provincial road network. A security gate near the intersection of the access road and PR391 limits access to the area to those authorized. The site is approximately a one-hour drive from the City of Thompson. There is no landing strip at the site for fixed-wing aircraft; however several landing areas are present to permit helicopter access. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Workforce: The station has approximately 10 staff comprised of the following: operating staff, maintenance staff (electrical, mechanical, utility), support staff (administration, stores) and supervisory staff. The workforce arrive at the Wuskwatim GS from various locations within the province. The workforce is split into two shifts who work an eight days on/six days off schedule, allowing the station to be fully staffed every day between 0700h and 1800h. After hours, the System Control Centre located in the City of Winnipeg monitors alarms within the station and calls out operating staff to investigate any anomalies. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The workers stay at site in dormitories retained following completion of construction of the station. The site is supported by a small on-site kitchen/dining complex and is serviced by the construction water treatment plant and sewage lagoon.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Public Safety: Several safety features were designed into Wuskwatim, including: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a water release siren that is automatically sounded before adjusting discharge through the spillway gates to warn the public in the area of the generating station; &lt;br /&gt;
* a boat restraining barrier (safety boom) which is located upstream of Wuskwatim Falls; &lt;br /&gt;
* life rings provided on the spillway, powerhouse intake and tailrace decks; &lt;br /&gt;
* fencing used as a barrier to dangerous areas; &lt;br /&gt;
* signage (printed in English and Cree) for users of the waterway; and &lt;br /&gt;
* security gates which restrict access at the highway access point. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Licenses: Manitoba Hydro operates the Wuskwatim GS on behalf of the WPLP in accordance with the Water Power Act and Environment Act licences issued by the Province of Manitoba. The Wuskwatim GS was the first generating station in Manitoba to be authorized under the Environment Act. For more details on the Wuskwatim GS operations and its effects on the water regime, see Water Regime, Section 4.3.3.6. For further information on the Water Power license, see the Manitoba Government Water Power Licensing website at: https://www.gov.mb.ca/sd/water/water-power/index.html. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Mitigation and Rehabilitation==&lt;br /&gt;
The Wuskwatim GS was designed to be a low impact project and included the following elements: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a “low head” design that resulted in minimal flooding; &lt;br /&gt;
* an operating plan that stabilized water levels on Wuskwatim Lake and limits the geographic extent and magnitude of downstream water level and flow changes; &lt;br /&gt;
* an access road that incorporated environmental and cultural considerations in the route selection process;  &lt;br /&gt;
* commitment to develop an access management plan; and &lt;br /&gt;
* a commitment to develop an Environmental Protection Plan that assured that all work was carried out in compliance with regulatory requirements, project approvals, and proven environmental protection practices. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rehabilitation efforts of construction activities at the Wuskwatim GS have been ongoing since 2009, and have consisted of tree planting and seeding which concluded in June of 2015. To date, over 600,000 seedlings have been planted and approximately 198 acres (80 ha) of land has been seeded with native plants. Locations of revegetation include: along the Wuskwatim access road, decommissioned borrow pits, excavated material placement areas, impacted areas around the camp and generating station, and at the Wuskwatim village where cultural plantings took place. The rehabilitation has been a success to date and will continue to be monitored for at least 5 to 7 years under the Terrestrial Effects Monitoring Plan.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro &amp;amp; the Province of Manitoba, December 2015, ''Regional Cumulative Effects Assessment Phase II: Part II Hydroelectric Development Project Description in the Region of Interest''. Retrieved April 1 2016 from, https://www.hydro.mb.ca/docs/regulatory_affairs/pdf/rcea/rcea_phase2_part_ii_hydroelectric_development_project_description.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Wuskwatim_Generating_Station&amp;diff=2825</id>
		<title>Wuskwatim Generating Station</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Wuskwatim_Generating_Station&amp;diff=2825"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T20:55:35Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Fixed broken link to MB Gov Water Power Licensing&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;For a high level overview of this and other hydro projects see [[Hydroelectric Development in Northern Manitoba]]. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Background==&lt;br /&gt;
The Wuskwatim GS location was identified by Manitoba Hydro as a potential hydroelectric development site following the implementation of the Churchill River Diversion (CRD) in 1966. The site became a higher potential resource option once the CRD began operating in 1976. The project was committed to in the summer of 2006 to meet the needs of continued load growth following a rigorous regulatory review process. The Wuskwatim GS was developed, and is owned by, the Wuskwatim Power Limited Partnership (WPLP) a legal entity involving Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation (NCN) and Manitoba Hydro. Manitoba Hydro operates the Wuskwatim GS as part of the Manitoba power grid on behalf of WPLP. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Location==&lt;br /&gt;
The Wuskwatim Generating Station (GS) is located at a site previously known as Taskinigup Falls (Photo 1) on the Burntwood River, one mile (1.6 km) downstream of Wuskwatim Falls, which is the natural outlet of Wuskwatim Lake. The Wuskwatim GS is approximately 23 mi (37 km) southeast of community of Nelson House and 28 mi (45 km) southwest of the City of Thompson.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 1: Pre-Construction Looking Upstream toward Wuskwatim Lake, 2007]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Components==&lt;br /&gt;
===Principal Works===&lt;br /&gt;
Wuskwatim GS spans a total of 0.4 mi (0.6 km) across the Burntwood River and consists of a closecoupled intake/powerhouse with three units, a non-overflow concrete dam, a concrete wing wall, a main dam, a dyke to contain the immediate forebay, and a three-bay gated spillway (Photo 2; Map 1). The immediate forebay is the area between generating station principal works and Wuskwatim Falls. The immediate forebay area and Wuskwatim Lake together form a reservoir that is typically referred to as the forebay. Channel improvements were undertaken at Wuskwatim Falls to increase the outflow capability of the lake.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 2.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 2: Wuskwatim Generation Station – looking Upstream]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Wuskwatim Map 1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=4.0|Map 1: General Arrangement]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Data===&lt;br /&gt;
* Turbine Generator Units: &lt;br /&gt;
** Type: 3 vertical shaft fixed blade propeller turbines &lt;br /&gt;
** Capacity: 214 MW (63rd Annual Report, Mar. 2014) &lt;br /&gt;
* Powerhouse: &lt;br /&gt;
** Length: 246.16 ft (75.03 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Waterfall drop: 70.2 ft (21.4 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Discharge capacity: 38,846 ft3/s (1,100 m3/s) &lt;br /&gt;
* Main Dam: &lt;br /&gt;
** Length: 1,056 ft (322 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Maximum height: 46.3 ft (14.1 m) &lt;br /&gt;
* Spillway: &lt;br /&gt;
** Number of bays: 3 &lt;br /&gt;
** Length (of all bays): 141.08 ft (43.0 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Discharge capacity: 81,577 ft3/s (2,310 m3/s) &lt;br /&gt;
* Reservoir/Forebay Elevation: &lt;br /&gt;
** Full supply level (maximum): 767.71 ft (234.0 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Normal minimum operating forebay elevation: 766.89 ft (233.75 m) &lt;br /&gt;
** Flooded Area: 0.1 mi2 (0.4 km2)   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Supporting Infrastructure===&lt;br /&gt;
Access to the Wuskwatim GS site is from the north via a 29.8 mi (48 km) permanent gravel access road from PR 391, approximately 32 km west of the City of Thompson. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Generation Outlet Transmission===&lt;br /&gt;
Development of the Wuskwatim GS required the development of new transmission lines and transmission stations in order to deliver the generated electricity into the existing transmission system. The points of connection are to a new Birchtree Station at the City of Thompson and to the existing Herblet Lake Station north of the community of Snow Lake. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The new transmission facilities include the following: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a new 230 kilovolt (kV) switching station at the Wuskwatim GS site; &lt;br /&gt;
* a new switching station (Birchtree Station), just south of the City of Thompson; &lt;br /&gt;
* a new 230 kV transmission line (W76B) to connect the Wuskwatim Switching Station to the Birchtree Station. This line was the first built and was initially used to provide construction power for development of the proposed generating station (Figure 1); &lt;br /&gt;
* two new 230 kV transmission lines (W73H and W74H) between the Wuskwatim Switching Station and the existing Herblet Lake Station, to the north of the community of Snow Lake (Figure 1); and &lt;br /&gt;
* a new 230 kV transmission line from the Herblet Lake Station to the Rall’s Island Station at The Pas.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 7.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Figure 1: Illustrations of Transmission Lines and Clearing Requirements]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Construction==&lt;br /&gt;
===Principle Structures===&lt;br /&gt;
Construction began in 2006 when clearing for the site access road and start-up camp got underway. Over a two year period, the access road was constructed, borrow areas were developed, and the site construction camp built adjacent to the future location of the generating station. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Work on the generating station began in late 2007 with the opening up of a rock quarry, impervious and granular borrow areas, and construction of cofferdams to isolate the area for the spillway, powerhouse and exit channels to be built. River diversion through the completed spillway structure took place in 2010, allowing for construction of the Stage II cofferdams and the permanent main dam across Taskinigup Falls (Photo 3). The stations three generating units went into commercial service between June and October 2012 (Photo 4). &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All of the construction workforce lived in camp for several weeks at a time and travelled to their homes during their days off.  Decommissioning of construction facilities and restoration of the site continued through 2013 and 2014. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 5.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 3: Stage II Diversion - Construction of the Main Dam]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 6.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 4: Powerhouse and Spillway Looking Upstream]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Construction Infrastructure===&lt;br /&gt;
A temporary construction camp and work areas (Photo 5) were established near the site. The construction camp comprised of accommodations for upwards of 840 workers, a dining complex, a recreation centre, and a lounge. Construction power was brought in by pre-building the 230 kV transmission line (W76B) from the City of Thompson (Birchtree Station to Wuskwatim Switching Station) and would ultimately be used as outlet transmission once the project was complete.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:Wuskwatim 4.jpg|thumb|center|upright=2.0|Photo 5: Construction Work Areas]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Operations==&lt;br /&gt;
Access: Access to the site is by the construction road, which was used to build the project and connect the site to PR 391. The access road is private and is not part of the provincial road network. A security gate near the intersection of the access road and PR391 limits access to the area to those authorized. The site is approximately a one-hour drive from the City of Thompson. There is no landing strip at the site for fixed-wing aircraft; however several landing areas are present to permit helicopter access. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Workforce: The station has approximately 10 staff comprised of the following: operating staff, maintenance staff (electrical, mechanical, utility), support staff (administration, stores) and supervisory staff. The workforce arrive at the Wuskwatim GS from various locations within the province. The workforce is split into two shifts who work an eight days on/six days off schedule, allowing the station to be fully staffed every day between 0700h and 1800h. After hours, the System Control Centre located in the City of Winnipeg monitors alarms within the station and calls out operating staff to investigate any anomalies. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The workers stay at site in dormitories retained following completion of construction of the station. The site is supported by a small on-site kitchen/dining complex and is serviced by the construction water treatment plant and sewage lagoon.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Public Safety: Several safety features were designed into Wuskwatim, including: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a water release siren that is automatically sounded before adjusting discharge through the spillway gates to warn the public in the area of the generating station; &lt;br /&gt;
* a boat restraining barrier (safety boom) which is located upstream of Wuskwatim Falls; &lt;br /&gt;
* life rings provided on the spillway, powerhouse intake and tailrace decks; &lt;br /&gt;
* fencing used as a barrier to dangerous areas; &lt;br /&gt;
* signage (printed in English and Cree) for users of the waterway; and &lt;br /&gt;
* security gates which restrict access at the highway access point. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Licenses: Manitoba Hydro operates the Wuskwatim GS on behalf of the WPLP in accordance with the Water Power Act and Environment Act licences issued by the Province of Manitoba. The Wuskwatim GS was the first generating station in Manitoba to be authorized under the Environment Act. For more details on the Wuskwatim GS operations and its effects on the water regime, see Water Regime, Section 4.3.3.6. For further information on the Water Power license, see the Manitoba Government Water Power Licensing website at: https://www.gov.mb.ca/sd/water/water-power/index.html. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Mitigation and Rehabilitation==&lt;br /&gt;
The Wuskwatim GS was designed to be a low impact project and included the following elements: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* a “low head” design that resulted in minimal flooding; &lt;br /&gt;
* an operating plan that stabilized water levels on Wuskwatim Lake and limits the geographic extent and magnitude of downstream water level and flow changes; &lt;br /&gt;
* an access road that incorporated environmental and cultural considerations in the route selection process;  &lt;br /&gt;
* commitment to develop an access management plan; and &lt;br /&gt;
* a commitment to develop an Environmental Protection Plan that assured that all work was carried out in compliance with regulatory requirements, project approvals, and proven environmental protection practices. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rehabilitation efforts of construction activities at the Wuskwatim GS have been ongoing since 2009, and have consisted of tree planting and seeding which concluded in June of 2015. To date, over 600,000 seedlings have been planted and approximately 198 acres (80 ha) of land has been seeded with native plants. Locations of revegetation include: along the Wuskwatim access road, decommissioned borrow pits, excavated material placement areas, impacted areas around the camp and generating station, and at the Wuskwatim village where cultural plantings took place. The rehabilitation has been a success to date and will continue to be monitored for at least 5 to 7 years under the Terrestrial Effects Monitoring Plan.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro &amp;amp; the Province of Manitoba, December 2015, ''Regional Cumulative Effects Assessment Phase II: Part II Hydroelectric Development Project Description in the Region of Interest''. Retrieved April 1 2016 from, https://www.hydro.mb.ca/regulatory_affairs/rcea/pdf/rcea_phase2_part_ii_hydroelectric_development_project_description.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=2824</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=2824"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T20:51:36Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Another update of Keeyask status.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[file:LittleSaskDam.jpg|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station - photo Gordon Goldsborough]]&lt;br /&gt;
While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the [[Minnedosa River Hydropower Station|first hydro-electric dam]] in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at [[Kanuchuan Power Development|Kanuchuan Rapids]] on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation. The first unit went into service in February 2021 and there were six units operating in January 2022.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - https://www.enggeomb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=2823</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=2823"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T20:48:26Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Updated Keeyask status.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[file:LittleSaskDam.jpg|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station - photo Gordon Goldsborough]]&lt;br /&gt;
While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the [[Minnedosa River Hydropower Station|first hydro-electric dam]] in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at [[Kanuchuan Power Development|Kanuchuan Rapids]] on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation. The first unit went into service in February 2021.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - https://www.enggeomb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=2822</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=2822"/>
		<updated>2022-10-29T20:42:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Updated link from apegm.mb.ca to enggeomb.ca&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[file:LittleSaskDam.jpg|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station - photo Gordon Goldsborough]]&lt;br /&gt;
While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the [[Minnedosa River Hydropower Station|first hydro-electric dam]] in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at [[Kanuchuan Power Development|Kanuchuan Rapids]] on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - https://www.enggeomb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Garland_Lalibert%C3%A9&amp;diff=2821</id>
		<title>Garland Laliberté</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Garland_Lalibert%C3%A9&amp;diff=2821"/>
		<updated>2022-10-27T01:10:17Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: /* Professional Service */ Added missing accent on photo caption&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== Garland Everett Laliberté, Ph.D. Agricultural Engineering, P.Eng. FEC ==&lt;br /&gt;
(December, 1936 - July, 2022)&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Garland Laliberté was an agricultural engineer of Metis heritage. He was a professor of engineering at the University of Manitoba and went on to become the Dean of the Faculty of Engineering, and was the president of both APEM (Engineers Geosciences Manitoba) and CCPE (Engineers Canada). Throughout his career he was recognized countless times by the professional and technical societies to which he contributed and provided leadership. He died at Winnipeg on July 30th, 2022.&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:2019 Garland Everett Laliberte.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Garland Everett Laliberté, Photo Credit - Garland Laliberté]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Education==&lt;br /&gt;
Born on the family farm in the Shell River Municipality in western Manitoba, he graduated from high school at the tender age of 14 and had the highest academic standing in his class. Garland started university at the University of Manitoba, and then went on to the University of Saskatchewan and graduated in 1956 at the age of 19 with a B.Sc. in agricultural engineering and then again in 1961 with a M.Sc. He continued on to the Colorado State University where he obtained his Ph.D in 1966 specializing in porous media physics. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Early Professional Career==&lt;br /&gt;
In the early part of his career, he spent eleven years working for the federal government in the irrigated area of southern Alberta.  There, he supervised the survey, design and construction of land grading projects to improve the efficiency of surface irrigation.  He also carried out field and laboratory research on water movement through soil with application on irrigation and drainage projects and, in particular, on subsurface drainage.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Academic Career==&lt;br /&gt;
He eventually moved back to Manitoba and took up a teaching position at the University of Manitoba as a professor of agricultural engineering. He continued with his academic career for the next 30 years at the University where he specialized in soil and water research, and authored and co-authored over 100 publications. During this time, he spent 17 years as the Head of the Department of Agricultural Engineering and from 1989 to 1994 he was the Dean of the Faculty of Engineering. Laliberté officially retired in 1996. Shortly thereafter he was awarded the honorary title of Dean Emeritus and continued in that capacity for many years.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Professional Service==&lt;br /&gt;
In addition to his academic career he made significant contributions to the Association and to the engineering profession. Laliberté served as a council member from 1985 to 1990; and was APEM’s President in 1989. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:1989 Garland Everett Laliberte.jpg|thumb|none|250px|1989 - Garland Everett Laliberté, Photo Credit - Association files]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
He also served on the Executive Finance Committee, the Board of Examiners (now the Academic Review Committee), the Admissions Board, the Nominating Committee, and a number of other ad-hoc committees. In total, his contribution to these various committees amounted to the equivalent of 33 committee-years of service to the Association.  Laliberté received the Association's Outstanding Service Award in 1994 for his unwavering commitment to the Association. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Laliberté served on the Board of the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers (CCPE, now Engineers Canada) in 1990. This was then followed up by serving on the Executive of CCPE for three years and was elected President of CCPE in 1994. In 1998 he was recognized by the CCPE when it presented him with its Professional Service Award. He also served with a number of agricultural engineering related associations and received many additional awards from them. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Laliberté was first registered with the Association of Professional Engineers of Manitoba in 1968 and continued his membership for 35 years. Then in 2003 the Association made him an honorary life member for his outstanding contributions to the Association and to the engineering profession.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a correspondence with Dave Ennis in the fall of 2019, Garland shared that one of his most proud accomplishments was his involvement in the University of Manitoba, Faculty of Engineering’s, Engineering Access Program for indigenous students (ENGAP).  “A moment that I recall in particular during my term as Dean of Engineering was having to call upon then Premier Gary Filmon's support to overturn a plan of the Manitoba Department of Postsecondary Education to eliminate completely the Department's share of the financial support for the Program.”  It was this type of commitment that was instrumental in keeping the program going.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Laliberté continued to be active in retired life including participating in current Manitoba events that he was passionate about.  He was a member of the Bipole III Coalition group from 2010 to 2018 who were a group of 'citizens influencing the future generation, use, and conservation of electricity for the economic development of Manitoba.  He then was instrumental in creating the Manitoba Energy Council in 2018 which had as it’s mission statement ‘the Manitoba Energy Council believes that its expertise in most facets of the production, use and conservation of electrical energy in this province would be an asset to Manitoba Hydro in planning the delivery of electricity to Manitobans’.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Heritage==&lt;br /&gt;
Laliberté is a descendent of Jean-Baptiste Lagimodiere, a coureur des bois with the Hudson Bay Company, and Marie-Anne Gaboury who is considered the first women of European descent in western Canada, and grandparents to Louis Riel. At the age of 15, his grandfather Justin Laliberté was hired by the Hudson Bay Company as a Red River cart driver which was a part of an ox freight train heading from the Red River Colony to Fort Edmonton. The cargo for each cart was six 100-pound sacks of flour, and the round trip on the Carlton Trail took the entire summer. Laliberté himself started school on a small sleigh pulled by a sleigh dog.  He learned to fiddle at an early age and continued to play Metis tunes with a bluegrass group at his winter home in Florida.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;1.	Garland Everett Laliberté obituary, Winnipeg Free Press, August 3, 2022, https://passages.winnipegfreepress.com/passage-details/id-309560/LALIBERTE_GARLAND&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;2.	Garland Everett Laliberté  – Abridged CV for Engineers Geoscientists Manitoba, Heritage Committee, December 11, 2019.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;3.	Bipole III Coalition website – accessed August 3rd, 2022&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;4.	Manitoba Energy Council website – accessed August 3rd, 2022.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;5.	Memorable Manitobans – Manitoba Historical Society website – accessed August 4th, 2022.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Compiled by==&lt;br /&gt;
Glen N. Cook, P. Eng.(SM), FEC&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;Editing and Review by Dave Ennis, P. Eng.(SM), FEC&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Grosvenor_House&amp;diff=2820</id>
		<title>Grosvenor House</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Grosvenor_House&amp;diff=2820"/>
		<updated>2022-10-27T01:06:42Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Changed http to https on external links in the References section&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== Overview ==&lt;br /&gt;
Grosvenor House Apartment Building is located at 811 Grosvenor Avenue in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Grosvenor House is an eight story apartment building with a precast concrete frame and floor system. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==When==	&lt;br /&gt;
Built in 1960. At the time it was the tallest all-precast concrete building in Canada. It continues to serve as a residential condominium building.   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Where==&lt;br /&gt;
Grosvenor House is located in the vicinity of Osborn Village, River Heights, and the Corydon Strip in south Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
{{#display_map:811 Grosvenor Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada | height= 300px| width= 400px}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why==	&lt;br /&gt;
The precast concrete industry was emerging in Manitoba. The City of Winnipeg building permitting authority had just accepted precast concrete as building system, and an alternate to the original cast-in-place design was developed. The innovation of the project highlighted the versatility, economy, use of local products and potential of precast concrete for the building industry of Manitoba at a time when development was vital to the Province.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How==	&lt;br /&gt;
The consulting structural engineer was L. Cazaly on the basis of an architectural design prepared by Libling Michener and Associates (Leslie J. Stechesen). The precast concrete was fabricated and erected by Building Products &amp;amp; Coal Ltd. of Winnipeg (later PRECO, later Con-Force, and now Armtec). &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Building Details==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;gallery&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
File:GrosvenorHouseF1.jpg|General arrangement and detail of the precast concrete sections&lt;br /&gt;
File:GrosvenorHouseF2.jpg|Details of the column splices, spandrel connection and floor system&lt;br /&gt;
File:GrosvenorHouseF3.jpg|General view of the completed precast concrete work&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/gallery&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Key players== &lt;br /&gt;
*Don Elliot http://passages.winnipegfreepress.com/passage-details/id-205551/name-Donald_Elliott/ &lt;br /&gt;
*L. Cazaly &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Web links:&lt;br /&gt;
*https://www.winnipegarchitecture.ca/811-grosvenor-avenue/ accessed 15 May 2014&lt;br /&gt;
*https://www.winnipegarchitecture.ca/leslie-stechesen/ accessed 15 May 2014&lt;br /&gt;
*https://archiseek.com/2012/1961-grosvenor-house-winnipeg/#.U3UJfdK2h8E accessed 15 May 2014&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=2819</id>
		<title>Heritage Wiki Primer</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=2819"/>
		<updated>2022-10-26T02:30:50Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Fixed typo &amp;quot;One you are logged&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;Once you are logged&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Once you are logged in, this is what the main Wiki page looks like.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Adding / Editing Text ===&lt;br /&gt;
You can add or edit text by clicking the Edit tab at the top right near the search function. To see what formatting can be applied to text, click on the Help link on the left just above the Toolbox, then click on Formatting under the Editing heading on the help page. This text is regular, un-formatted text. The large-type, bold face &amp;quot;Adding / Editing Text&amp;quot; above was created using &amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;===&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt; before and after the words. [[Look in the &amp;quot;Section Formatting&amp;quot; area on the Formatting help page]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''It's actually pretty easy. Click on the Edit tab to see how this page was done.'''[[Link title]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
----Wow&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=St._Andrew%27s_Lock_and_Dam&amp;diff=2818</id>
		<title>St. Andrew's Lock and Dam</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=St._Andrew%27s_Lock_and_Dam&amp;diff=2818"/>
		<updated>2022-10-26T02:21:20Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Spelling correction for Caméré&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&amp;lt;onlyinclude&amp;gt; &amp;lt;includeonly&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
'''St. Andrew's Lock and Dam'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Completed in 1910, this engineering system is comprised of three elements; a dam, a lock, and a bridge. The design employed a Camere style dam and, at 240 metres long, it is the largest dam of this type ever built. It is also considered to be the only one still in existence in the world. It continues to operate to this day, regulating the water level of the Red River. It also allows river traffic to operate between Winnipeg and points downstream, while providing a link for road traffic across the river. ([[St. Andrew's Lock and Dam|Full Article...]])&amp;lt;/includeonly&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/onlyinclude&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:4083715791_873ec4b2ba_b.jpg|border|left|thumb|St. Andrew's Lock and Dam, Photo Credit: Alan Pollard]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam upstream view 2007 10 30.JPG|border|left|thumb|Upstream view - October 2007  Photo Credit: Provincial Government]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam downstream view - drop section construction for floodway enhancements in the background 2007 10 30.JPG|left|thumb|Downstream view with construction activity in the Floodway Channel in the background - October 2007, Photo Credit: Provincial Government]]&amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam overhead view - work barge on the downstream side 2007 10 30.JPG|left|thumb|Overhead view - October 2007, Photo Credit: Provincial Government]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam upstream view west side 2007.JPG|left|thumb|Upstream view of the locks on the west side - October 2007, Photo Credit: Provincial Government]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrews Lock and Dam 2019 08 01 Alan Pollard.jpg|left|thumb|Locks - August 2019, Photo Credit: Alan Pollard]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock Curtain wall CLoseUp 20190801 Alan Pollard.jpg|left|thumb|Curtain Dam Close up - August 2019, Photo Credit: Alan Pollard]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- THE MAIN ARTICLE STARTS HERE   --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Completed in 1910, this engineering system is comprised of three elements; a dam, a lock, and a bridge. The design employed a Caméré style dam and, at 240 metres long, it is the largest dam of this type ever built. It is also considered to be the only one still in existence in the world. It continues to operate to this day, regulating the water level of the Red River. It also allows river traffic to operate between Winnipeg and points downstream, while providing a link for road traffic across the river.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
__NOTOC__&lt;br /&gt;
==Quick Facts==&lt;br /&gt;
* Dam constructed 1907-10. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Bridge constructed 1912-13. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Modifications in 1949 to increase loading capacity. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Frame and curtain replacement in 1967. (1) &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Metallized in 1999 (2)  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Location==&lt;br /&gt;
Lockport, Manitoba&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{#display_map:Lockport, MB |height=400|width=400|type=satellite|zoom=35}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why==  &lt;br /&gt;
Prior to it's construction, there wasn't a singular mode of transportation between areas downstream of Selkirk (including all of Lake Winnipeg) and areas upstream of St. Andrew's. At the time, there were no rail lines connecting Winnipeg with areas North of it. The elevation drop of the Red River (approximately 13 feet between between Middle Church and Lister Rapids) also prevented freighter ships from navigating through the area currently known as Lockport. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Immediately after the opening of the locks and dam, freighter ships as large as the &amp;quot;Winnitoba&amp;quot;, which could carry 2,000 passengers and thirty-five carloads of freight, could  provide a viable link. These passenger and freighter ships ensured economically sustainable development of fisheries, farming land, and mineral resources. (3)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
With the competition of rail lines and road transportation, the use of the locks for river travel waned considerably by the middle of the 20th Century. However, the dam continues to provide a key role in flood mitigation as a control structure.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Images were photographed and digitized by Alan Pollard, P. Eng. (SM) FEC with the assistance of the R.M. of St. Clement in 2019&lt;br /&gt;
====Typical shipping vessels====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Selkirk Ferry Crossing - 1916.jpg|border|left|thumb|Selkirk Ferry Crossing - c. 1916.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Winnitoban Ship at Offical Opening of St Andrews Locks 1 - 1910 reduced.jpg|left|thumb|Winnitoban at the Official Opening - c. 1910, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Traditional York Boat - c1910.jpg|border|left|thumb|York Boat passing through - c. 1910.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Winnitoba Downstream at St Andrews Post card.jpg|border|left|thumb|Winnitoba Downstream at St. Andrews Dam - postcard.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:SS Majestic at Lockport.jpg|border|left|thumb|SS Majestic passing through the locks.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:SS Keenora at Lockport - 1941.jpg|left|thumb|SS Keenora at Lockport - c. 1941, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]]&amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Ship Passing Through the Locks.jpg|left|thumb|Unidentified Ship, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Ship Passing Through the Locks 3.jpg|left|thumb|Unidentified Ship, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Ship Passing Through the Locks 2.jpg|left|thumb|Unidentified Ship, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How== &lt;br /&gt;
The St. Andrew's Dam is a unique “Caméré” style dam using moveable curtains consisting of horizontal sections of wood hinged together, which are raised or lowered to control water flows. Invented by French engineer M. Caméré, this type of dam was popular in western Europe in the late nineteenth century. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The structure consists of:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Seven 15 m high concrete piers&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Steel trusses approximately 40 m long that span between the piers&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* A 6 m high by 11 m wide concrete sill or fixed dam that joins the bottom of the piers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 15 steel frames per span which are hung from the trusses, and&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 89 wood curtains&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The design consists of a repeating series of two movable components. The first is a steel frame that is stored horizontally when the dam is not restricting flow. These frames are hung from the upper structure and are rotated down from an axis that is transverse to the flow of the river and located at the top end of the frame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Attached to these frames are curtains, 4 m long and 2.1 m wide and consisting of 50 individually sized Douglas Fir laths held together with brass hinges and pins. During the navigation season the curtains are individually rolled up to increase flow, or rolled down to restrict flow, depending on daily water flow rates in the river.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Construction Photos===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam Construction.jpg|left|thumb|Construction - date unknown, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]]&amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Building St Andrews Lock and Dam 2 - 1908.jpg|left|thumb|Construction Activities c. 1908, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Building St Andrews Lock and Dam 1 - 1908.jpg|left|thumb|Construction Activities c. 1908, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Buidling St. Andrew's lock and Dam Construction 1908 - hi res.jpg|left|thumb|Construction Activities c. 1908 (hi resolution), Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St Andrews Locks - 1910.jpg|left|thumb|Lock c. 1910, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:OfficialOpeningFoote.jpg|left|thumb|Official Opening, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives/L.B. Foote]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Upstream at St Andrews Lock and Dam - 1910 .jpg|border|left|thumb|Looking downstream at St. Andrews Dam - c. 1910.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Downstream of Dam with Boats before Bridge Added.jpg|left|thumb|Downstream area before bridge was added date unknown, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Offical Opening of Bascule Lift Span - c1914.jpg|left|thumb|Opening of the Bascule Lift Span c. 1914, Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:St. Andrew's Lock and Dam Downstream area - 1926.jpg|border|left|thumb|Downstream area c. 1926.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Bascule Bridge span Raised for SS Keenora - 1939.jpg|border|left|thumb|Bascule Bridge span raised for SS Keenora c. 1939.  Photo Credit:  Manitoba Archives]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Fun Facts==&lt;br /&gt;
* The Canadian government constructed the dam and lock as part of a proposed river steamboat navigation system extending from Winnipeg to Edmonton.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The total cost of construction was $3.5 million by 1913.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* It was opened by the Honorable Wilfred Laurier, the Prime Minister of Canada, from the deck of the Winnitoba, which was built in Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* During construction, organizations prearranged excursions to see the work in progress.  A special trail for visitors was created from Winnipeg and Back.  The cost was 45 cents return, allowing them two hours to inspect the project. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Also See==&lt;br /&gt;
Caméré dam, curtain dam (US) (it was invented by Caméré and introduced in 1876-1880 at Port Villez on the lower Seine. In it wooden curtains that can be rolled up from the bottom were substituted for the needles in the Poiree weir) Camerewehr, Rolladenwehr, Jalousiewehr, Rollvorhangwehr&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Key Players==&lt;br /&gt;
Mr. A.R. Dufresne - Construction Engineer. Mr. A. St. Laurent and H.E .Vautelet, Design Engineers&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Summary Article for Engineers Geoscientists Centennial Anniversary in 2020 ==&lt;br /&gt;
The Lockport Dam and Bridge goes by many names but it is known officially as the St. Andrew’s Caméré Curtain Dam. Completed in 1910, this engineering marvel is comprised of three elements: a dam, a lock, and a bridge. The design employs a caméré-style dam and is the only structure of its kind in North America and one of only four in the world. At 240 metres long, it is also the largest dam of this type ever built. In 1990, it was designated as a national historical site due to the uniqueness of its engineering design. It continues to operate to this day, regulating the water level of the Red River, and enabling circumnavigation of an historically challenging reach of the river via the only lock on the Canadian prairies. It allows river traffic to operate between Winnipeg and points downstream, while the incorporated bridge provides a link for road traffic over the river.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The dam and lock were to be a cornerstone project in creating an inland water transportation system stretching westward to Edmonton, eastward to Thunder Bay, and northward to Hudson Bay. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, steamship transport was an important mode of transportation. During the 1890s, more than 30 steamships provided freight and passenger service to the lower reaches of the Red River and Lake Winnipeg, including a connection via Grand Rapids to steamship service on the Saskatchewan River.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The natural course of the Red River is blocked by series of five rapids which start just north of Middle Church and continue downstream to the St. Andrew’s Rapids. The rapids were an impediment to navigation with its fall of some 15 feet within a 10-mile distance. Accordingly, towards the end of the 19th century, surveys determined the best method of overcoming these obstacles. A dam at St. Andrews was determined to be the ideal solution. The reason for selecting this site was that it contained a long bend in the river which gave the engineers sufficient room in which to build the lock. The location was also the site of a natural fault in the rock strata, high enough to give easy access to the bedrock for construction of the foundations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Several factors weighed on the decision about the type of dam to construct. The structure had to allow for free passage of ice during the spring melt. It had to be removable on short notice, perhaps in a matter of hours, if necessary. Short-term fluctuations in river level caused by atmospheric and wind pressure on Lake Winnipeg, 27 miles to the north, had to be considered too. A caméré dam, with a removable curtain forming a weir, met all the criteria.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The project was constructed in two phases, the first being the construction of the lock and dam between 1900 and 1910 by the federal Department of Public Works. The dam is 788 feet (240 m) long and is supported by seven piers, 50 feet (15 m) high and 131 feet (40 m) apart. A working deck is located below the road deck where a series of removable wood and metal curtains are lowered and operated.  Each curtain is made of 50 Douglas Fir ‘laths’ fastened to a cast-iron plate at the bottom. The curtains maintain the river at a navigable depth during the summer months and are rolled up and removed each fall to enable the spring flood waters and ice to pass unimpeded. After the spring run-off has passed, the curtains are lowered, usually in the middle of May, and they rest on a concrete sill at the river bottom. The dam maintains a relatively stable water level at Winnipeg of about 734 feet above sea level.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The adjacent lock section is 215 feet long, 45 feet wide, and 22 feet deep. Water in the lock can be raised or lowered in approximately 10 minutes. Its gates are 13 feet high and are connected by bronze pins and hinges. Completed in early 1910, the first steamer to pass through the locks was the Victoria, on 2 May 1910. The official inauguration did not occur, however, until 14 July 1910 when a large number of federal, provincial, and municipal dignitaries, including Prime Minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier, traversed the locks aboard the Winnitoba. An example of the envisioned potential that the project would unleash can be seen in the size of some of the newly constructed ships, the largest being the Winnitoba with a capacity of 2,000 passengers and 35 carloads of freight.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In its first year of operation, 1,600 vessels passed through the lock and no tolls were charged for the passage. Several professional journals devoted space to detailed technical descriptions of the project. The prestigious American publication Engineering News even included an eight-page feature on the dam in its October 1910 edition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The second phase of construction entailed the addition of a vehicular bridge between 1912 and 1913. This brought the total project cost to $3.5 million, or about $93 million in today’s money. The bridge is 270 m long and consists of seven truss spans with the upper cords supporting a road deck and the lower cords supporting a working deck for the dam. To allow for the passage of ships with high masts through the locks, the bridge works over the lock section included a bascule-type hinged apparatus, which raised the road section to allow vessels to pass beneath. A few years later, a fish ladder was added on the east side to enable spawning fish to swim upstream.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By the time the dam and lock were finished, the extension of railway networks throughout Manitoba led to a steady decline in the importance of waterways for the movement of freight and passengers. By the middle of the 20th century, under intense competition from railways and road transportation, use of the locks for economic activity had waned. However, the dam continues to mitigate floods on the Red River. And it was still used by pleasure craft. During the 1990s, between 1,000 to 1,500 boats smaller than 40 feet in length passed through the locks in an average summer season, with an additional 300 to 500 boats larger than 40 feet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1984, the lock gates needed to be replaced. A search found forests near Seattle where suitable Douglas Fir trees, estimated to be 350 years old, could be used to make “dense select structural” timber. In total, 108 of these special timbers—28 feet long, 33 inches wide, and 15 inches deep—were used to reconstruct the gates. Between 1994 and 1999, a full reconstruction of the water control structure was undertaken, at a cost of $20 million.&lt;br /&gt;
==What else is there to see==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The area is a nice destination for a Sunday afternoon drive from Winnipeg to enjoy one of the many restaurants in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;li style=&amp;quot;display: inline-block;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;[[File:Skinners Hotdog 20190801 Alan Pollard.jpg|border|left|thumb|Footlong hotdog from Skinners Restaurant, August 2019. Photo Credit: Alan Pollard]] &amp;lt;/li&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=4441&lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.tac-atc.ca/english/resourcecentre/readingroom/conference/conf2004/docs/s5/bowen.pdf&lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/pageant/11/locks.shtml&lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=4441&lt;br /&gt;
# http://lockportmanitoba.ca/history.swf &lt;br /&gt;
# http://www.stclementsheritage.com/index.php/heritage-articles/transportation/influence-of-the-river/st-andrews-lock-and-dam/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Compiled by==&lt;br /&gt;
Alan Pollard, P.Eng. (SM), FEC &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Ryan Bernier, P. Eng.&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Last posting by Glen Cook, P. Eng. (SM), FEC&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=2198</id>
		<title>Laurie River Generating Stations</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=2198"/>
		<updated>2018-04-03T23:02:52Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Laurie River Development is a smaller complex on the Manitoba Hydro System with a capacity of 10 MW producing about 0.3% of total system generation; it is located in northern Manitoba, about 200 km northwest of the city of Thompson, on the Laurie River, which is a left bank tributary of the Churchill River. The site is located within the resource are&lt;br /&gt;
of Mathias Colomb Band (Pukatawagan). It is normally accessible only by air for operating staff, although supplies and heavy equipment can be delivered to the development by rail.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Capacity ==&lt;br /&gt;
The total capacity of the two dams is 10 MW. &lt;br /&gt;
Laurie River 1, equipped with two 2.5 MW units, two concrete dams about 15 m high and a 5-bay spillway while Laurie&lt;br /&gt;
River 2, equipped with one 5 MW unit, three concrete dams about 15 m high, a 5-bay spillway and three embankment dams about 6 to 7 m high.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Construction ==&lt;br /&gt;
The dams were completed in 1952 and 1958 respectively by the Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro on May 1, 1970.[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=3.0|Laurie River I Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #1 Generating Station is located approximately 200 km (120 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 125 km (78 miles) upstream of Southern Indian Lake.&lt;br /&gt;
It consists of a two unit powerhouse, a five bay stoplog controlled spillway and three gravity dams. The station has a name plate capacity of 5 MW (7,000 hp). Construction of the station was completed by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver2.jpg|thumb|center|upright=3.0|Laurie River II Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #2 GS is located approximately 210 km (130 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 10 km (6 miles) upstream of Laurie River #1 Generating Station.[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Water Control Structures == &lt;br /&gt;
There are two regulating reservoirs upstream of Laurie River&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
      &lt;br /&gt;
* Russell Lake, with an embankment dam about 7 m high and a three-bay control structure;&lt;br /&gt;
*Eager Lake, with an embankment dam about 6 m high and a two-bay control structure.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, the upper basin of the adjacent Loon River is diverted into Russell Lake by means of two dykes about 9 and 6 m high respectively.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
[1] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river1.html&lt;br /&gt;
[2] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river2.html&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Civil Engineering]] &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Mechanical Engineering]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Generating Stations]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=2197</id>
		<title>Laurie River Generating Stations</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=2197"/>
		<updated>2018-04-03T23:02:28Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Laurie River Development is a smaller complex on the Manitoba Hydro System with a capacity of 10 MW producing about 0.3% of total system generation; it is located in northern Manitoba, about 200 km northwest of the city of Thompson, on the Laurie River, which is a left bank tributary of the Churchill River. The site is located within the resource are&lt;br /&gt;
of Mathias Colomb Band (Pukatawagan). It is normally accessible only by air for operating staff, although supplies and heavy equipment can be delivered to the development by rail.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Capacity ==&lt;br /&gt;
The total capacity of the two dams is 10 MW. &lt;br /&gt;
Laurie River 1, equipped with two 2.5 MW units, two concrete dams about 15 m high and a 5-bay spillway while Laurie&lt;br /&gt;
River 2, equipped with one 5 MW unit, three concrete dams about 15 m high, a 5-bay spillway and three embankment dams about 6 to 7 m high.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Construction ==&lt;br /&gt;
The dams were completed in 1952 and 1958 respectively by the Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro on May 1, 1970.[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver1.jpg|thumb|center|upright=3.0|Laurie River I Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #1 Generating Station is located approximately 200 km (120 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 125 km (78 miles) upstream of Southern Indian Lake.&lt;br /&gt;
It consists of a two unit powerhouse, a five bay stoplog controlled spillway and three gravity dams. The station has a name plate capacity of 5 MW (7,000 hp). Construction of the station was completed by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver2.jpg|thumb|center|upright=3.0|Laurie River II Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #2 GS is located approximately 210 km (130 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 10 km (6 miles) upstream of Laurie River #1 Generating Station.[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Water Control Structures == &lt;br /&gt;
There are two regulating reservoirs upstream of Laurie River&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
      &lt;br /&gt;
* Russell Lake, with an embankment dam about 7 m high and a three-bay control structure;&lt;br /&gt;
*Eager Lake, with an embankment dam about 6 m high and a two-bay control structure.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, the upper basin of the adjacent Loon River is diverted into Russell Lake by means of two dykes about 9 and 6 m high respectively.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
[1] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river1.html&lt;br /&gt;
[2] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river2.html&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Civil Engineering]] &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Mechanical Engineering]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Generating Stations]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Association_Presidents&amp;diff=1151</id>
		<title>Association Presidents</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Association_Presidents&amp;diff=1151"/>
		<updated>2015-11-05T18:52:00Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Added 2015 President; fixed broken link at bottom of page&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Every year, the APEGM Council elects a new President from amongst its membership. They are nominated to Vice-President, become President the next year, and Past-President the following year. Afterwards they join the Past Presidents Committee.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* 2015 - H.N. Procyshyn&lt;br /&gt;
* 2014 - M.R. Friesen&lt;br /&gt;
* 2013 - D.J. Nedohin-Macek&lt;br /&gt;
* 2012 - A.R.D. Pawlikewich&lt;br /&gt;
* 2011 - W.C. Girling&lt;br /&gt;
* 2010 - J.C. Woods&lt;br /&gt;
* 2009 - D.J. Himbeault&lt;br /&gt;
* 2008 - M.T. Corkery&lt;br /&gt;
* 2007 - R.L. Taylor&lt;br /&gt;
* 2006 - D.S. Jayas&lt;br /&gt;
* 2005 - A.D. Silk&lt;br /&gt;
* 2004 - A.H. Permut&lt;br /&gt;
* 2003 - L.R. Ferchoff&lt;br /&gt;
* 2002 - M.A. Barakat&lt;br /&gt;
* 2001 - A.J. Pollard&lt;br /&gt;
* 2000 - J.R. Hosang&lt;br /&gt;
* 1999 - M.G. Britton&lt;br /&gt;
* 1998 - P. Washchyshyn&lt;br /&gt;
* 1997 - J.M. Symonds&lt;br /&gt;
* 1996 - C.L. Stewart&lt;br /&gt;
* 1995 - D.G. Osman&lt;br /&gt;
* 1994 - D.G. Chapman&lt;br /&gt;
* 1993 - C.E. Anderson&lt;br /&gt;
* 1992 - N.P. Feschuk&lt;br /&gt;
* 1991 - Wm. M.A. McDonald&lt;br /&gt;
* 1990 - K.A. Buhr&lt;br /&gt;
* 1989 - G.E. Laliberte&lt;br /&gt;
* 1988 - W.D. Christie&lt;br /&gt;
* 1987 - E.A. Speers&lt;br /&gt;
* 1986 - E.W.J. Clarke&lt;br /&gt;
* 1985 - R.A. Kane&lt;br /&gt;
* 1984 - R.R. Foster&lt;br /&gt;
* 1983 - D.E. Cross&lt;br /&gt;
* 1982 - K.M. Jardine&lt;br /&gt;
* 1981 - R.C. Isaak&lt;br /&gt;
* 1980 - W. Saltzberg&lt;br /&gt;
* 1979 - R.A. Johnson&lt;br /&gt;
* 1978 - A.W. Gilliland&lt;br /&gt;
* 1977 - E.F. Glass&lt;br /&gt;
* 1976 - C.R. Bouskill&lt;br /&gt;
* 1975 - D.R. Grimes&lt;br /&gt;
* 1974 - G.A. DePauw&lt;br /&gt;
* 1973 - C.R. McBain&lt;br /&gt;
* 1972 - S. Barkwell&lt;br /&gt;
* 1971 - R. Hood&lt;br /&gt;
* 1970 - J.D. Adam&lt;br /&gt;
* 1969 - L.W. Blackman&lt;br /&gt;
* 1968 - F.M. Fowler&lt;br /&gt;
* 1967 - R.C. Sommerville&lt;br /&gt;
* 1966 - R.T. Harland&lt;br /&gt;
* 1965 - S.J. Borgford&lt;br /&gt;
* 1964 - B. Chappell&lt;br /&gt;
* 1963 - T.E. Weber&lt;br /&gt;
* 1962 - R.E. Chant&lt;br /&gt;
* 1961 - C.S. Landon&lt;br /&gt;
* 1960 - W.L. Wardrop&lt;br /&gt;
* 1959 - W.L. Wardrop&lt;br /&gt;
* 1958 - L.A. Bateman&lt;br /&gt;
* 1957 - N.S. Bubbis&lt;br /&gt;
* 1956 - J. Hoogstraten&lt;br /&gt;
* 1955 - J. Hoogstraten&lt;br /&gt;
* 1954 - G.B. Williams&lt;br /&gt;
* 1953 - J.L. Charles&lt;br /&gt;
* 1952 - C.L. Fisher&lt;br /&gt;
* 1951 - W.D. Hurst&lt;br /&gt;
* 1950 - W.D. Hurst&lt;br /&gt;
* 1949 - T.E. Storey&lt;br /&gt;
* 1948 - B.A. Johnston&lt;br /&gt;
* 1947 - B.A. Johnston&lt;br /&gt;
* 1946 - J.W. Battershill&lt;br /&gt;
* 1945 - G.E. Cole&lt;br /&gt;
* 1944 - H.S. Rimmington&lt;br /&gt;
* 1943 - H.S. Rimmington&lt;br /&gt;
* 1942 - C.V. Antenbring&lt;br /&gt;
* 1941 - G.E. Cole&lt;br /&gt;
* 1940 - F.S. Adamson&lt;br /&gt;
* 1939 - W. Youngman&lt;br /&gt;
* 1938 - P. Burke-Gaffney&lt;br /&gt;
* 1937 - E.V. Caton&lt;br /&gt;
* 1936 - A.L. Cavanagh&lt;br /&gt;
* 1935 - J.N. Finlayson&lt;br /&gt;
* 1934 - H.M. White&lt;br /&gt;
* 1933 - J.W. Sanger&lt;br /&gt;
* 1932 - J.W. Sanger&lt;br /&gt;
* 1931 - R.W. McKinnon&lt;br /&gt;
* 1930 - C.H. Attwood&lt;br /&gt;
* 1929 - C.H. Attwood&lt;br /&gt;
* 1928 - W.G. Chace&lt;br /&gt;
* 1927 - Wm. Aldridge&lt;br /&gt;
* 1926 - D.L. McLean&lt;br /&gt;
* 1925 - C.H. Fox&lt;br /&gt;
* 1924 - A.J. Taunton&lt;br /&gt;
* 1923 - A.A. Young&lt;br /&gt;
* 1922 - D.A. Ross&lt;br /&gt;
* 1921 - M.A. Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* 1920 - M.A. Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.apegm.mb.ca/OldSite/PastPresidents.html&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=900</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=900"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T18:29:46Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[file:LittleSaskDam.jpg|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station - photo Gordon Goldsborough]]&lt;br /&gt;
While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the [[Minnedosa River Hydropower Station|first hydro-electric dam]] in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at [[Kanuchuan Power Development|Kanuchuan Rapids]] on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - http://www.apegm.mb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=899</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=899"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T18:28:28Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: /* Private Generating Stations */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[file:LittleSaskDam.jpg|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the [[Minnedosa River Hydropower Station|first hydro-electric dam]] in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at [[Kanuchuan Power Development|Kanuchuan Rapids]] on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - http://www.apegm.mb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=898</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=898"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T18:26:25Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[file:LittleSaskDam.jpg|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the [[Minnedosa River Hydropower Station|first hydro-electric dam]] in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at Kanuchuan Rapids on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - http://www.apegm.mb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=897</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=897"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T18:19:56Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[file:LittleSaskDam.jpg|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the first hydro-electric dam in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at Kanuchuan Rapids on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - http://www.apegm.mb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=896</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=896"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T18:18:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the first hydro-electric dam in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:LittleSaskDam.jpg|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at Kanuchuan Rapids on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - http://www.apegm.mb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=895</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=895"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T18:17:28Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the first hydro-electric dam in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
[[file:LittleSaskDam|thumb|Little Saskatchewan Generating Station]]&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at Kanuchuan Rapids on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - http://www.apegm.mb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:LittleSaskDam.jpg&amp;diff=894</id>
		<title>File:LittleSaskDam.jpg</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:LittleSaskDam.jpg&amp;diff=894"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T18:15:18Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Little Saskatchewan Dam&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Little Saskatchewan Dam&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=893</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=893"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T18:05:22Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the first hydro-electric dam in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at Kanuchuan Rapids on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This article first appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional - http://www.apegm.mb.ca/pdf/Keystone/15Spring.pdf&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=892</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=892"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T17:59:29Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the first hydro-electric dam in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Winnipeg River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
Pinawa Generating Station on the Winnipeg River started operation in 1906 by the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company, which held a monopoly on transit service, electric power and gas distribution for the City of Winnipeg. The first publicly owned generating station was Pointe Du Bois, upstream from Pinawa. It was completed in 1911 and is still in service today. In the 1920 and 1930s, three more generating stations were built on the Winnipeg River; Great Falls, Seven Sisters and Slave Falls. The four Winnipeg River stations would ultimately produce a total of 445 megawatts.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Depression, War and Farm Electrification==&lt;br /&gt;
The boom of hydro-electric development came to an end with the great depression. In the early 1930s, power to municipalities in Manitoba was a patchwork quilt of contracts with differing rates and terms. The passing of the Municipal Power Commission (MPC) Act in 1931 started the process of bringing uniformity to power service and the MPC was supplying 139 communities by the end of the decade. Under the Act, the MPC sold power directly to end customers rather than to municipalities. City Hydro in Winnipeg remained as a municipal utility.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
World War II caused a shortage of available farm hands and  farmers petitioned the MPC for access to electricity. As a result, a farm electrification program started in 1945 with the aim of connecting 90% of Manitoba farms to the electric grid. In 1954 when the program ended, Manitoba was the most electrified of the western provinces with 75% of farms connected and a total of 100,000 customers. This was accomplished by careful attention to the economics of farming. Power line extensions were free and the farmer only paid for the in-building wiring and the power consumed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board==&lt;br /&gt;
The success of the Farm Electrification program combined with the post-war boom brought new challenges in the early 1950s. Existing generation capacity would not support the new demand. Three of the largest players, City Hydro, the Winnipeg Electric Company (formerly the Winnipeg Electric Railway Company) and the Manitoba Power Commission along with the provincial government agreed to the creation of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board (MHEB) in 1949 to coordinate generation and distribution of power in Manitoba. The first MHEB generating station, Pine Falls entered service in 1951 adding 82 megawatts to the generating capacity of the Winnipeg River. In 1952, Seven Sisters was expanded to 150 megawatts which required the retirement of the first Winnipeg River station, Pinawa. The last station on the Winnipeg River, McArthur Falls, went into service in 1954.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1952 and 1953, reorganizations took place which separated the Winnipeg Electric Company's gas and transit operations into the Greater Winnipeg Gas and Greater Winnipeg Transit companies respectively. The remaining electricity operations and assets were amalgamated with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board. City Hydro and the Manitoba Power Commission split the distribution components between the City of Winnipeg and the suburbs along the 1955, pre-Unicity boundaries. City Hydro was renamed Winnipeg Hydro in 1964 and was bought by Manitoba Hydro in 2002.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Generating Stations==&lt;br /&gt;
There were several private generating stations built in Manitoba, some of which would become part of the provincial power grid. In 1913, the Minnedosa Hydro Plant was built just north of the town supplying power until 1933. A station was built in 1934-1935 at Kanuchuan Rapids on the Island Lake River to supply power for the new gold mines at Elk Island in God’s Lake. The mine closed in 1943 but the generating station continued to supply some power until at least 1966. There were also two stations built on the Laurie River north of Flin Flon by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited. They provided power for mining operations in the 1950s and 1960s. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro in 1970 and are still in service. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Nelson River Development==&lt;br /&gt;
In 1960, the MHEB started operating the Kelsey Generating Station, the first one on the Nelson River, to supply power to the newly developed City of Thompson and the International Nickel Company's operations there. It was followed in 1965 by the Grand Rapids station on the Saskatchewan River. Both were connected to the provincial power grid in 1967 via a 230-kV line that ran between the two. The same line also furnished power to International Nickels's new Soab Lake mine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Between the times of these two stations, the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board and the Manitoba Power Commission merged to form Manitoba Hydro. The new utility began to work with power utility companies in the United States through the Mid-continent Area Power Planners (MAPP) on power exchanges with the 22 power utilities in the MAPP. In 1963, a Nelson River Programming Board was created by the Governments of Manitoba and Canada to investigate power development on the Nelson River and transmission of power to southern Manitoba by High Voltage Direct Current (HVdc) transmission. This work came to fruition in 1970 and 1971 with the commissioning of the Kettle Generating station and the first HVdc line from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Two converter stations, Radisson near Gillam and Dorsey north-west of Winnipeg were built to support the connection of the direct current transmission line to the alternating current power grid. A 230kV AC transmission line was completed between Winnipeg and Grand Forks to allow power to be exchanged with utilities in North Dakota and Minnesota.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Churchill River Diversion and Lake Winnipeg Regulation==&lt;br /&gt;
Rather than develop both the Churchill and Nelson Rivers for hydro-electric power, it was more economical to divert some of the water from the Churchill River into the Nelson and place the generating stations on the Nelson River system, comprised of the Rat, Burntwood and Nelson Rivers. Two control structures at Missi Falls and Notigi and a channel from the Churchill River to the Rat River allow water from the Churchill River to be routed into the Nelson River system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To complete the development of the Nelson River, it was necessary to manage the historical fluctuations in the level of Lake Winnipeg to ensure adequate minimum water flows in the river. The Jenpeg Generating Station and associated Control Structure began operation in 1976 and are used along with three man-made channels to stabilize the level of Lake Winnipeg.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This made possible the operation of the 980 megawatt Long Spruce Generating Station, completed in 1979. During the same period, the second HVdc line was completed from the Nelson River to Winnipeg. Another generating station was planned at Limestone but it was deferred due to low electricity demands and finally started producing power in 1990.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Limestone Generating Station was to be last one to be built in the 20th century. Only one hydro-electric installation, the 200 megawatt Wuskwatim Generating Station on the Burntwood River, has been built since then in Manitoba. Completed in 2012, it is a joint venture between the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation and Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In July of 2014, construction began on Keeyask Generating Station near Gull Lake on the Nelson River. The 695 Megawatt station s a collaborative effort between Manitoba Hydro and four Manitoba First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, War Lake First Nation, York Factory First Nation and Fox Lake Cree First Nation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Acknowledgements==&lt;br /&gt;
Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Historical Society&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=891</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=891"/>
		<updated>2015-03-15T17:54:44Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;While there were several earlier instances of electricity generation in Manitoba, the first hydro-electric dam in the form we now know was on the Little Saskatchewan river, now called the Minnedosa River. Beginning operation in 1900, It served the City of Brandon ( Sorry Winnipeg, the Wheat city gets the honours here ) with 600 kilowatts of power via a 14 kilometre transmission line. The dam was made of wood filled with rocks and seems to have only operated in the summer months. Two units of 300 kilowatts each provided the  current which was stepped up to 11kV for transmission along wooden poles to Brandon. There it was brought in to the existing steam generating facility to augment generation in summer. The Little Saskatchewan plant was the brainchild of three men who formed Brandon Electric Light Company Ltd. to provide steam generated power to Brandon around 1889. To increase capacity in summer and keep the costs down, they built the hydro-electric station. The site was decommissioned in 1924 and was probably damaged by the failure of an upstream dam in Minnedosa on 4 May 1948.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=859</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=859"/>
		<updated>2015-01-28T00:40:30Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is a place-holder for a copy of the article &amp;quot;A Brief History of Hydro-Electric Power in Manitoba&amp;quot; which appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional. This entry will contain the text of that article and will be available for additions that space in the KP did not permit. Come back soon. - ''APEGM Heritage Committee''&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=858</id>
		<title>History Of Electric Power In Manitoba</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=History_Of_Electric_Power_In_Manitoba&amp;diff=858"/>
		<updated>2015-01-28T00:28:46Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Created page with &amp;quot;This is a place-holder for a copy of the article &amp;quot;A Brief History of Hydro-Electric Power in Manitoba&amp;quot; which appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional. Th...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is a place-holder for a copy of the article &amp;quot;A Brief History of Hydro-Electric Power in Manitoba&amp;quot; which appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of the Keystone Professional. This entry will contain the text of that article and will be available for additions that space in teh KP did not permit. Come back soon. - ''APEGM Heritage Committee''&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:LaurieRiver2.jpg&amp;diff=822</id>
		<title>File:LaurieRiver2.jpg</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:LaurieRiver2.jpg&amp;diff=822"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T17:57:59Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=821</id>
		<title>Laurie River Generating Stations</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=821"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T17:56:40Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Laurie River Generating Stations are two hydroelectric dams on the Laurie River in northern Manitoba. The two stations are named Laurie I and Laurie II. The dams are owned and operated by Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Capacity ==&lt;br /&gt;
The total capacity of the two dams is 10 MW&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Heading ==&lt;br /&gt;
This is a heading&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Construction ==&lt;br /&gt;
The dams were completed in 1952 and 1958 respectively by the Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro on May 1, 1970.[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver1.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #1 Generating Station is located approximately 200 km (120 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 125 km (78 miles) upstream of Southern Indian Lake.&lt;br /&gt;
It consists of a two unit powerhouse, a five bay stoplog controlled spillway and three gravity dams. The station has a name plate capacity of 5 MW (7,000 hp). Construction of the station was completed by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver2.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #2 GS is located approximately 210 km (130 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 10 km (6 miles) upstream of Laurie River #1 Generating Station.[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
[1] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river1.html&lt;br /&gt;
[2] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river2.html&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Civil Engineering]] &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Mechanical Engineering]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Generating Stations]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=818</id>
		<title>Laurie River Generating Stations</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=818"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T17:47:03Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Laurie River Generating Stations are two hydroelectric dams on the Laurie River in northern Manitoba. The two stations are named Laurie I and Laurie II. The dams are owned and operated by Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Capacity ==&lt;br /&gt;
The total capacity of the two dams is 10 MW&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Heading ==&lt;br /&gt;
This is a heading&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Construction ==&lt;br /&gt;
The dams were completed in 1952 and 1958 respectively by the Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro on May 1, 1970.[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver1.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #1 Generating Station is located approximately 200 km (120 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 125 km (78 miles) upstream of Southern Indian Lake.&lt;br /&gt;
It consists of a two unit powerhouse, a five bay stoplog controlled spillway and three gravity dams. The station has a name plate capacity of 5 MW (7,000 hp). Construction of the station was completed by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
[1] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river1.html&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Civil Engineering]] &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Mechanical Engineering]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Generating Stations]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=815</id>
		<title>Heritage Wiki Primer</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=815"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T14:59:35Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;One you are logged in, this is what the main Wiki page looks like.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Adding / Editing Text ===&lt;br /&gt;
You can add or edit text by clicking the Edit tab at the top right near the search function. To see what formatting can be applied to text, click on the Help link on the left just above the Toolbox, then click on Formatting under the Editing heading on the help page. This text is regular, un-formatted text. The large-type, bold face &amp;quot;Adding / Editing Text&amp;quot; above was created using &amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;===&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt; before and after the words. Look in the &amp;quot;Section Formatting&amp;quot; area on the Formatting help page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It's actually pretty easy. Click on the Edit tab to see how this page was done.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=814</id>
		<title>Heritage Wiki Primer</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=814"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T14:54:15Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;One you are logged in, this is what the main Wiki page looks like.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Adding / Editing Text ===&lt;br /&gt;
You can add or edit text by clicking the Edit tab at the top right near the search function. To see what formatting can be applied to text, click on the &amp;quot;Help&amp;quot; link on the left just above the &amp;quot;Toolbox&amp;quot;, then click on &amp;quot;Formatting&amp;quot; under the &amp;quot;Editing&amp;quot; heading on the help page.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=813</id>
		<title>Heritage Wiki Primer</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=813"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T14:47:40Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;One you are logged in, this is what the main Wiki page looks like.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Adding / Editing Text ===&lt;br /&gt;
You can add or edit text by clicking the Edit tab at the top right near the search function.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=812</id>
		<title>Heritage Wiki Primer</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=812"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T14:37:14Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;One you are logged in, this is what the main Wiki page looks like.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg&amp;diff=811</id>
		<title>File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg&amp;diff=811"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T14:36:45Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: AJP uploaded a new version of &amp;amp;quot;File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg&amp;amp;quot;: Scaled to 50% to help view-ability on smaller screens&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=810</id>
		<title>Heritage Wiki Primer</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=810"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T14:30:28Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;One you are logged in, this is what the main Wiki page looks like.&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg&amp;diff=809</id>
		<title>File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg&amp;diff=809"/>
		<updated>2014-11-12T02:47:44Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: AJP uploaded a new version of &amp;amp;quot;File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg&amp;amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg&amp;diff=808</id>
		<title>File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg&amp;diff=808"/>
		<updated>2014-11-11T19:15:56Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=807</id>
		<title>Heritage Wiki Primer</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Heritage_Wiki_Primer&amp;diff=807"/>
		<updated>2014-11-11T19:11:29Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: Started a primer page for new users&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[File:PrimerHomePageImage.jpg]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=806</id>
		<title>Laurie River Generating Stations</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=806"/>
		<updated>2014-11-10T20:58:57Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Laurie River Generating Stations are two hydroelectric dams on the Laurie River in northern Manitoba. The two stations are named Laurie I and Laurie II. The dams are owned and operated by Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Capacity ==&lt;br /&gt;
The total capacity of the two dams is 10 MW&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Construction ==&lt;br /&gt;
The dams were completed in 1952 and 1958 respectively by the Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro on May 1, 1970.[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver1.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #1 Generating Station is located approximately 200 km (120 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 125 km (78 miles) upstream of Southern Indian Lake.&lt;br /&gt;
It consists of a two unit powerhouse, a five bay stoplog controlled spillway and three gravity dams. The station has a name plate capacity of 5 MW (7,000 hp). Construction of the station was completed by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
[1] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river1.html&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Civil Engineering]] &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Mechanical Engineering]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Generating Stations]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:LaurieRiver1.jpg&amp;diff=805</id>
		<title>File:LaurieRiver1.jpg</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=File:LaurieRiver1.jpg&amp;diff=805"/>
		<updated>2014-11-10T20:57:40Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=804</id>
		<title>Laurie River Generating Stations</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://enggeomb-heritage.a2hosted.com/index.php?title=Laurie_River_Generating_Stations&amp;diff=804"/>
		<updated>2014-11-10T20:56:05Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;AJP: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Laurie River Generating Stations are two hydroelectric dams on the Laurie River in northern Manitoba. The two stations are named Laurie I and Laurie II. The dams are owned and operated by Manitoba Hydro.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Capacity ==&lt;br /&gt;
The total capacity of the two dams is 10 MW&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Construction ==&lt;br /&gt;
The dams were completed in 1952 and 1958 respectively by the Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area. They were transferred to Manitoba Hydro on May 1, 1970.[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Laurie River #1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:LaurieRiver1.jpg]]&lt;br /&gt;
The Laurie River #1 Generating Station is located approximately 200 km (120 miles) northwest of Thompson and approximately 125 km (78 miles) upstream of Southern Indian Lake.&lt;br /&gt;
It consists of a two unit powerhouse, a five bay stoplog controlled spillway and three gravity dams. The station has a name plate capacity of 5 MW (7,000 hp). Construction of the station was completed by Sherritt Gordon Mines Limited to supply their mining operations in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
[1] Manitoba Government http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/licensing/laurie_river1.html&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Civil Engineering]] &lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Mechanical Engineering]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Generating Stations]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>AJP</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>