A HISTORIC CONTEXT FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF HYDROELECTRICITY 
BY THE BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION, 1939-1945 
by 
CHRISTINE ANN CURRAN 
A THESIS 
Presented to the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation 
and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon 
in partial fulfillment of the requirements 
for the degree of 
Master of Science 
June 1998 
11 
"A Historic Context for the Transmission of Hydroelectricity by the Bonneville Power 
Administration, 1939-1945," a thesis prepared by Christine A. Curran in partial 
fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science degree in the Interdisciplinary 
Studies Program: Historic Preservation. This thesis has been approved and accepted by: 
• 
Pro essor Donald Peting, Chair of the Exa ining Committee 
Date ~ 
Committee in charge: Professor Donald Peting, Chair 
Professor Mary Gallagher 
Dr. William Willingham 
lll 
An Abstract of the Thesis of 
Christine Ann Curran for the degree of Master of Science 
in the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation 
to be taken June 1998 
Title: A HISTORIC CONTEXT FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF 
HYDROELECTRICITY BY THE BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION, 
1939-1945 
Approved: 
The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) was created in 1937 to market 
power from Bonneville Dam and later, Grand Coulee Dam, two New Deal relief projects 
on the Columbia River. Between 1939 and 1945 the BPA built a long-distance, high-
voltage electrical transmission network that connected Bonneville and Grand Coulee 
Dams with population centers in Oregon's Willamette Valley and Washington State's 
Puget Sound area. Known as the "master grid," the original transmission system included 
2,736 circuit miles of transmission line and fifty-five electrical substations. This study 
provides a historic context for the properties that comprise the master grid. It also 
identifies and describes the grid's two main property types: the electrical substation and 
the transmission line, discussing ranges of variation and distribution patterns for each 
type. This study also sets forth registration requirements and evaluation criteria for the 
master grid properties, as well as treatment recommendations and mitigation measures for 
their preservation.  
• 
V 
CURRICULUM VITA 
NAME OF AUTHOR: Christine Ann Curran 
PLACE OF BIRTH: Portland, Oregon 
DATE OF BIRTH: May 13, 1965 
GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: 
University of Oregon 
Lewis and Clark College 
DEGREES AWA RD ED: 
Master of Science in Historic Preservation, 1998, University of Oregon 
Bachelor of Arts in Art, 1987, Lewis and Clark College 
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST: 
Preservation of historic industrial and engineering resources 
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: 
Architectural Historian, Hess, Roise and Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 
1996-present 
Cultural Resources Assistant, Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem, 1994 
Research Assistant, Heritage Research Associates, Eugene, Oregon, 1993 
Graduate Intern, Museum of Art, University of Oregon, Eugene, 1992-94 
Research Assistant, Demuth Glick Consultants, Ltd. , Portland, Oregon, 1991 
Vl 
Research Associate, Janus Associates, Inc. , Phoenix, Arizona, 1990 
AWA RDS AND HONORS: 
Oregon Laurel Award, 1992-93 
Oregon Laurel Award, 1993-94 
• 
vu 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
This project would not have been possible without the assistance of several people 
at the Bonneville Power Administration. In particular, Sue Ludeman, Robert Hasibar, and 
• Susie Sivyer went out of their way to provide me with crucial information and contacts. 
Substation operators and building managers gave their time and knowledge, patiently 
answering questions and lending their hard hats. Thanks to Bob Presser, Salem; Bill 
Haden, Eugene; John Straub and Marlin Lewis, Vancouver; Janice Sushereba, 
Ellensburg; and the staff at Troutdale. I also want to express my appreciation to my thesis 
committee: Don Peting, Mary Gallagher, and Bill Willingham. Their thoughtful 
comments and professional guidance were made all the more significant by the miles that 
separated all of us. I want to thank my family and friends for their patience, support, and 
encouragement when I needed it the most. Finally, I am grateful to JR Vanderburg, for 
remaining interested, insightful, and understanding all the way through this long process. 
Vlll 
• 
DEDICATION 
For my parents 
lX 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Page 
INTRODUCTION ............... ..... .... ............................................... .. ..... .... .. ................. ........ 1 
Chapter 
I. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW ... ... ... ... .... .... ....... .. ..... ....................... ...... ... .......... ....... 4 
Early Electrical Transmission, 1873 - 1899 ............... .................... ....... .. .. ....... ... 4 
Development of Alternating Current.. ... .................. .. .......................... ..... .......... . 6 
A Precedent is Set: Niagara Falls ................................. ..... .. ....... ........... .... ........ 10 
Electrical Transmission in the Pacific Northwest .............. ..... ... ....... ............ .. ... 13 
Interconnected Systems in the Pacific Northwest .................. .. .... ..................... 16 
Planning for Power: The Evolution oflntegration .... ................ .............. .......... 19 
Superpower Realized: Conowingo and the PNJ Interconnection ..... .... ............. 22 
The Great Depression .... .... .... .............................................. ..... .. ....... .... ........ .... 25 
"Talking Columbia" .......... ...................... ............. ............ ............ ... ...... ... .... .... .. 26 
The Boulder Canyon Project Act.. .......... .................. ................. ..................... ... 29 
The Federal Government in the Power Business ............................ ................... 32 
"The Biggest Thing That Man Has Ever Done" ....... ............. .. ............... ....... .... 34 
The Marketing Dilemma ........................................................... ... ..................... 3 7 
The Bonneville Project Act .......................................................... ... .................. 43 
The Bonneville Power Administration .......................... .. .......................... ... ..... 46 
Pl arming for the Master Grid .... ...... .... ...... ............................ ... ...... ............. ....... 4 7 
Nuts, Bolts, and Substations: Design Issues of the Master Grid ................ .. ..... 51 
Building the Big Line .. ... ... ....... .... .. ....... ................... ............ .................. ........ ... 56 
A Second Leader and a Second War ........... ....... ......................... ......... ............ . 62 
The Northwest Power Pool ................. ........ ............................ ........ .. .... ..... ... ..... 71 
Conclusion ...... ........ ............. .... ... .. .. ..... ............................................. ...... ... .... .. .. 74 
II. IDENTIFICATION .. ........... .......... ........ .... ... .................................. ........... ....... .. ... 79 
Purpose and Methodology ...... ... ................. ............... ...... .................................. 79 
Property Type: Electrical Substation ...... .. ... ... ...... .... ..... .. .................. ......... ... .... 81 
Property Type: Transmission Line .................... ........................................ ...... 11 7 
X 
Page 
III. EVALUATION ..... .... ... ........................ ... .. ... ............. ..... .......... ........ .. .. ...... .. ....... 171 
Property Type: Electrical Substation ............................................................. 172 
Property Type: Transmission Line ...................... .. ......................................... 178 
IV. TREATME T .... ........... ... ............... .... ... .... .... ............ ............................ .. .......... 183 
Survey Needs ............................................... .................................................. .. 183 
Research Needs ........... ................... ......................................................... ......... 185 
Treatment Strategies and Mitigation Measures .. ......................... ............. ....... 186 
SUMMARY .. ... ....... ....... ..... ................... .. ......... .......... ....... ............. ... .................. .......... 190 
BIBLIOGRAPHY .......... .......... .. ................. .. ..................................... .... ............ ............ 196 
LIST OF TABLES 
Table Page 
1. Substations Identified ..... ... ... ...... ............... ... .... .. .... ..... ...................... ............... .... . 124 
2. Transmission Lines Identified .. ................................. .......... ........................ ....... .... 128 
Xll 
LIST OF FIGURES 
Figure Page 
1. Map ofthe Master Grid, 1938 ........................... ............................. .... ........ ......... ... . 61 
2. Map of the Master Grid, 1944 .... ............................. ........... .... ..................... ........... .. 76 
3. Map of the Master Grid, 1946 ............................ ............ ..... .... ..... ... .. ... ... ... ...... ...... 123 
4. Control House, Eugene Substation ... ...... .. ....... .. ...... ... .... ........ .. ......................... .. .. 138 
5. Control House, Eugene Substation ..... .... .................... ... ......... .... .. .... ..................... 13 9 
6. Control House, Eugene Substation ..... .. ........................ ..... ... ... .. .... ...... .... .... ... ... ... . 140 
7. Control Room, Eugene Substation ... .... ....... ....... ... ......... ...... ............................. .... . 141 
8. Control House Plan, Eugene Substation .............. ................. ..... ...................... .. .. .. 142 
9. Control House, Troutdale Substation .......... ... ..................................... ... .. .. ..... ... .... 143 
10. Control House, J. D. Ross Substation .................................................. ... ............... 144 
11. Control House, J. D. Ross Substation .... .... .......................................... ... .... .......... . 145 
12. Control House, Ellensburg Substation ...... .. .. ........... ............................ .... ......... .. ... 146 
13 . Control House/Untanking Tower, Salem Substation .. ..... .......................... .......... .. 147 
14. Control House, Astoria Substation ............. ............ ........ .... ..... ..... .... .. .. ..... ............ 148 
15 . Control House, Astoria Substation ............ ... ................. ....................................... . 149 
16. Untanking Tower, Salem Substation ........ ....... ...................................................... 150 
17. Interior of Untanking Tower, Salem Substation .......... .. .. ... ........ ....... .... ....... .... ... .. 151 
Xlll 
Page 
18. Interior of Untanking Tower, Salem Substation ...... ... ........ ............ .. ... ......... .. .. ..... 152 
19. Untanking Tower, J. D. Ross Substation .... ....................................... ..... ............ ... 153 
20. Oil House, Troutdale Substation .. .. .. ... .... .. .. ...... .. ......... .. ...... .............. ...... .............. 154 
21. Switchyard, Troutdale Substation .................................... ....... ..... ..... .... ................. 155 
22. Switchyard, J. D. Ross Substation .... .............. ........... .... .................... ..... ..... .......... 156 
23. Buswork, Ellensburg Substation ...... ...... ... ............. ..... .................. ......... .... ............ 157 
24. Gas Circuit Breaker and Transformers, Eugene Substation ................... ...... ... .. .... 158 
25. Oil Circuit Breakers, Salem Substation .......... ..... ... ....... .. .... .. ..... ................. ....... .. . 159 
26. Capacitor Banks, Astoria Substation ........................................... .. .. ...... .. ............ .. 160 
27. Disconnecting Switch, Troutdale Substation ....... ......... .... ... ..... ...... ... ................. ... 161 
28. Switchyard Lighting Fixture, Ellensburg Substation ............................... ... ........... 162 
29. Transformer Fans, Troutdale Substation ...... ................................ .... ......... ......... .. .. 163 
30. Double-Circuit Suspension Tower, Bradford Island .......................... ...... .............. 164 
31. Single-Circuit Crossing Towers, Bradford Island ....... .... ......... ..................... ........ 165 
32. Transmission Line Corridor, Bonneville Dam ....... ................ .. .... .............. ...... .... ... 166 
33. Drawing, Single-Circuit Suspension Tower ..................................... ..... .. ..... ... ..... . 167 
34. Drawing, Single-Circuit Crossing Tower ............................................... .. .. ....... .... 168 
35 . Drawing, Single-Circuit Lattice Pole Tower .... ................................... .. .... .. .... ... ... 169 
36. Drawing, Double-Circuit Suspension Tower ........ ................ .. ..... ...... .................... 170 
1 
INTRODUCTION 
The Bonneville Power Administration (BP A) is a hydroelectric power marketing 
agency whose genesis was concurrent with the Federal government's commitment to 
promoting hydroelectric power in the western United States during the 1930s. Over 
nearly 15,000 circuit miles of their own high-voltage transmission lines, the BPA brings 
to market power generated by twenty-nine federal dams on the Columbia and Snake 
Rivers and their tributaries. The BP A's service area stretches across 300,000 square 
miles, encompassing the states of Oregon, Washington, Idaho, western Montana, and 
parts of California, Wyoming, Nevada, Utah, and eastern Montana. 1 
The BPA was established in 1937 to market power from Bonneville Dam, the first 
federal dam on the Columbia River. In 1938, J. D. Ross, the BPA 's first administrator, 
unveiled a master plan for a transmission network that would connect Grand Coulee and 
Bonneville Dams with the population centers of Portland and Puget Sound. Known as the 
"master grid," this network would link together Pasco, Yakima, Spokane, and Ellensburg, 
Washington; then join with Washington and Oregon coastal areas and extend down the 
Willamette Valley to the California border. This master plan proposed in 193 8 did indeed 
1 Department of Energy, "Bonneville Power Administration 1994 Fast Facts," March 1995. 
2 
govern the construction of the BP A main transmission grid that exists today. 
The power that traveled along the transmission lines built by the BP A between 
1939 and 1945 triggered an industrial transformation in the Pacific Northwest. By 
constructing nearly 3,000 circuit miles of its own transmission lines and interconnecting 
with existing public, private and municipal distribution systems, the BPA  grid brought 
cheap Columbia River power to rural communities and attracted large industry to the 
reg10n. 
New Pacific Northwest industries used Bonneville power to produce material for 
ships and planes and explosives during World War II. More than twenty-five percent of 
the total aluminum output in the United States during 1943 was produced in the Pacific 
Northwest, using power transmitted by the BPA.2 Perhaps BPA's most significant, if not 
infamous, contribution to the war effort was the provision of power to the Hanford, 
Washington plant for the production of plutonium used to create the atomic bomb that 
ended World War II . 
This study will provide a historic context for the events that shaped the history of 
BP A's transmission grid between 1939 and 1945. In addition, this study will provide 
guidance for the preservation of resources directly linked to the historic context of 
hydroelectric power transmission by the BP A. It will serve as a starting point from which 
2 Gene Tollefson, EPA and the Struggle for Power at Cost (Portland: Bonneville Power 
Administration, 1987), 172. 
3 
further research, survey and inventory can be directed to assist in evaluation and 
treatment programs. 
There are four components within this historic context: (1) a historical overview 
chapter, which discusses the history of electrical transmission in the Pacific Northwest 
and the development of transmission facilities by the Bonneville Power Administration 
during the years 1939 through 1945; (2) an identification chapter, which presents 
property types associated with the development; (3) an evaluation chapter, where 
parameters are set and registration requirements are presented for the assessment of the 
property types; and (4) a treatment chapter, which includes an initial list of mitigation 
measures and strategies for the preservation of these resources. 
This historic context will be a thematic study focusing on the research topics of 
Industry, 20th Century Architecture and Engineering, Social History, and 
Politics/Government. The context will discuss the range of variability, character-defining 
features, evaluation criteria and protection/treatment activities for identified property 
types that represent the transmission of hydroelectricity by the BPA . The temporal 
boundaries of the study are from 1939 to 1945. The transmission of power over the first 
lines of the master grid defines the start date. All the features comprising the original plan 
of the master grid were in place by the time World War II ended in 1945, thus providing 
the end date. The spatial boundaries of the study comprise the states of Oregon and 
Washington. These are the states that contain the identified property types. 
4 
CHAPTER I 
HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 
Early Electrical Transmission, 1873 - 1899 
The first practical demonstration of electric power transmission was made by 
Belgian scientist Zenobe Gramme at the 1873 Vienna Exposition. Using a steam engine-
driven motor as a dynamo, he transmitted electricity approximately 550 yards, and used it 
to power a motor-driven pump.3 By the late 1870s and the early 1880s, electricity was 
being used for arc and incandescent lighting, generated by coal, steam or water-driven 
dynamos. Both lighting systems depended on direct-current transmission for the 
distribution of electricity.4 Direct-current transmission worked well for transmission of 
electricity over short distances, but was problematic for long-distance use. During 
transmission, resistance from the copper conductors converted much of the electrical 
3 Generators were called "dynamos" until 1892 (Tollefson, 14); Duncan Hay, Hydroelectric 
Development in the United States, 1880-1940 (Washington, D.C.: Edison Electric Institute, 1991 ), 6. 
4 Direct current refers to the flow of electricity through a current in which electrons travel in only 
one direction, like water through a pipe. For an excellent discussion of basic principles of electricity, please 
see William B. Steinberg and Walter B. Ford's Electricity and Electronics - Basic (Chicago: American 
Technical Society, 1961). 
5 
energy to heat before it reached the other end of the line. There was also a corresponding 
loss of pressure, or voltage, in the electrical current, between the time it was generated by 
the dynamo and the time it reached its destination.5 If the transmission route was short, 
there was less resistance, and the loss of voltage was minimal. However, the longer the 
transmission route, the greater the resistance, and the voltage loss could be quite 
substantial by the time the electrical current reached the end of the transmission line. The 
power demand at the end of a transmission line is equal to the voltage multiplied by the 
current of the electrical energy. Because of this directly proportional relationship, a heavy 
current flow accompanied the relatively low voltages that early systems generated. 
Transmitting a heavy current required large, expensive conductors, and it also meant lots 
of heat in the lines, which resulted in line losses.6 Maintaining constant voltage over 
many miles of transmission lines would have required an enormous generator capable of 
producing several times the amount of voltage needed on the receiving end of the line, as 
well many miles of huge conductors to accommodate the heavy currents. Because of 
these technological restrictions, lighting operations in the 1870s and the early 1880s 
could not extend more than a mile beyond the generating station. Consequently, 
generating plants were centrally located in settled urban areas, close to the homes, 
5 John J. O'Neill, Prodigal Genius: The Life of Nikola Tesla (New York: Ives Washburn, Inc. , 
1944), 70. 
6 Steinberg and Ford, 113. 
6 
factories , and streets that comprised the market for arc and incandescent lighting 
companies. Households in suburban or rural districts were forced to remain dependent on 
candles and oil lamps for illumination.7 
Development of Alternating Current 
In an effort to make electricity available for wider use, inventors in the early 
1880s worked with urgency to find a way to transmit high voltage electrical current over 
long distances. Research all over the world focused on a type of electrical current called 
alternating current (AC).8 The scientific principles behind alternating current electricity 
allowed the introduction of a transformer into the system.9 The transformer made voltage 
adjustments possible along the transmission route; electricity could be generated at low 
voltage, stepped up by a transformer to a high voltage for transmission, then stepped 
down again to accommodate differing industrial, commercial and residential loads at the 
end of the line. 
7 Hay, 6. 
8 Alternating current always flows first one way through a circuit and then reverses and starts 
flowing in the other direction. 
9 For a good description of the relationship between alternating current and transformers, please 
see O'Neill's Prodigal Genius. 
7 
Scientists had been working with alternating current for years, but it was the 
invention of the transformer that made the application of alternating current feasible for 
use in a long-distance transmission system. Frenchman Lucien Gaulard and his English 
business partner, John Gibbs are credited with inventing the transformer. Gaulard and 
Gibbs were the first to patent a complete system that combined alternating current with 
transformers as an economical means of long-distance transmission. The two inventors 
received their first British patent for "A New System of Distributing Electricity for the 
Production of Light and Power" in 1881-1882, but it took several more years to develop a 
fully functional system. Gaulard and Gibbs demonstrated their alternating-current 
transformer at the Inventions Exposition in London in 1885. Upon hearing of the 
demonstration and consequent work with a ten-mile-long transmission line near Turin, 
Italy, George Westinghouse rushed to secure American rights to their patents. 
Westinghouse, along with inventor William Stanley, proceeded to developed a means of 
manufacturing transformers that was much less expensive than the Gaulard and Gibbs 
process. In March 1886, Stanley installed a 500-volt Siemens alternating-current motor 
(alternator) and steam engine on the outskirts of Great Barrington, Massachusetts and led 
a one-mile-long transmission line from there into the center of the village where six 
transformers stepped voltage down for distribution. By the end of that year, alternating-
8 
current incandescent lighting systems were in commercial operation. 10 Westinghouse's 
system generated power at 2,200 - 2,400 AC volts and transformed it up to 11,000 volts 
for transmission. Voltages were then stepped down to 110 or other useable low voltages 
for consumers at the end of the line. Alternating-current transmission offered many far-
reaching advantages over direct current. Since voltages were high during transmission, 
the accompanying currents were low, which meant smaller conductors could be used. The 
savings in copper costs were dramatic. In addition, the ability to transmit electricity long 
distances freed generating plants from their mile-wide radius restrictions. Plants could 
extend operations to rural districts that had been previously unreachable, and the plants 
themselves could be located far from urban areas. The latter was particularly liberating 
for western generating plants that used hydropower to operate their generators. 
Hydropower plants could finally take advantage of the steep waterfalls and numerous 
rivers in the western United States, development of which had been hindered by 
remoteness from urban centers. 11 
More improvements to the Westinghouse system came in 1888, when Serbian 
immigrant Nikola Tesla sold his patented poly-phase (3-phase) AC system to 
Westinghouse. Previous to Tesla's invention, AC systems operated on a single-phase 
10 Hay, 10-12. 
11 Tollefson, 36. 
9 
system. Tesla multiplied the effectiveness of the original system by making it operate on 
three or more alternating currents simultaneously. 12 The implications of Tesla's new 
"Universal system" spanned all technological and socio-economical boundaries. BPA 
historian Gene Tollefson explains, 
The [polyphase] system was capable of supplying incandescent lamps, arc 
lights, direct current motors, single-phase alternating current motors, 
polyphase motors, and energy for thermoelectrical, and electrochemical 
uses - all from a common transmission line. It set off a shockwave of 
institutional reorganization that did not end until after WWII, more than 
40 years later. Mines, mills, manufacturing and commercial establishments 
became more productive. Electric motors were adapted to drills, saws, 
printing presses, food processing plants, and other uses. In the home, 
sewing machines and electric kitchen appliances made their first 
appearances. 13 
Westinghouse successfully demonstrated Tesla's polyphase Universal system at the 
Columbian Exposition during the Chicago World's Fair in 1893. The famous "City of 
Lights," the spectacular illumination of all the fair buildings and grounds at night, was 
made possible by polyphase alternating-current electricity, generated by Westinghouse 
alternators. 14 
Hydroelectric projects at Willamette Falls in Oregon City, Oregon (1890), and 
12 O'Neill, 51 . 
13 Tollefson, 42. 
14 Hay, 21. 
Snoqualmie Falls in Washington State ( 1899) were among the first to provide a test of the 
new alternating current transmission system. In addition, dramatic projects, built in the 
early 1890s in the Rockies and the Sierra mountains of California, used newly available 
long-distance transmission lines to bring power to mining operations, where fuel scarcity 
was becoming a serious problem due to their remote locations. The 1890s saw inventive 
minds, especially in the West, taking advantage of alternating current to build pioneering 
transmission networks, shattering the technological impasses that had tethered the region 
for decades. While many of the early applications of alternating current occurred in the 
frontier west, it took a highly visible eastern project, at Niagara Falls, New York, to 
firmly establish the electrical generation and transmission standards that guide the 
industry today. 
A Precedent is Set: Niagara Falls 
The hydroelectric development at Niagara Falls presented George Westinghouse 
with an opportunity to demonstrate his Universal system on a far larger scale than any 
previous electrical project he had undertaken. The scale of the Niagara plant was 
unprecedented, and Westinghouse and other engineers found themselves designing 
electrical components specifically for Niagara operations. When the plant went on line 
for the first time in 1895, it served only local loads. The following year, electricity from 
Niagara Falls began serving Buffalo, New York, traveling twenty miles along an 11 ,000-
11 
volt transmission line. Soon, demand by electrochemical industries located at Niagara 
Falls exceeded that of Buffalo. Pittsburgh Reduction Company (later named Aluminum 
Corporation of America - ALCOA) quickly became one of Niagara's largest customers. 
Other companies followed, including Carborundum Company, a producer of 
silicon carbide, and Union Carbide, which manufactured calcium. By 1898, two-thirds of 
the electric power produced by Niagara Falls was being used by electrochemical 
manufacturers. 
Duncan Hay suggests that Niagara's significance was primarily symbolic: 
Niagara demonstrated both the technical and economic viability of 
generating electricity in enormous quantities as a commodity that could be 
sold to a variety of users, many of whom were located some distance from 
the point of generation. Technical features such as 3-phase AC generation 
and transmission, step-up and step-down transformers, and the use of 
rotary converters for changing AC to DC, had been used at previous sites 
but the size of the Niagara Project gave them a visibility and legitimacy 
that overshadowed alternative systems. Beyond the equipment, Niagara 
proved to the financial community that hydroelectricity could be a means 
of making money. 15 
Bernard Finn talks about the impact Niagara had on the field of electrical engineering in a 
broader sense: 
The full potential of the electrical revolution began to be realized at 
Niagara Falls. Here was shown the immense promise of water-powered 
electrical generation. Here was made clear the great future of electricity 
applied to chemistry. Here was proven the great value of high-voltage 
15 Hay, 25 . 
12 
alternating current for the transmission of power. Here was schooled a 
whole generation of electrical engineers, who, having solved the problem 
of harnessing Niagara, went on to bring electricity within the reach of 
everyone. 16 
The technological and economic trends that began at Niagara Falls had a profound effect 
on the electrical industry. Power plants across the United States adopted modified or 
elaborated versions of the principles developed at Niagara for the next twenty-five 
years.17 
The diversity of solutions to electrical transmission problems reached their 
pinnacle in the years that followed initial operations at Niagara Falls. Innovations and 
experimentation continued to mark transmission developments in the west, but with the 
added technical knowledge and initiative spawned by the·plant at Niagara Falls. 
States west of the Rockies continued to see some of the longest transmission 
distances in the country, as water resources with the most hydroelectric potential were 
typically located hundreds of miles from load centers. In addition, transmission facilities 
in western states did not have to withstand the humidity, ice, and snow that characterized 
the weather in the East and Midwest. Climatic conditions in California, Colorado, 
Nevada and Utah were comparatively arid, inflicting less damage to long spans of 
16 Bernard S. Finn, Lighting a Revolution: The Beginning ofE lectric Power (Washington, D.C.: 
Smithsonian Institution, 1979), 80-81 , quoted in Hay, 25. 
17 Hay, 25 . 
13 
transmission line, which resulted in lower maintenance costs. Thirdly, much of the west 
was unsettled territory, making it was much easier to secure many continuous miles of 
rights-of-way than it was east of the Rockies were populations were dense. 18 
Electrical Transmission in the Pacific Northwest 
The advent of alternating-current transmission found several private lighting 
companies operating in the Pacific Northwest, most of them founded in the mid-1880s. 
U.S. Electric Lighting and Power Company (predecessor of Portland General Electric) of 
Portland, the Seattle Electric Lighting Company of Seattle, the Tacoma Light and Water 
Company of Tacoma, and Washington Water Power of Spokane, were all distributing 
direct current electricity from central stations. In 1889, transmission of direct-current 
electricity from Willamette Falls in Oregon City, Oregon, fourteen miles to the city of 
Portland, initiated long-distance electrical transmission systems in the Pacific Northwest. 
The following year, the Oregon City plant switched successfully to alternating current. 
The installation at Snoqualmie Falls in Washington State, completed in 1899, used a 
vertical drop of 270 feet to generate electricity, which was then distributed by parallel 
transmission lines to Seattle (thirty-two miles away) and Tacoma (forty-four miles 
18 Ibid. , 31. 
14 
distant). As with the Buffalo line at Niagara, Westinghouse's 3-phase, universal system 
was used. 19 
During this time, the major cities in the region were establishing streetcar 
systems. In addition to providing a market for electricity beyond illumination, the 
streetcar systems, in some cases, served as a means of extending municipal electrical 
distribution grids. In these instances, railway companies would contract with private 
lighting companies for use of the transmission lines built to service the streetcars.20 
Private companies were not the only entities developing electrical operations in 
the late 1890s. Soon after the Civil War, a series of fatal epidemics caused by water-
borne disease prompted many U.S. cities to acquire and operate their own water systems. 
Cities that owned their own systems were likely to develop a subsequent electrical 
generating plant to supply themselves with cheap electricity for pumping operations. 
Subsequently, many city-owned systems expanded their distribution networks and began 
to provide electricity in their municipality where service by private companies was 
insufficient. Seven cities in the Pacific Northwest operated electrical distribution systems 
by 1900: McMinnville, Milton-Freewater, and Forest Grove, Oregon and Tacoma, 
19 Tollefson, 28-33 . 
20 Ibid. 
15 
Centralia, Port Angeles and Ellensburg, Washington. 21 
After the turn of the century, the federal government entered the electricity market 
on a limited scale. In 1902, Congress passed the Reclamation Act to encourage settlement 
of the western United States. The Act created the Reclamation Service, an agency 
charged with irrigating the arid regions of the west by constructing large water storage 
projects and pumping plants. During the construction of Reclamation's first two projects, 
the Theodore Roosevelt Dam at Arizona's Tonto basin, and the Minidoka Project on 
Idaho's Snake River, the government realized the commercial potential of the 
hydroelectricity that was being generated at both sites to support construction activities. 
Subsequently, Congress passed the 1906 Townsite Act, which authorized the 
Reclamation Service to sell surplus power from irrigation projects, with preference given 
to municipalities. Revenue from would be used to pay for the irrigation project. At 
Roosevelt Dam, the Reclamation Service built transmission lines to the city of Phoenix, 
where the power was purchased by Pacific Gas and Electric Company. At Minidoka, 
Reclamation built transmission lines to three towns, Heyburn, Rupert and Burley. In turn, 
the towns organized cooperative utility companies, which built distribution networks 
inside the town, and arranged sales to individual customers. By 1920, over 1,100 Idaho 
farm families were obtaining electricity from approximately twenty mutual power 
21 Gus Norwood, Columbia River Power for the People: A History of Policies of the Bonneville 
Power Administration (Portland: Bonneville Power Administration, 1980), 95-103. 
16 
companies that maintained 290 miles of distribution lines. In this way, the Reclamation 
Service became an unlikely mechanism for the expansion of electric power transmission 
networks in some western states.22 
Interconnected Systems in the Pacific Northwest 
By the time the Minidoka Project began providing electric power to rural Idaho 
towns, electricity had become commonplace in the major cities of the Pacific Northwest. 
Portland's Lewis & Clark Exposition of 1905 had exposed over three million people to a 
brilliant display of interior and exterior electric lighting, demonstrating that electricity 
was "no longer a novelty in the cities."23 By the end of that year, power distribution 
systems of public and privately owned utility companies served most of the towns and 
cities in the Pacific Northwest. 
In 1910, American Power and Light, a subsidiary of an eastern holding company 
known as Electric Bond and Share, incorporated Pacific Power and Light (PP&L) in 
Portland, Oregon. PP&L was the first of many Pacific Northwest utilities that was formed 
22 Leah S. Glaser, "Historic American Engineering Record, Eastern Mining Area Transmission 
Line (The 115kV System), HAER No. AZ-6-8, Gila County, Arizona." Salt River Project, Phoenix, 
Arizona, June 1996, 4-1 O; Jeffrey Hess and Demian Hess, "The Minidoka Project," typed manuscript, 
1991 . 
23 Tollefson, 55 . 
17 
or acquired by large eastern-based holding companies between 1910 and 193 0. The trend 
toward holding company ownership in the utility industry began nationally just after the 
turn of the century. Holding companies acquired small, underdeveloped operating 
utilities, financed their improvement, and provided expert advice in the areas of 
generation, transmission and distribution of electricity. As the operating companies grew, 
so did the profits, and control, of the holding companies. Although the power and 
influence of the holding companies would peak in the Pacific Northwest and the rest of 
the country in the 1920s, the trend began to shape the development of transmission and 
distribution systems in Oregon and Washington before the First World War. 
After incorporating PP&L, Electric Bond and Share proceeded to acquire several 
small utilities in Oregon and Washington. Historian Thomas P. Hughes illuminates the 
strategy behind the holding company's actions: 
When the companies acquired [by the holding company] were in the same 
geographical area ... they were united by transmission lines into a 
continuous system and were often merged to form larger operating 
companies. As a result, small, inefficient plants could be shut down, load 
factor could be improved, varied energy sources mixed, and diversity 
exploited.24 
The small utilities that Bond and Share acquired were subsequently interconnected and 
absorbed by PP&L, providing the newly formed company with an instant customer base, 
24 Thomas P. Hughes, Networks ofP ower (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983), 
399. 
18 
several generating facilities , and 388 miles of transmission lines. In 1911 , one year after 
its incorporation, PP&L acquired and interconnected eight more neighboring systems.25 
Available technology and demonstrated success prompted similar 
interconnections between disparate electrical systems. Spokane's Washington Water 
Power (WWP) was another private utility that took an early lead in consolidating systems 
in central and eastern Washington and Idaho. However, unlike PP&L, WWP was not 
owned by a holding company. It was a large, independently owned utility that supplied 
much of the inland region with electricity over 600 miles of 66,000-volt transmission 
lines from its numerous and powerful generating plants. WWP sold power wholesale to 
small town utilities until 1913, when it began acquiring them. Operating under a single 
owner, the WWP system of generating plants and transmission lines evolved over several 
years to cover 20,000 square miles. After World War I, the WWP system interconnected 
with other privately owned electrical systems in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and 
Montana, forming one of the largest regional interconnections in the country. 26 
25 Tollefson, 63 ; John Dierdorff, How Edison's Lamp Helped Light the West (Portland: Pacific 
Power and Light Company, 1971), 16. 
26 Tollefson, 65 . 
19 
Planning for Power: The Evolution of Integration 
Across the country, regionally interconnected networks proved more efficient, 
more capacious, and more dependable than isolated distribution systems. However, most 
utilities were still able to meet their load requirements profitably while operating 
independently. Therefore, interconnected electrical systems were still in the minority as 
the United States prepared to enter the First World War. As the war effort geared up, 
many utilities found they could not meet the enormous demands for electricity needed to 
produce war materiel. A survey of the country's generating plants sponsored by the War 
Industries Board revealed that using interconnection technology could greatly increase 
the generating capacity of existing plants. The results of the survey prompted the federal 
government to build giant steam and hydroelectric power plants to augment existing 
transmission systems. The high productivity of these systems boosted American 
generating capacity by more than two million horsepower between the spring of 1917 and 
the fall of 1918. Despite this increase, however, demand by war industries continued to 
outpace production. In July 1917, the War Industries Board predicted that if hostilities 
continued through the winter of 1918-1919, the nation would suffer a massive power 
shortage. As historian Duncan Hay explains, to avert the shortage, the War Industries 
Board "and other government agencies actively encouraged, and in some cases ordered, 
20 
interconnection of electric generation and distribution systems. "27 
World War I marked the first time interconnections had been used successfully on 
such a large scale in the United States. In addition, the end of the war left government 
and industry planners with the task of developing new markets for several giant federal 
power plants. Through these efforts was born the notion of the "integrated system," in 
which the existing facilities of independent utilities were combined with new generating 
facilities and high-voltage transmission lines to create a huge "power pool" that was 
centrally controlled and operated. The difference between standard interconnection 
practices and integration was, 
a simple interconnection tied together at one juncture or a limited number 
of points only two utility systems; often the capacity of the tie line was 
small, permitting transfer of only a limited amount of excess power. 
Control of each system remained independent. By contrast, integration 
would bring two formerly independent systems under common control. No 
longer would it be possible to distinguish the boundaries of these systems 
by their tie lines, for these would become part of the transmission-line 
network of the integrated systems. Institutional merger did not follow 
immediately, however.28 
Integration was the technological key to the "planned systems" that emerged after the 
war. Historian Thomas Hughes explains the concept: 
The purpose of these new systems, established according to master plans, 
27 Hay, 115. 
28 Hughes, 296. 
21 
was to knit together, on a regional scale, utilities that had formerly evolved 
independently. The planned networks, or grids, usually took the form of 
high-voltage lines ringing a supply region, or polygon, the sections of 
which met at major load centers. The planned grids represented the 
pooling of energy from utilities that preserved their legal identities, 
primarily as distributors of the pooled energy. In some instances, a 
separate corporate entity owned and managed the grid; in others, the 
utilities presided over the grid, or pool, using a committee structure ... . 
Under some plans, the utilities or power companies fed the pool from their 
own power plants. Under others, the grid took power both from its own 
plants and from the plants of participating utilities.29 
Alarmed by the power shortages during World War I, planners and engineers 
increasingly looked toward the idea of huge regional planned grids, or power pools, to 
solve the problem of future nationwide power shortages. Industry leaders agreed that a 
comprehensive system was an appropriate solution, but disagreements erupted over 
whether the nationwide network should be should be publicly or privately owned. 
Politicians and government officials brought the issue to the forefront of public debate in 
the early 1920s, when secretary of interior Franklin Knight Lane emerged in support of a 
privately owned and operated system known as "superpower." In theory, the system, 
which would.be owned and managed by private holding companies, would combine huge 
new thermal and hydroelectric generating plants with existing facilities under a new 
master grid of superhigh-voltage transmission lines. Opposition to this plan was led by 
Pennsylvania governor Gifford Pinchot, who envisioned a scheme similar to superpower, 
29 Ibid., 324. 
22 
but publicly owned. In further contrast to superpower, "giant power" included a 
distribution plan to service rural areas, a market long neglected by private utilities and 
unreachable by municipal systems. The year 1926 was a definitive year for the public 
versus private power debate. Pinchot's giant power failed in the Pennsylvania legislature, 
as the Federal Power Commission authorized the construction of the nation's fust 
superpower project on the Susquehanna River near Conowingo, Maryland.30 
Superpower Realized: Conowingo and the PNJ Interconnection 
Built by the Philadelphia Electric Company, the Conowingo plant was designed 
specifically to feed into a regional transmission grid, formed when Philadelphia Electric's 
existing facilities were interconnected with those of two neighboring utilities, the Public 
Service Electric and Gas Company of New Jersey and the Pennsylvania Power and Light 
Company. The construction of a high-voltage grid and the Conowingo hydroelectric plant 
completed the integration of the three utilities, forming what was the world's largest 
power pool at that time, with 1.5 million kilowatts of centrally controlled power. The 
Conowingo project did not introduce new technology to the industry. Its uniqueness lay 
in the way the power pool was administered. While Conowingo was still under 
30 Tollefson, 76; Hughes, 303-304. 
23 
construction, the three companies formed a new entity known as the PNJ Interconnection, 
which operated the power pool from a central dispatcher. Historian Thomas Hughes 
highlights some of the reasons the PNJ power pool was so unique in the industry: 
The integrated and centrally controlled PNJ power pool differed from the 
mergers and utility holding-company structures that were then 
proliferating. The utility managers and engineers who operated the power 
pool began to see the PNJ as electrically one company, but financially and 
organizationally a committee of peers negotiating planning and operations. 
The PNJ brought the economic benefits of a large system and at the same 
time preserved the utilities' corporate identities.31 
The success of the PNJ venture gave credibility to the superpower notion. The 
project "served as a model for other utility confederations and for cooperation among 
peers in general. Contemporaries recall that during the early years of its operation, 
managers and engineers from the world over came to inspect the PNJ grid. "32 
Across the country, other integrated regional systems began drawing attention 
from the engineering press. Networks in Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and 
California were featured as smaller-scale examples of the superpower concept. 33 In 
contrast to these planned systems, however, most of the electrical networks in the nation 
were evolving under the manipulations of eastern-based holding companies. Hughes 
31 Hughes, 330. 
32 lb id., 333 . 
33 Hay, 116. 
24 
estimated that by 1924, two-thirds of the generating capacity of the national electric 
industry were controlled by holding companies. 34 
In 1928, virtually all of the private electric utilities in the Pacific Northwest were 
"absentee owned" by eastern holding companies.35 Subsidiary companies of Electric 
Bond and Share owned most of the utilities servicing Washington, Idaho, Montana and 
parts of Oregon, including Pacific Power and Light, Northwestern Electric, Inland Power 
and Light, Washington Water Power, Idaho Power, Montana Power and Utah Power and 
Light.36 By 1930, subsidiaries of Standard Gas and Electric and Central Public Service 
Corporation, both of Chicago, serviced much of Oregon. In addition, Stone and Webster, 
the large eastern concern that built the Conowingo project, established its presence in the 
Pacific Northwest when it built the first hydroelectric dam on the Columbia River. 
Constructed between 1928 and 1932, Rock Island Dam created a huge surplus of power 
and triggered a flurry of interconnections among the Electric Bond and Share companies 
and subsequently, between those companies and Stone and Webster's Northwestern 
subsidiary, Puget Sound Power and Light. The interconnected facilities of these and other 
private and municipal utilities created the electrical transmission and distribution 
34 Hughes, 390 
35 Norwood, 24. 
36 Tollefson, 56. 
25 
networks that crisscrossed the Pacific Northwest in the late 1920s and early 1930s. These 
were evolving systems; interconnections that were made over a long period of time, 
based on proximity, ownership, and corporate machinations. 
The Great Depression 
When the national economy crashed in October 1929, so did the stocks of many 
large holding companies. Because virtually all private electrical utilities in the Pacific 
Northwest were owned by holding companies, the region and its utility industry were hit 
particularly hard by the Great Depression. Investments in hydroelectric generation 
dropped, construction ceased, and power sales plummeted as businesses and factories 
went out of business.37 Hostility toward private utility had been spreading throughout the 
nation, even before the Depression. A 1927 Federal Trade Commission Report on the 
extent of monopolization in the electric utility industry had prompted an investigation of 
utility holding companies. The investigation revealed "unfair attacks on municipally 
owned electric systems, corruption of legislatures and public officials, financial 
manipulation, and neglect of operating utility companies."38 These revelations "adversely 
37 Norwood, 32. 
38 Norwood, 24. 
26 
affected the public image of utilities" and added fuel to the frustration of farmers and 
other rural citizens who were already bitter because holding-company-owned utilities 
either would not extend service to rural areas, or would do so under financially 
unreasonable conditions.39 When New York governor and presidential candidate Franklin 
Delano Roosevelt came to Portland to deliver a campaign speech in 1932, his attack on 
electric utility holding-company monopolies found a receptive audience. 
"Talking Columbia" 
Governor Roosevelt also spoke to another topic of great interest to the attentive 
crowd, when he addressed the issue of Columbia River development: 
We have, as all of you in this section of the country know, the vast 
possibilities of power development on the Columbia River. And I state, in 
definite and certain terms that the next great hydroelectric development to 
be undertaken by the Federal Government must be that on the Columbia 
River.40 
Roosevelt called for federally controlled public power, to insure that "there will exist 
forever a national yardstick to prevent extortion against the public and to encourage the 
39 Norwood, 101. 
40 Samuel I. Rosenman, comp. , The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, New 
York: Russell and Russell, 13 vol. , 193 8-1960, as quoted in Norwood, 26. 
27 
wider use of that servant of the American people - electric power."4 1 Roosevelt 
subscribed to the ideology long-held by the Bureau of Reclamation: that multi-purpose 
projects were more efficient and cost-effective than single-purpose projects, and that this 
type of undertaking should exist as part of a carefully controlled, comprehensive river 
development program. 
Franklin Roosevelt was not the first to acknowledge the industrial potential of the 
Columbia River. State and private interests had been sponsoring surveys and 
commissioning preliminary studies on the development potential of the upper and lower 
Columbia River since before 1920. Fears that there would not be a big enough market for 
the enormous amount of power that would be generated, and cost estimates pushing $30 
million kept these early initiatives from becoming realities.42 
In March 1925, Congress authorized the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1925. The Act 
directed the Corps of Engineers to prepare cost estimates for investigations of "those 
navigable streams of the United States, and their tributaries, whereon power development 
appears feasible and practicable . .. ," and from these investigations, formulate a plan for 
multipurpose development of those rivers.43 In 1926, cost estimates and recommendations 
41 Jbid. 
42 William F. Willingham, Water Power in the AWilderness: The History of Bonneville l ock and 
Dam (Portland : U.S . Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, 1987), l. 
43 The River and Harbor Act of 1925 expressly excluded investigations of the Colorado River 
28 
for comprehensive surveys were submitted to Congress as House Document No. 308-
69/1, more commonly referred to as the "308 Report." Surveys of the Columbia, 
Tennessee, Missouri, and other rivers were authorized in the River and Harbor Act of 
1927, resulting in extensive reports on each river. The report on the Columbia River 
recommended a system of eight dams, including Grand Coulee and Bonneville, as the 
basis of their "general plan for the improvement of the Columbia River and minor 
tributaries for the purposes of navigation and efficient development of water power, the 
control of floods, and the needs of irrigation. "44 In Washington, D.C., the Board of 
Engineers for Rivers and Harbors of the U.S . Army Corps of Engineers changed the 
number of proposed dams on the Columbia from eight to ten. They also recommended 
that the development of the river be undertaken by states, municipalities, or private 
concerns; not the federal government. However, by the time the Board of Engineers 
completed their recommendations, the Great Depression had made the notion of a locally 
developed Columbia River an impossibility. As the Depression deepened, the future of 
development on the Columbia River looked increasingly bleak. For Franklin Roosevelt, 
the stalled Columbia River development plan fit perfectly into his New Deal picture. His 
plan to fund Bonneville and Grand Coulee dams as relief measures would not only 
(Norwood, 45). 
44 Norwood, 45 . 
29 
provide for their construction, but would put thousands of men back to work in the 
process. The New Deal was to become the instrument that turned a decade of planning 
into reality. 45 
As Roosevelt revealed his plan for the Columbia River, a Bureau of Reclamation 
project on the Colorado River was setting the stage for the policies and attitudes that 
would allow him to make good on his promises to the Pacific Northwest. The 
authorization, construction, and operation of Boulder (later, Hoover) Dam established a 
level of federal involvement that had heretofore never been seen in the United States. The 
project would set precedents for federal development of the nation's river systems that 
would last for the next 25 years. 
The Boulder Canyon Project Act 
Like Bonneville and Grand Coulee Dams, Boulder Dam had its genesis before the 
Great Depression brought Franklin Roosevelt and his New Deal to the White House. The 
dam was authorized in 1928 primarily as a flood control measure for the southern valleys 
of California. Located in the Black Canyon on the Colorado River, it was a component of 
the Boulder Canyon Project Act, which also provided for irrigation of California's 
45 Willingham, 2-7. 
30 
Imperial and Coachella valleys by way of an All-American Canal.46 The Bureau of 
Reclamation (USBR) project was to be paid for by the sale of electricity generated by a 
powerhouse at the dam, in accordance with the 1906 Townsite Act. While these functions 
mirrored those of previous USBR irrigation projects across the western states, the 
immense scale and the politics surrounding the Boulder Canyon Project Act quickly 
distinguished it from its predecessors. 
Because of the Colorado River's unique interstate and international character, the 
federal government made early efforts to mediate potential conflicts of use. In 1921 , in 
anticipation of the river's eventual development, Congress passed an act authorizing the 
Colorado River Compact, an agreement designed to provide for equitable distribution of 
the water supply among the states of California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, 
Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah. Later, planning for the Boulder Canyon Project Act 
brought the complexities of interstate and international negotiations to the forefront, 
prompting legislators to include an unprecedented provision in the Boulder Canyon 
Project Act that "forbade the approval of any power permits on the Colorado River or its 
tributaries until the act had become effective."47 The government did not want other 
46 The site chosen for Boulder Dam was one of two that were under consideration by the 
Department of the Interior. The winning site was called Black Canyon, while the other was known as 
Boulder Canyon. The legislation process began before the site was chosen, and therefore carries the 
misleading name of the Boulder Canyon Project Act. 
47 Paul L. Kleinsorge, The Boulder Canyon Project (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1941 ), 
91. 
31 
projects on the river that would "interfere with the interstate water allocation 
agreements. "48 This policy remained in place until after the Boulder Canyon Project Act 
was declared effective in June 1929. However, even after the provision was no longer in 
effect, most permit applications were rejected. By refusing to allow private power 
projects on the Colorado River, the Federal Power Commission was sending a strong 
message about the government's desire to pursue the development of the river as a unified 
system.49 That intention was further emphasized by an additional provision of the 
Boulder Canyon Project Act, which authorized the use of $250,000 to "investigate the 
feasibility of irrigation, power, and other projects in the Colorado River Basin. "50 
With the government firmly entrenched on the Colorado River, the continuity of 
federal presence became essential to the success of the Boulder Canyon Project. The 
interstate and international character of the Colorado River presented challenges unlike 
any previous USBR projects, and in most cases, the solutions to these challenges required 
the presence of federal authority. Each of the seven states of the Colorado Compact had 
their own political agendas and conflicting ideas on how to distribute and utilize the 
river's water. Power and irrigation interests needed to be regulated, and agreements with 
48 Ibid., 54. 
49 Ibid., 52. 
so Ibid., I 02. 
32 
Mexico on the division of waters on the lower Colorado had to be negotiated. In addition, 
it was clear that some sort of centralized management would be necessary in order to 
operate the one powerhouse at the plant and to market the electricity. 
The Federal Government in the Power Business 
In an effort to prevent private monopolization of the regional power industry, the 
Department of Interior decided to retain control over the operation of the power plant at 
Hoover Dam, and sell the power themselves to contractors who would fill the greatest 
public need. No provisions would be made for the transmission of the electricity by the 
government - transmission facilities would be built by the contracting agencies, and local 
distribution would occur over existing lines. There were to be three principal contractors 
for Hoover Dam power: the City of Los Angeles, Metropolitan Water District, and 
Southern California Edison Company. Provisions were also included for future power use 
by Arizona and Nevada. According to historian Paul L. Kleinsorge, since these fifty-year 
contracts "will account for over $327,000,000 in revenues during the fifty-year period, 
they represent one of the largest power transactions in the history of the world."51 
The power marketing activities at Hoover Dam were, indeed, a far cry from any 
51 Ibid., 154. 
33 
previous USBR efforts. Government-built plants at projects, such as Roosevelt Dam in 
Arizona or Idaho's Minidoka, were much smaller in scale than the Boulder Canyon 
Project. Construction and operation costs, as well as revenues, were so much smaller at 
these projects that they were not considered precedents for the government's entrance into 
the power industry on the huge scale exhibited at Hoover Dam. As historian Kleinsorge 
surmised, 
That the government has kept control of the power-production facilities in order 
to assure reaping the greatest social benefits is an unusual step away from the traditional 
policy of reserving such activity to private enterprise; but, as an unusual step, it may 
serve as a precedent which will have far-reaching effects upon the future economic 
development of the power industry. 52 
The success of the Hoover Dam project elevated the level of acceptance of federal 
involvement in private industry. In addition, the project gave rise to a new confidence in 
the federal government, a confidence that led to a social and political environment that 
would enable Franklin D. Roosevelt to establish his public power policies in the Pacific 
Northwest with authority. 
52 Kleinsorge, 300. 
34 
"The Biggest Thing That Man Has Ever Done" 
President Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in January 1933, two years into the 
construction of Boulder Dam. By May of that year, he had approved the first public 
power legislation as part of his New Deal reforms. The Tennessee Valley Authority 
(TVA) was created with a broad mandate to develop the resources of the Tennessee 
Valley, an area that included most of the state of Tennessee, parts of Alabama and 
Mississippi, and areas of Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Georgia. In addition to 
the generation of electric power, the dams and power plants authorized by the Act were to 
provide for flood control and the improved navigation along the Tennessee River and its 
tributaries. However, unlike previous federal multipurpose initiatives, the TV A Act 
responded to the specific social and environmental problems of a particular region. 
Reflecting the Depression era's New Deal agenda, the TVA Act included provisions for 
reforestation and proper use of the land, as well as the manufacturing of fertilizers to 
boost the agricultural and industrial economies in the region. Roosevelt's commitment to 
public power inspired a key component to the plan for the region's economic revival : a 
TVA directive to sell any surplus power generated by the dams in a way that assured the 
widest possible use of electricity for the lowest possible cost. To that end, Congress 
authorized the TV A to construct transmission facilities to bring the power to market. The 
TVA transmission network would evolve over time, through two principle means: a 
massive acquisition program, whereby the TVA purchased the existing distribution 
35 
facilities of private utilities in the region; and, the construction of transmission lines that 
would connect TV A power plants, as well as bring the power to customers. Preferred 
customers, which were identified as municipalities and rural electric cooperatives, would 
build or acquire the distribution facilities that would transmit TV A electricity to the 
ultimate consumer. The TV A transmission network was somewhat reminiscent of the 
pre-war evolving systems, in that it developed over time. However, the integration of 
existing systems with new high-voltage transmission lines; the establishment of a central 
dispatch point; and the emphasis on regional distribution had all the markings of the kind 
of planned, integrated regional system that had its genesis during the first world war. 
Combined with its federal mandate and New Deal social agenda, the TV A transmission 
network would ultimately bear a striking resemblance to Gifford Pinchot's giant power 
scheme of the 1920s. 53 
Federal power was poised to enter its heyday. Boeyed by a compliant Congress, 
Roosevelt introduced the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) in June 1933. Among 
its many provisions, the NIRA authorized the "development of water power" and 
"transmission of electric energy," and provided for the Public Works Administration 
under the Department of the Interior. Under the direction oflnterior secretary and 
53 Roscoe C. Martin , ed., TVA : The First Twenty Years (Knoxville: The University of Tennessee 
Press, 1956), 109-113 ; The Tennessee Valley Authority, Annual Report (Washington: USGPO, 1936), 24-
28; Tennessee Valley Authority, 1933-1937 (Washington: USGPO, 1937), 27-34; Victor C. Hobday, 
Sparks at the Grassroots (Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press, 1956), 14- I 5. 
36 
administrator of Public Works Harold Ickes, the PWA was the intial funding source for 
countless federal building projects undertaken during the Depression. In 1933, Ickes 
authorized Public Works Administration Federal Project No. 9 and Public Works 
Administration Federal Project No. 28, known more commonly as Grand Coulee Dam 
and Bonneville Dam, respectively. Construction began on both dams that same year. 
Bonneville Dam was the first in the 308 Reports' ten-dam chain on the Columbia 
River. It was built by the Corps of Engineers at a site located about thirty-seven miles 
upstream from Portland, Oregon. Bonneville was designed as a "run-of-river" dam, which 
meant that it would have limited storage capacity, and little ability to control the flow of 
the river. Although the dam was intended to improve navigation on the river, it's primary 
function was the production of electric power. The original powerhouse at Bonneville 
Dam was constructed to hold two, 43,200-kilowatt hydroelectric generating units, with a 
substructure that would accommodate four additional units. 54 
In contrast to the run-of-river dam being built at Bonneville, north central 
Washington's Grand Coulee Dam was eventually designed as a high storage dam capable 
of impounding huge quantities of water and regulating the flow of the river. Constructed 
by the Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee was primarily an irrigation project, with a 
directive to generate electricity to finance the project. When completed, Grand Coulee's 
54 Willingham, 12-13 . 
37 
original two powerhouses would contain nine 108,000-kilowatt generators each, for a 
combined output of 1.9 million kilowatts of electricity. The generator units planned for 
Grand Coulee Dam were the largest that had ever been built anywhere in the world. 55 
As the dams rose on the Columbia, anticipation ran high in Oregon and 
Washington. Together, the dams triggered the long-awaited development of the 
Columbia River, and promised to transform the economy of the region. Because the dams 
were authorized as New Deal relief measures, construction began immediately. The 
Bonneville project alone put over 3,000 people back to work. The Grand Coulee project 
was so gigantic in scale that it became, even more so than Hoover Dam, a national 
symbol of better days to come. "It was colossal and magnificent," wrote Marc Reisner in 
Cadillac Desert, "a purgative of national despair."56 
The Marketing Dilemma 
In 1934, as construction on both dams progressed, regional planning officials 
turned their attention to the issue of how to sell the power that would soon be available. 
In 1934, a seven-member "Bonneville Commission" presented split opinions in a report 
55 Paul C. Pitzer, Grand Coulee: Harnessing a Dream (Pullman: Washington State University 
Press, 1994), 208 . 
56 Marc Reisner, Cadillac Desert (New York: Penguin Books USA Inc. , 1993), 156. 
38 
to the Oregon legislature on the transmission issue. Four members favored the idea of a 
trunk line running from Bonneville Dam to the Portland-Vancouver area, where it would 
connect with existing local distribution systems and new lines built to service anticipated 
large industrial loads. By contrast, the Bonneville Commission's remaining three 
members, insisting that "the market area for Bonneville power is taken as the entire 
Northwest region," urged the United States "to construct the interstate power 
transmission system, connecting all public and private plants in the Northwest."57 
Beginning in January 1935, several bills were introduced before Congress, presenting 
options such as: the Bureau of Reclamation taking control of Bonneville Dam and 
marketing the power of both Bonneville and Grand Coulee; the establishment of a 
Columbia Valley Authority that would take over Bonneville Dam from the Corps of 
Engineers and Grand Coulee from the Bureau of Reclamation; and the Corps retaining 
control over Bonneville Dam and selling the power from main transmission trunk lines. 
Although pressure was mounting for the establishment of a TV A-type system in the west, 
President Roosevelt remained open-minded about the type of organization that should be 
chosen. Roosevelt encouraged a regional approach, and in the spring of 1935, he 
discussed options at length with members of the Pacific Northwest Regional Planning 
Commission (PNWRPC), an organization created the previous year by the National 
57 Norwood, 53. 
39 
Planning Board.58 In July 1935, Secretary Ickes wrote a letter to the PNWRPC enlisting 
its assistance in the preparation of a report by the National Resources Committee to the 
President on "the future of the Columbia Basin, which he is hoping will be helpful in 
determining the type of organization which would be set up for the planning, 
construction, and operation of certain public works in that area. "59 
In preparation for the report, the PNWRPC held public hearings on the 
transmission issue in September 1935 in cities all over Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. 
Among the many opinions offered during these meetings, the voice of Professor Carl 
Edward Magnusson emerged to provide critical information, educated opinion, and 
direction to the decision-making process. Magnusson, a professor of engineering at the 
University of Washington, was a vocal, educated proponent of interconnected electrical 
transmission systems and a long-time advocate of a regional transmission grid. In his 
many speeches, lectures and articles, he emphasized the important role that ownership 
played in the administration of a transmission network, stating that "ownership and 
control of the transmission lines form the basis for establishing and maintaining regional 
monopoly of the electric power business." Respected by his professional peers, 
58 The National Planning Board was established by the Public Works Administration, having been 
authorized to do so by the National Industrial Recovery Act of June 16, 1933 . The PNWRPC was made up 
of a small group of private citizens and representatives from the planning boards of Oregon, Washington, 
Idaho, and Montana (Richard Lowitt, The New Deal and the West (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 
1984), 138). 
59 Norwood, 55. 
40 
Magnusson was able to communicate the complexities of the transmission issue to the 
public in a way they could understand. He was very much in favor of a new federal 
power marketing agency that would market Bonneville power over a federally-built 
regional transmission network. Magnusson's opinions held a lot of weight in the Pacific 
Northwest and he was an active participant in the hearings held by the PNWRPC in 1935. 
The PNWRPC submitted their report to the National Resources Committee in 
December, 1935. In the report, the Commission endorsed the establishment of a federal 
power marketing corporation; the adoption of a uniform-rate policy throughout the 
region; and a TVA-style three-man board.60 The report also recommended the 
construction of "a central grid to link the principal centers of existing and future public 
power generation by means of high-tension lines capable of supplying power reliability 
and uniformity. "61 The volume also included a large, fold-out map of the proposed 
"master grid," showing a closed triangular loop that began at Grand Coulee Dam, 
dropped southwest to Bonneville Dam and Portland, ran northeast to Seattle, then back to 
Grand Coulee. 230,000-volt backbone lines radiated east to Montana, south through 
Idaho to Utah, north to Vancouver, B.C. and south to Califomia.62 The map was prepared 
60 Norwood, 59; Tollefson, 127. 
6 1Vera Springer, Power and the Pacific Northwest: A History of the Bonneville Power 
Administration (Washington DC: USDI, 1976), 8. 
62 Norwood, 237. 
41 
by Charles E. Carey, an electrical engineer and member of the PNWRPC. The report 
received a strong endorsement from the National Resources Committee. It was published 
in May 1936, as Bonneville Dam neared completion out west on the Columbia River. 
Under normal political conditions, it would have been virtually impossible for a 
federal power marketing agency to enter the marketplace in the Pacific Northwest, a 
region historically dominated by holding-company-owned private power. Opposition 
from a strong utility lobby, whose monopolistic agenda was regarded by Roosevelt as 
"private socialism," would have made it very difficult for public power legislation to pass 
through Congress. During the 1930s, however, conditions across the nation were far from 
normal. Conditions caused by the Depression gave public power a foot in the national 
door, and step by step, New Deal reforms whittled away the power and influence of 
private electric utility interests in the Pacific Northwest. This gradual process received a 
substantial boost in 1935, when Senator Burton Wheeler of Montana and Congressman 
Sam Rayburn of Texas introduced legislation targeting electric utility holding companies. 
In August 1935, President Roosevelt signed the Public Utility Holding Company Act, 
which "limited holding companies to a single utility property with a co·ntiguous service 
area," and provided for the "elimination of non-contiguous holding companies within five 
years. "63 The effect of this legislation on the Pacific Northwest and across the nation was 
63 Tollefson, 122, 262. 
42 
gradual but decisive. As BPA historian Gene Tollefson explained: 
Between 1935 and 1950, 759 companies were separated from the holding 
company systems. Between 1938 and 1958, the number of holding companies declined 
from 216 to 18. With passage of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, the 
electric utility industries emphasis shifted from razzle-dazzle finance and enrichment by 
questionable means, to providing service to the customer at a reasonable profit.64 
As was the President's intention, the Public Utility Holding Company Act 
considerably weakened the influence of private interests in the electric utility industry. 
The elections of 1936 dealt another blow to private power in the Pacific Northwest, as 
voters in Washington State approved the establishment of public utility districts (PUDs) 
in fifteen counties. Although Oregon and Idaho did not follow suit, this represented a 
substantial contingent of public power supporters in the region. In the same election, 
Oregon and Washington voters turned down a proposal for state-constructed transmission 
grids to carry Bonneville and Grand Coulee power, "eliminat[ing] the alternative of State-
owned transmission systems and thus clariflying] the transmission option as simply 
either Federal or private."65 Although the reaction against State-owned transmission 
systems could not be interpreted as a mandate for federal power transmission in the 
64 Ibid., 267. 
65 Norwood, 50. 
43 
region, the decisive reelection of President Roosevelt made it a likely option. 
The Bonneville Project Act 
By early 1937, Roosevelt knew a decision on the marketing of Bonneville power 
would need to be made soon. Despite the endorsement of the PNWRPC report by the 
National Resources Committee, months of hearings, and the introduction of bill after bill, 
agreement on the logistics of marketing power in the Pacific Northwest had failed to 
materialize. Since January 1935, over thirty bills had been introduced. The ongoing 
debate had added fuel to the long-standing feud between the Corps of Engineers and the 
Bureau of Reclamation, and proponents of a Columbia Valley Authority continued to be 
vocal and insistent. Oregon's two Republican senators, Charles McNary and Frederick 
Steiwer; Washington's two Democratic senators, Homer T. Bone and Lewis 
Schwellenbach; and Idaho's Democratic senator, James P. Pope all introduced opposing 
legislation during this time. Roosevelt, apparently weary of the "increased bickering, turf 
guarding, and mutual suspicions," appointed Secretary Ickes as head of an informal 
committee on National Power Policy, and gave him two weeks to report back.66 The 
President was anxious to make a decision; it would be several years before Grand Coulee 
66 Pitzer, 236. 
44 
Dam would be ready to produce power, but Bonneville Dam was almost finished. The 
Committee on National Power Policy presented to their findings to the President, 
endorsing the report by the PNWRPC with some exceptions. They wanted a bureau 
instead of a corporation to market the power, and they wanted it under Secretary Ickes' 
Department oflnterior. This bureau would develop, generate, and market electricity. It 
would also guarantee uniform, or "postage-stamp" rates all over the region, as opposed to 
rates that would vary according to the distance between a customer and the generating 
. source. After considering the committee's recommendations, Roosevelt suggested 
creating a temporary agency, leaving the controversial question of rates, and the 
marketing of Grand Coulee power, for future consideration. After several revisions, a bill 
creating "an independent administration, under the Interior Department, controlling the 
sale and distribution of power generated at Bonneville Dam" was introduced by 
Representative Joseph Mansfield of Texas and steered through Congress by Senator 
McNary.67 The Bonneville Project Act was passed and signed by the President on August 
20, 1937, just weeks before Bonneville Dam was dedicated. It was authorized as a 
temporary measure, as stated directly in the legislation: "The form of administration 
herein established for the Bonneville Project is intended to be provisional pending the 
establishment of a permanent administration for Bonneville and other projects in the 
67 Pitzer, 236; Willingham, 42 . 
45 
Columbia River Basin. "68 
Although plans for a Columbia Valley Authority were on hold, the legislation that 
created the Bonneville Project Act drew much precedent from that which created the 
Tennessee Valley Authority. Although not as comprehensive as the TVA Act's 
conservation mandate, the Bonneville Project Act clearly committed the Bonneville 
Project to encourage diversification of the Pacific Northwest economy by soliciting large 
industry. In addition to actively promoting regional economic development, both BPA 
and TV A Acts gave preference, in the sale of power, to municipalities and rural electric 
cooperatives; they also authorized the construction of federal transmission lines. 
Historian Gus Norwood boiled down the basic provisions of the Bonneville Project Act: 
Basically, the Bonneville Project Act establishes the Bonneville Power 
Administration [the agency was known as the Bonneville Project until 
1940] and serves as BP As charter or organic law. The Act assigns 
responsibilities: the Corps of Engineers generates the power. The Corps 
installs and operates generators requested by the Administrator. The 
Administrator builds and operates transmission facilities, markets and 
exchanges power, negotiates power contracts, and proposes rate schedules. 
FPC makes the cost allocations and approve rates. These constitute the 
structural decisions of the Act.69 
68 Lowitt, 161. 
69 Norwood, 63. 
46 
The Bonneville Power Administration 
With policy in place, President Roosevelt traveled to Oregon to dedicate 
Bonneville Dam on September 28, 1937. At the dam Roosevelt assured the crowd that 
the cost of the dam "will be returned to the people of the United States many times over 
in the improvement of navigation and transportation, the cheapening of electric power, 
and the distribution of this power to hundreds of small communities within a great 
radius." It must have been difficult to believe that the $83,000,000-pricetag of Bonneville 
Dam could ever pay for itself in a region that held only three million people; where just 
over thirty percent of its farms were electrified; where the primary economic bases, 
lumber and agriculture, remained devastated by the Depression; and where there was 
virtually no industrial development. Roosevelt's words at the dedication ceremony belied 
the foresight that distinguished him as an outstanding leader. The man Roosevelt favored 
to administer the new Bonneville Project was also a man of vision. On October 10, 193 7, 
Secretary Ickes appointed Roosevelt's good friend and consummate public power man, 
James Delmage McKenzie (J. D.) Ross as Administrator of the Bonneville Project.70 
J. D. Ross worked for Seattle City Light as an electrical engineer from 1903 until 
1911 , when he was promoted to lighting superintendent. During his long tenure with 
70 Lowitt, 162. 
47 
Seattle City Light he was an outspoken proponent of public power. Later he served as a 
consultant on the Saint Lawrence River Project for then New York Governor Franklin D. 
Roosevelt. Over the course of his career, Ross was a consultant for the Federal Power 
Commission, an advisory engineer for the Public Works Administration, and a 
commissioner on the Securities and Exchange Commission. Ross kept his job as Seattle's 
lighting superintendent after he was tapped to head the Bonneville Project. He served 
part-time for both agencies. Ross died unexpectedly in 1939, after just 17 months as 
Bonneville Project Administrator. In that short time, he launched all the major policy 
directives of the Bonneville Project Act. With a hand-picked administrative staff, Ross 
tackled the controversial rate issue, initiated efforts to actively promote local PUDs, and 
insisted on the earliest possible construction of the master grid transmission network. "He 
served vigorously as the instrument of change," Gus Norwood recounted. "He was able to 
facilitate change because he had wide support among the people of the Pacific Northwest. 
He also had the confidence and support of the President."71 
Planning for the Master Grid 
SEC.2. (b) In order to encourage the widest possible use of all electric 
energy that can be generated and marketed and to provide reasonable 
7 1 Norwood, 103. 
48 
outlets therefor, and to prevent the monopolization thereof by limited 
groups, the administrator is authorized and directed to provide, construct, 
operate, maintain, and improve such electric transmission lines and 
substations, and facilities and structures appurtenant thereto, as he finds 
necessary, desirable, or appropriate for the purpose of transmitting electric 
energy, available for sale, from the Bonneville project to existing and 
potential markets, and, for the purpose of interchange of electric energy, to 
interconnect the Bonneville project with other Federal projects and 
publicly owned power systems now or hereafter constructed. 72 
Such was the directive, one of many, faced by J. D. Ross when he accepted the job of 
Administrator of the Bonneville Project. Approximately one month after his appointment, 
Ross and a small staff established the BP A headquarters in Portland, Oregon. Early 
planning efforts for the transmission grid were broad-based. Historian Craig Holstine 
wrote that, once they were settled in their new offices, "Ross and his staff began their 
investigation of the region's power n eds and potentials. They examined metropolitan 
areas likely to demand the heaviest loads of power; rural electrification systems and 
power requirements for irrigation; railway electrification needs; natural resource 
development plans; and the forthcoming interconnection of the federal network with 
previously existing power systems. "73 In addition, Ross spent those early months 
preparing a budget, which he submitted to the Bureau of the Budget late in 193 7. 74 
72 Norwood 63. 
73 Craig Holstine, "National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form: Bonneville 
Power Administration Master Grid," 1987. 
74Norwood, 112. 
49 
As Ross continued to gear up the building program through early 1938, a sense of 
urgency began to emanate from the White House. President Roosevelt was becoming 
increasingly concerned by events taking place oversees. Germany had been rearming its 
military forces since 1935. Hitler's 1936 reoccupation of the Rhineland and Mussolini's 
invasion of Ethiopia the same year served as warnings of serious unrest in western 
Europe. The expansionist tendencies ofltaly and Germany became even more threatening 
when they forged an alliance during their involvement in the Spanish Civil War (1936-
1939). Japan's aggressive move into China in 1937 prompted Roosevelt to speak openly 
of the need to "'quarantine' aggressor nations."75 The Roosevelt administration had been 
watching events in Europe closely, but any efforts to prepare for possible involvement 
were minimal. Congress and much of the country had been in a very isolationistic mood 
since the first World War, and Roosevelt was not anxious to alienate either faction. 
However, after Hitler's invasion of Austria on March 12, 1938, Roosevelt took 
steps to secure the nation's electric supply. To him, involvement in the war seemed 
imminent, whether the people wanted it or not, and he was not about to let power 
shortages hamper a potential war effort as they had in World War I. 76 On March 18, the 
75 Doris Keams Goodwin, No Ordinary Time (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994), 22 . 
76 Roosevelt was Assistant Secretary of the Navy during World War I. His knowledge of the 
power shortages experienced during World War I led to his proactive efforts to avoid a similar situation 
should the U.S. go to war again (Norwood, 120). 
50 
president directed the Federal Power Commission and the War Department to survey the 
nation's power capacity. In July a report was made to the president, concluding that the 
situation was "so serious as to require immediate attention."77 Roosevelt counted on J. D. 
Ross and the Bonneville grid to dramatically boost the nation's power capacity. As 
administrator of the nascent BPA , Ross was in a unique position to create, from the 
ground up, a transmission system designed to accommodate defense production as well 
as serve domestic and commercial needs. In his 1938 annual report, Ross emphasized the 
importance of utilizing Bonneville power for defense production: 
It is logical to expect these [war] industries to make increasing demands 
upon the installed capacity of the Pacific Northwest. Bonneville's output 
will therefore stand as a safeguard against acute power shortage ... 
Modern warfare is fought in the factory as much as in the air or trenches. 
America must be ready to meet not only peacetime needs of power for 
home, farm, and industry, but must be assured of her ability to cope with 
emergency demands for large blocks of electricity. In the hydroelectric 
streams of the Pacific Northwest is potential power far in excess of that 
available in other regions of the Nation. It should pe developed at an 
economical rate to meet mounting peacetime needs and the equally 
important possibilities of emergency drains ... Preparedness requires 
foresight. 78 
Under the threat of war, the regional Bonneville grid acquired national 
importance. What began as a system to connect two New Deal projects to improve a 
77 Norwood, 107. 
78 Bonneville Power Administration, Annual Report (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1938), quoted in 
Norwood, I 08. 
51 
regional economy became a means for a nation's collective security. So began a crash 
construction program that took a transmission grid planned for a ten-year development 
period to one that was completed in just over five years.79 
Nuts, Bolts, and Substations: Design Issues of the Master Grid 
One of the first people J. D. Ross hired in November, 1937, was engineer Charles 
E. Carey, formerly with the PNWRPC. Carey had designed the map depicting a proposed 
master grid transmission system included in the PNWRPCs 1935 report to the National 
Resources Committee. Ross adopted Carey's plan as the basis of BP A's transmission grid, 
and hired him to carry it out. In developing the master grid, Carey had looked closely at 
the British Electricity Grid, England's national transmission system built between 1927-
1933, and Ontario, Canada's publicly owned regional system, which also began operating 
in the mid-1920s. Both were high-voltage transmission grids overlaying and connecting 
to existing regional distribution systems. He also looked at the experiences of the TV A. 80 
Once he was recruited by Ross, Carey hired engineering consultant Dr. E.C. Starr, who 
had begun his career on the Conowingo superpower project in 1927, to help develop the 
79 BPA, Annual Report, 1944, 41. 
80 Norwood, 202. 
52 
grid. Much of the technological data used to build the Bonneville grid originated at 
Conowingo. According to Dr. Starr, "It was pretty much the same thing. I mean, we were 
using data developed for the design on the Conowingo transmission lines when we 
designed our first lines here. The data had been produced in Dr. Peek's laboratory and 
elsewhere and lines had been built and operated successfully and consequently we 
followed those designs quite closely. "81 Engineers utilized industry standards in designing 
the line's steel towers, modifying their structural components to account for a variety of 
factors, such as "function, voltage level, number of circuits, safety requirements, 
topography, and financial considerations." Topography was an especially important 
factor for tower design along the BP A grid. Towers designed for heavily forested, 
mountainous terrain required special specifications to handle up to 8 pounds per square 
inch of wind and ice loads; lightning; and unusually narrow right-of-ways through 
mountain passes. American Bridge Company of Pittsburgh, PA, supplied the first steel 
towers for the grid.82 
Designs for substation components evolved in-house. On high-voltage, long-
distance transmission systems, substations were placed _at strategic locations to "route and 
81 Dr. E .C. Starr, personal interview as quoted in Tollefson, 136. Dr. Frank W. Peek, Jr. was a 
famous high-voltage engineer who directed the development of insulation for a 230kv transmission line 
that ran from the Conowingo plant to Philadelphia. 
82 Holstine; Norwood, 116, 173. 
53 
control electrical power flow; transform a voltage to a higher or lower level; and function 
as a delivery point to an individual customer, such as a private or publicly owned utility, 
or an industry such as an aluminum plant. "83 Buildings typically found at a substation 
would include a control house, which held crucial operating equipment; an untanking 
tower, where giant oil transformers and circuit breakers were cleaned and serviced; an oil 
house, which held pumping equipment; and a condenser building, used to house a large 
piece of equipment known as a synchronous condenser. A substation, depending on its 
size and function, might have only one of these buildings ( in which case that would be a 
control house), or all of the buildings mentioned. Many substations on the master grid 
didn't have any buildings at all. Large electrical components of a substation, such as 
transformers, circuit breakers, and capacitor banks, were located outdoors, contained 
within an area known as a switchyard. Every substation had a switchyard, in which 
equipment and apparatus were found in combinations, "depending upon voltage, station 
function, [a nd] customers served. "84 In a switch yard, aluminum tubes called buses carried 
high-voltage currents between the equipment in the yard. Giant steel towers supporting 
conductor cables served as the end of the line for transmission lines entering the 
83 Holstine, sec. 7, p. 1. 
84 Ibid., sec. 7, p. 5. 
54 
substation. 85 
Historian Craig Holstine notes the division of labor in the substation design 
process at BPA : 
The System Engineering Section drew up general plans for the first. .. 
substations to be installed in the original Master Grid. System Engineering 
then turned to the Substation Engineering Section, which prepared the 
specifications for heavy equipment and fittings needed for each station. 
Finally, after the grand scheme had been determined, the Architectural and 
Drafting Section was given the task of preparing individual building 
designs. 86 
According to a 1939 BP A Engineering Division report, the task of designing the 
substation buildings was difficult because there were no other BPA  buildings from which 
to use as a template. These were the Bonneville Project's first buildings. Engineers and 
designers began by establishing a reference file, "consisting of catalogues, drawings, 
specifications, and technical information from various other substations and construction 
jobs in all parts of the country." Men such as John M. Rathburn, Chief of Substation 
Design from 1939-1942, Franz Maas, Dean Wright, Glen Dunbar, H.R. Stevens and 
Clarence Frenke were involved in designing the substation buildings on the master grid 
85 Specific information about buildings and structures along the master grid obtained on substation 
site visits conducted by Christine Curran in 1995-1996; and from construction drawings dating from 1939 
found at various substations. 
86 Holstine, sec. 8, p. 8. 
55 
between 193 9-194 5. 87 
Designers established a basic building form early on, described in BP A's 1939 
Annual Report: 
The substation buildings are designed on a unit basis so that each unit will 
present a complete and appropriate structure that may have additional units 
added as the needs of the substation increase .... From an architectural 
viewpoint the most interesting feature of a substation is the control house, 
where plain wall surfaces are interrupted only by carefully proportioned 
window and door openings . . . . Particular attention is being given to the 
selection of materials on basis of durability and low expense of upkeep . .. 
. Landscaping has been made an integral part of the design of the 
substations to achieve natural, dignified, and pleasing structures. 88 
The substation control houses took on a very recognizable style. Almost of all 
them were one-story with either a basement or generous crawl space. Characterized by 
symmetrical facades, flat roofs and enormous multiple-pane, steel-sash windows, almost 
all of the control houses were designed in the stripped-classical style prevalent among 
government buildings built during the 1930s. Most of them were of reinforced concrete 
covered with stucco, although two had brick-sheathed steel frames. Some of the smaller 
ones had wood frames covered with wood or aluminum siding and hipped metal roofs. 
Exterior decoration was minimal, consisting primarily of brass, cast stone, and glass 
block. The larger, more critical substations on the line received the most elaborate 
87 Ibid., sec. 8, p. 9; Norwood, 115-116. 
88 BPA, Annual Report, l 939, quoted by Holstine, sec. 8, p. I 0. 
56 
decoration. Interior finishings ranged from simple brass radiator grilles and light fixtures 
to marble wainscot and granite window sills. Some had skylights. Most had metal lath 
and plaster over structural tile walls and floors of asphalt tile. 
Untanking towers and oil houses followed the same stylistic tendencies over 
different forms. The towers rose upwards of 50 feet, while the oil houses were small and 
between 60 and 80 percent below grade. 
Building the Big Line 
May 1938 saw the first congressional appropriation of $3.5 million distributed to 
the BP A. Initial monies were used for supplies and manpower, property acquisition, and 
preliminary surveys for a two-circuit, 220-kilovolt (lines were soon upgraded to 230 
kilovolts), thirty-seven-mile line from Bonneville Dam to Vancouver, Washington, and a 
230-kv line from Bonneville to Grand Coulee Dam. Ross felt these lines were the most 
critical of the system. The Bonneville-Vancouver line would bring power immediately to 
a population center, which would bring in needed revenue. As for the Bonneville-Grand 
Coulee line, even though the BP A was only authorized to market power from Bonneville 
Dam, Ross had always felt that linking the two dams was crucial. Once the dams were 
connected, no matter who marketed the power in the future, the potential would exist for 
a combined output. In 1938, as war clouds gathered, the tie between the two dams and the 
huge amounts of power it symbolized became increasingly significant. In addition to the 
57 
two backbone lines, surveys were funded for a 115-kv. line from Vancouver to Eugene, 
Oregon; a 230-kv. line from Vancouver to Kelso, Washington; a 230-kv. line from Kelso 
to Chehalis, Washington; a 115-kv. line from Chehalis to Raymond, Washington; and a 
115-kv. line from Bonneville Dam to the Dalles, Oregon.89 
Property acquisition along these lines was accomplished by means of a mass 
condemnation program, initiated by J. D. Ross to expedite the construction of the master 
grid. The program served its purpose, allowing corridors 300 to 375-feet-wide to be 
surveyed and cleared through forest and farmland in Oregon and Washington in record 
time. However, the condemnation suits resulted in extensive litigation that didn't let up 
until second BPA administrator, Dr. Paul J. Raver abandoned the contentious policy, in 
October 1939, in favor of purchasing easements.90 
Although actual construction wouldn't begin on the major lines of the master grid 
until 1939, one small line did materialize during the planning year of 1938. The BPA 
used $10,000 of its first appropriation to fund a 13.8-kv., 4.6-mile line from Bonneville 
Dam to Cascade Locks, a small Oregon community just upstream from the dam. Cascade 
89 Holstine, sec. 8, p. 7; Electrical West 81 (August 1938): 60. 
90 "Dam Line Buys Halt," Oregonian, October 28, 1939. Raver's easement policy meant that the 
BPA could erect structures, poles and lines wherever necessary, but the property would remain in the 
landowner's name, and could be used by the landowner. The landowners got paid for their land much more 
quickly through this voluntary agreement plan than they did through the process of condemnation. 
58 
Locks became BP A's first customer when this line was energized on July 9, 1938.91 
During the summer of 1938, BPA received $10,750,000 from the PWA for the 
construction of four transmission lines and their requisite substations. Covering a total of 
550 miles, the four lines ran from Bonneville to Grand Coulee; from Bonneville to The 
Dalles; from Vancouver to Aberdeen, and from Vancouver to Eugene. An additional 
WPA grant of $1,080,988 allowed right-of-way clearing to begin on the Bonneville-
Vancouver line. Hundreds of workers from the Works Progress Administration provided 
manpower for right-of-way clearing and the building of maintenance roads on this and 
other lines along the master grid.92 
By late 1938, J. D. Ross was administrator of a staff of 700 and a WP A crew of 
550. Preparation and planning for the construction project was in high gear: hundreds of 
miles of land had been condemned and cleared; $4 million-worth of contracts had been 
let for materials, and the design of the master grid was in full-scale production. In 
November, Ross disclosed the routes of the five initial lines in the transmission network, 
and the location of the principal substations. Originally, sixteen substations were planned 
for placement along the first five transmission lines. In Oregon they were to be located at 
Portland (St. John's), Oregon City, Salem, Albany, Eugene, Hood River and The Dalles. 
91 Electrical West 81 (July 1938): 44. 
92 Electrical West 81 (August 1938): 60; Tollefson, 136; Norwood, 113-114. 
59 
Washington substations were to be located at Vancouver, Kelso, Cathlamet, Chehalis, 
Raymond, Aberdeen,Yakima, North Bonneville, and Grand Coulee Dam.93 
The placement of substations along the grid depended on several factors. 
Substations were located at the generating sources to immediately step up voltage for 
transmission, hence the substations at North Bonneville and Grand Coulee Dam. Most 
were located at points were the federal grid interconnected with private, municipal or 
PUD distribution systems; or where lower-voltage federal "finger lines" broke-off from 
the main grid. Ross' original plan for substation placement on the early lines was 
followed with minor exceptions. The Yakima substation was eliminated after Yakima 
County voters failed to pass a measure establishing a public utility district. In addition, a 
major substation was added to regulate voltage on the extraordinarily long 234-mile line 
from Bonneville to Grand Coulee. Known as Midway substation, its name reflected its 
location halfway between the dams.94 
93 "Bonneville Lines and Substations Disclosed," Electrical West, 81 (December 1938): 53; there 
were actually eight Oregon substations in the planning stages at this time. BPA constructed a South Bank 
substation in 1939 at Bonneville Dam on the south shore of the Columbia River specifically to service the 
line from Bonneville Dam to Cascade Locks. In contrast with other BPA substations that operated at 
voltages from 115 kv. to 230 kv., South Bank substation had an operational capacity of 13.8 kv. Because 
of its limited voltage capacity, and its design for local use only, South Bank substation was not considered 
a key substation on the original grid. The substation was demolished in the late 1980s when new locks 
were constructed at Bonneville Dam. For more information on South Bank substation, see "Bonneville 
Power Administration South Bank Substation," Report HAER No. OR-4 for the Historic American 
Engineering Record, National Park Service, 1987. 
94 BP A again planned for a substation at Yakima in 1940 after election results called for the 
establishment of a PUD in Yakima County. However, materials shortages brought on by the war postponed 
construction of a distribution system, and in 1942 a subsequent election overturned the vote to form a PUD 
60 
In January 1939, Ross publicly presented the blueprint for the new federal 
transmission system (Figure 1) . Although more fully developed, it was essentially the 
system that Charles Carey designed in 1935. Depicted was a loop that ran from 
Bonneville Dam east to Portland-Vancouver, north through Chehalis to Tacoma and 
Seattle, northeast to Grand Coulee Dam, then southwest down to Bonnville Dam. In 
addition, high-voltage loops connected the Washington towns of Kelso, Raymond, 
Aberdeen and Chehalis; Grand Coulee Dam with Spokane, Lewiston, Idaho, Walla Walla 
and Pasco; and the Oregon towns of Albany, Waldport and Astoria. Circuits ran from 
Vancouver to the California border; from The Dalles, Oregon to Bend; from Pasco south 
through Pendleton to Boise, Idaho and east to Pocatello. Commonly called a "grid," it 
was really a series of interconnecting loops. It was so comprehensive, realistic, and 
efficient that it made the transition from a map to reality with little alteration. Changes 
that did occur were a result of shifting priorities driven by the United States' entry into 
World War II ; construction of certain circuits was rushed, material shortages delayed 
others, and an influx of industrial users into the region prompted the addition of new 
(Tollefson, 202); Midway substation was in such an isolated spot that BPA built a small town to house the 
men who operated the facility. The town was dismantled in 1991. Houses were sold and moved from the 
site (Juanita Jenson, Midway substation, interview by Christine Curran, January 23, 1998). 
, ·.:- . . .. \. ,' ·r:· i· -· -· -~-· _U._[E_a;_CE_~_CD_• --l 
f, . - . 
\ \ : ■ ~ U ~~TA TIO H 
I ' 
l !.!£. ONf.1101<.\£ LIMt. 
1J:. 0Nl 72O.lV. LINf.. 
RnMOMO 
ILWACO ltl~;;;,;i, 
A\lOR.1-
0 !? 
tUOtlH. 
0 N 
FIGURE 1. Map of the Master Grid, 1938. (BPA, Annual Report, 1938.) 
62 
lines and substations previously unplanned.95 
A Second Leader and a Second War 
The BPA experienced a change in leadership after the untimely death of J. D. 
Ross on March 14, 1939. The agency spent six months under the direction of Charles 
Carey, then Frank Banks, chief construction engineer for Grand Coulee Dam, before Dr. 
Paul J. Raver was appointed permanent administrator on September 15, 1939. Following 
in Ross' footsteps would not be easy. Historian Gus Norwood recounts that "Raver faced 
the many and continuing challenges of reorganization, conducting studies, building 
facilities, quadrupling the BP A work force, formulating power marketing policies, and 
typing BPA  firmly to the war effort. "96 Events during the fall of 1939 were to dictate the 
focus of Raver's leadership during the years 1939-1945, a period characterized by an 
astonishing increase in regional industrial development. Just days before Raver's official 
appointment, President Roosevelt declared a limited national emergency following 
Hitler's blitzkrieg of Poland. The United States was officially in a war economy. The very 
next month, Raver talked openly about "the possibility of a speedup in generating and 
95 "Master Power Plan for Northwest Announced," Electrical West 82 (February 1939): 62. 
96 Norwood, 122. 
63 
transmission line construction at both Bonneville and Grand Coulee and probability of a 
major power change that would place emphasis upon industrial rather than commercial 
and domestic development." The fact that there was virtually no heavy industry in the 
Pacific Northwest at this time did not stop Raver. His successful efforts to establish new 
industries in the region and provide them with power defined the development of the 
master grid between 1940 and the end of the war.97 
The day before J. D. Ross died, Charles Carey presided over the erection of the 
first steel tower on the Bonneville-Vancouver line, which marked the beginning of 
construction on the master grid. By June, construction was in progress at BPA 's small 
South Bank substation and the Eugene and North Vancouver substations. The North 
Vancouver facility was to be the largest and most important substation on the grid, as it 
was the central dispatching point for the entire BP A system. Later known as Ampere . 
substation, it was renamed for the third time in 1941 in honor of J. D. Ross. 98 Later that 
summer, an Interior Department appropriation of $13.4 million, plus $2 million from the 
WPA , assured construction on the master grid would continue uninterrupted through 
1940. By October 1939, more than 2,000 WP A workers were clearing rights-of-way and 
building maintenance roads for the BPA , making the project the "largest single WP A 
97 "Bonneville Line Speedup Talked," Oregon Journal, October 20, 1939. 
98 For detailed information about equipment and engineering relating to J. D. Ross Substation, see 
Donald G. Worth, "J. D. Ross Substation is Northwest's Largest," Electrical West 89 (August 1942): 41-44 . 
64 
payroll in the state at present. "99 In December, the twin-circuit Bonneville-Vancouver line 
was energized. 100 
With the construction program on track, administrator Raver turned his attention 
to creating large markets for Bonneville power. By the end of 1939, Raver had secured 
contracts to sell Bonneville power to Canby's municipal system and Portland General 
Electric Company, a major private utility that serve the Portland metropolitan area. The 
BPA  also held contracts with a few public utility districts and small municipalities 
throughout Oregon and Washington. However, bigger markets were crucial to the success 
of the BPA system. Congress was anxious to see a financial return on the project, and 
President Roosevelt needed large industrial production facilities to prepare the country 
for war. A December 1939 contract with the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA) 
to provide power for a planned Vancouver reduction plant was just the beginning of a 
BPA -led industrial transformation of the Pacific Northwest. 
It had always been the intention of New Deal planners and public-power 
advocates to establish industrial markets in the Pacific Northwest concurrent with the 
development of the Columbia River. New industries were expected to provide a market 
for Bonneville and Grand Coulee power, and in the process, stabilize and develop the 
99 "2,000 Working on Bonneville Power Lines," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, October 24, 1939. 
100 BPA, "Transmission Line One-Line Diagrams-Cross Index," April 15, 1991, 1-36. 
65 
regional economy. BPA policy and directive encouraging industrial customers had been 
in place since its beginning. For this reason, when the United States shifted to a war 
economy in September 1939, the BPA stood poised to play a key role in meeting national 
defense requirements "without impairment of the Government's long-time program for 
development of the Pacific Northwest in accordance with sound conservation practice." 
According to BP A's Annual Report for 1941, "All that remained to put the Northwest on 
a full defense footing was the execution of contracts with new defense industry," and 
permission to market power from Grand Coulee Dam. 101 
Raver turned to BP A's Market Development Section, where a small staff was 
engaged in a systematic planning effort to bring electrometallurgical and electrochemical 
industry to the region. The first task of the Market Development Section was to oversee 
the BP A's participation in an intensive economic-industrial survey of the Pacific 
Northwest. Co-sponsored by the Pacific Northwest Regional Planning Commission and 
the Northwest Regional Council, the surveys helped identify potential industrial sites, 
locations of existing facilities, availability of raw materials and community resources, 
power costs; and social and economic trends; virtually all the "information that any 
industrial prospect would want." Market Development staff analyzed and compiled the 
data and made it available to potential industrial customers. Gus Norwood suggests that 
101 BPA, Annual Report, 1941: 49, 52 . 
66 
"for several years BP A was, in effect, a regional chamber of commerce bringing war-
oriented defense loads to the Pacific Northwest. 11 102 The efforts of the Market 
Development Section met with modest initial success. ALCOA's 1939 decision to build a 
plant on the Columbia River was followed in 1940 by the establishment of Pacific 
Carbide and Alloys Company and the Pennsylvania Salt Manufacturing Company in 
Portland. 103 
Meanwhile, the war in Europe had reached crisis proportions. Hitler invaded 
Holland on May 10, and within five weeks had taken Belgium and France as well. On 
May 16, President Roosevelt urged Congress to approve appropriations "to recruit an 
additional half-million men for the army, to purchase guns and equipment, to build 
modern tanks, and to construct naval ships." In addition, he called for the production of 
50,000 aircraft per year, a staggering number that was "ten times the current [production] 
capacity. "104 Congress responded in June with a $5 billion defense appropriation bill that 
triggered a flurry of defense contracts in the Pacific Northwest and contributed 
substantially to BP A's transmission system construction budget for 1940-1941 .105 
102 BPA, Annual Rep ort, June 1941 , p,.54; Norwood, 125; "Bonneville to Survey Northwest 
Industry," Electrical West 83 (December 1939): 56. 
103 SPA, Annual Report, 1941 , 55 . 
104 Goodwin, p.44. 
105 Norwood, 144; SPA, Annual Report, 1941 , 59-60. 
67 
Raver knew that in order for BP A to meet the immense power loads that would be 
required by the expanding national defense program, it was critical to integrate Grand 
Coulee power into the transmission system. Roosevelt agreed, and on August 26, 1940 
signed an executive order permitting the BP A to market power generated at Grand 
Coulee Dam. 106 Just three weeks previous to the signing, the BP A had energized "the 
biggest electric transmission line in the Pacific Northwest," the 235-rnile circuit between 
Bonneville and Grand Coulee dams. 107 
Although construction of transmission lines and substations continued through 
1940 and 1941 along routes previously planned, the pace was greatly accelerated. By 
June 1941 , the BP A had energized 1,1 76.8 miles of line and twenty substations. Through 
1941 , increasing defense spending, rising production quotas, and a major influx of new 
industry into the Pacific Northwest saw the BP A scrambling to make "exhaustive 
reappraisals of future power needs in response to the constantly changing war 
developments." As Raver explained, "These planning activities were vitally necessary as 
a basis for determining the direction in which the Government's Northwest grid should be 
expanded to serve both normal and defense load growth."w8 However, after Japan 
106 Tollefson, 146; Norwood 117. 
101 "Bonneville and Grand Coulee Transmission Line Complete," Electrical West, 85 (September 
1940): 74. 
108 BPA, Annual Report, 1941 , 57. 
68 
attacked Pearl Harbor, "since the war program required the use of critical materials for 
the production of war goods, the Administrator's program was limited after December 7 
to only those extensions of its system which contribute directly to the prosecution of 
war." 109 This directive did not prevent the completion of the master grid. By the time the 
U.S. declared war on December 8, 1941 , much of the system was already in place along 
the routes finalized in 1938. The main components that were not yet in place, such as the 
Covington to Grand Coulee line, were indisputably critical to the war effort. Indeed, it 
served to permit the construction of several new lines and substations as well as additions 
and modifications to existing ones specifically to serve defense loads, allowing the grid 
to expand despite severe material and manpower shortages. 
Between 1940 and 1943, BPA signed defense contracts for power sales with nine 
private industrial companies, six government-owned Defense Plant Corporation facilities, 
and eleven military establishments. As contracts were signed, BPA  engineers made 
additions and extensions to the main grid in order to reach the new plants.' 10 Most the 
new facilities were engaged in electroprocessing of raw materials and chemicals, using 
large blocks of electric power to produce aluminum and other chemical compounds. The 
availability of cheap public power was critical to the productivity of these plants, and 
109 BPA, Annual Report, 1942, 36. 
110 BPA,Annual Report, 1941 , 1942, 1943. 
69 
made it possible for them to operate profitably "in spite of the region's distance from the 
nation's heavy production and market centers." 111 
The Defense Plant Corporation built six defense plants throughout Oregon and 
Washington: an aluminum reduction plant near Mead at Spokane; an aluminum rolling 
mill near Trentwood at Spokane; a magnesium reduction plant near Hillyard at Spokane; 
an aluminum reduction plant at Troutdale; an aluminum-oxide manufacturing plant at 
Salem; an aluminum reduction plant at Tacoma, and a ferrosilicon plant at Wenatchee. 
A major substation previously planned at Spokane served the Mead and Hillyard plants, 
while BPA designed a new one for the Trentwood facility. The plant at Troutdale 
received its own substation, as did the ones in Tacoma and Salem. S_ources are unclear 
which substation served the Wenatchee plant, however, its proximity to the Midway 
substation suggests that connection. Military installations using BPA  power included 
army air bases, coast guard stations and navy yards. The Puget Sound Navel Shipyard 
received its own substation at Bremerton. Private industries were also supplied by BPA  
power, either through municipal interconnections, as were the Boeing facilities in Seattle, 
or directly, as were the three Portland shipyards built by Henry J. Kaiser.JI 2 By 1942, 
"industrial loads, all of them for war production, accounted directly for ninety-two 
11 1 BPA, Annual Report, 1941 , 50. 
112 Tollefson, 161-169, 214-222; BPA, Annual Report, 1943, 5; the substation for the Salem plant 
was known as "Alumina" sub. The war ended before the Salem plant was operational. (Tollefson, 222.) 
70 
percent of current [BP A] contracts." 113 
Although the directive to curtail construction of all portions of the BP A system 
not directly related to the war effort did not prevent the completion of the master grid, it 
did have a chilling effect on the construction of finger lines designed to meet the 
distribution systems of public utility districts and rural electric cooperatives in Oregon 
and Washington. Just as the original charter of the BPA encouraged the development of 
industrial markets, it contained even stronger language directing the agency to help 
establish and provide priority power to public and peoples' utility districts and rural 
electric cooperatives. However, only a handful of these public agencies were actually up 
and ready to receive power before the war began. 
Public, or People's Utility Districts (PUDs) first emerged in the Pacific Northwest 
in the early 1930s; rural cooperatives in 1914. They were established by voters on a 
county-wide (as in Washington) or multi-county-wide (as in Oregon) basis, acquiring 
distribution systems by building their own or purchasing the existing systems of private 
utilities within district boundaries. In the private-utility-dominated Pacific Northwest, 
initial growth of the public agencies was slow. In 1936, Roosevelt created the Rural 
Electrification Act (REA), which established a federal lending agency to provide loans 
for PUDs and rural electric cooperatives nationwide to build generation and distribution 
113 BPA, Annual Report, 1942, 29. 
71 
facilities or acquire existing systems. The REA triggered a dramatic increase in the 
number of PUDs and rural electric cooperatives all across the country. The promise of 
cheap Columbia River power made the public agencies especially appealing in rural 
Oregon and Washington and many were formed in anticipation of purchasing power from 
BPA. However, Roosevelt's declaration of war on December 8, 1941 found many"ofthese 
agencies only in the planning stages of their distribution systems. Although BP A 
continued throughout the war years to negotiate contracts with PUDs and rural electric 
cooperatives, it was only able to transmit power to those that had existing facilities. 
Cooperatives and PUDs that held REA loan money had to wait to build their systems 
until after the war was over. Meanwhile, BPA  continued to interconnect with large and 
small municipalities, private utility companies, and any public district or rural 
cooperative it could service without building new facilities. 114 
The Northwest Power Pool 
Interconnection of the BP A federal grid with existing municipal, public and 
private systems was executed as quickly as lines could be constructed and energized. 
Among the municipal systems integrated into the BP A grid were those of Seattle, 
11 4 Tollefson, 105-106; BPA, Annual Report, 1941 , 66-67, 1942, 28 ; Norwood, 141. 
72 
Tacoma, Centralia, Eugene, and McMinnville; private systems included Portland General 
Electric, Washington Water Power and Pacific Power and Light. Raver was a strong 
proponent of regional interconnection of all power facilities, public or private. To that 
end, the BPA  began in 1940 to conduct extensive studies on regionwide power pooling in 
anticipation of defense needs. Most of the Pacific Northwest's privately owned power 
systems had been interconnected during the 1920s. By mid-1942, most of those systems 
were interconnected with the BPA grid, and consequently, with all the public and 
municipal systems it represented. By the time the War Production Board made mandatory 
such regional interconnections between utilities throughout the country, the Northwest 
Power Pool was essentially in place. 
The Northwest Power Pool was made up of eleven major power systems located 
in the states of Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana and Utah. The pool was fed by 130 
privately owned and 20 publicly owned plants throughout the systems of the BPA, 
Portland General Electric, Pacific Power and Light, Northwestern Electric, Puget Sound 
Power and Light, Tacoma City Light, Seattle City Light, Washington Water Power, 
Idaho Power, Montana Power, and Utah Power and Light. Drawing on precedent set at 
the Conowingo superpower plant in 1926, the Northwest Power Pool was operated as a 
single enormous system. It was administered by an operating committee comprised of 
one representative from each of the eleven members in the pool. Combining 
approximately 4.5 million horsepower in electrical generating capacity, the Northwest 
Power Pool served to "forestall the development of area-wide power shortages within the 
73 
region and to make available at all times maximum power for war production." 11 5 
The Northwest Power Pool officially commenced on August 1, 1942. By that 
time, the Covington to Grand Coulee line was energized, tying Puget Sound to Grand 
Coulee and Bonneville dams and completing the primary loop of the master grid. That 
year, BPA  staff grew to a wartime high of 4,700 people. 11 6 
BP A struggled to complete the master grid despite mounting labor and material 
shortages. In early 1943, additional unanticipated defense requirements promised more 
changes to the nearly finished construction program. BP A's chief engineer Sol Schultz 
received a visit from a representative of the Dupont Company, who had been hired by the 
government to run a defense plant planned in Washington State. Historian Gene 
Tollefson quoted Schultz as he recounted the 1943 meeting: 
He came in, he said he wanted a block of power, could we provide it? And 
I said, that depends how soon, where, and how much. Well, he was very 
evasive about where. Finally, he said it will be in Central Washington and 
I figured it was near Midway station. Then he told me how much power 
was needed. It was a lot. He wouldn't divulge much more than that, he 
said, it's for defense purposes. I told him that with facilities already in 
operation at nearby Midway we could meet the date. 11 7 
115 Walter C. Heston, "Kilowatt-Hours Pooled for War," Electrical West 92 (March 1944): 51-63; 
BPA, Annual Report, 1943, 14; Tollefson, 228-231 ; Norwood, 126. 
116 Norwood, 126; "Transmission Line One-Line Diagrams Cross Index," BPA, 9; BPA, Annual 
Report, 1945, 38. 
117 Sol Schultz quoted in Tollefson, 234. 
74 
BPA  built a 230-kv loop to service the new plant near the tiny Washington town 
of Hanford. In doing so, "Bonneville-Grand Coulee power made a major contribution to 
development of the atomic bomb." The defense plant produced the plutonium that 
powered the world's first nuclear bombs. According to Raver, "the location of the 
Hanford Engineer Works in the Pacific Northwest was determined primarily by the 
availability of large quantities of hydro-electric power and pure, cold water from the 
Columbia River." 118 
Conclusion 
By 1943 the master grid was virtually complete. Although the country was still in 
full war production, President Roosevelt ordered all federal agencies to submit plans for 
the post-war period that spring. That year, BPA experienced a "sharp swing [from 
construction] toward the operating, research and marketing phases of the Administration's 
activities" in an effort to convert to a peace-time economy. By June 1943, BPA had 
constructed 2,443 circuit miles of transmission lines and fifty-one substations. Between 
June 1943 and June 1945 BPA built only 293 circuit miles oflines and four substations. 
During this time, construction focused on enlarging and modifying existing substations as 
118 BPA, Annual Report, 1945, 18. 
75 
needed for defense loads (Figure 2). 11 9 
When World War II ended in September 1945, the BPA master grid consisted of 
2,736.8 circuit miles of transmission lines and fifty-five substations. The master grid had 
supplied war plants with almost 20 billion kilowatthours of electricity, and another 7.5 
billion to private systems. This electricity made it possible for Pacific Northwest 
electrometallurgical plants to produce one-third of the light metals used in the war effort. 
At a cost of approximately $75 million, BP A had built the second largest power system 
in the country in six years; only the TVA was bigger, with 6,000 circuit miles of high-
voltage transmission lines. 120 
/ 
The influence of the war effort in the evolution of the BP A transmission system 
between 1939 and 1945 cannot be understated. While the depression and later, war 
shortages, crippled the construction programs of private utilities, the BP A's federal grid 
flourished under New Deal, then defense appropriations. Although Portland, Yakima and 
Spokane remained private-power strongholds, eighty-two percent of the 230-kv lines in 
the region belonged to the BPA by June 1945. According to the BP A's 1945 annual 
report, "the publicly owned systems of the Bonneville Power Administration, Seattle, 
Tacoma and other public agencies had 100 percent of the 230-kv lines with 
119 BPA, Annual Report, 1943, 1944, 1945. 
120 Springer, 46-47; Tennessee Valley Authority, typescript information booklet, (Knoxville: 
Tennessee Valley Authority, 1946). 
76 
. •••U...,,.'" I • 
~ASHING1(.0 N. ..... ,,, " !~ 
~•• I 
·" I 5-: 
rt • ,
i
.,~.   . ----
...u ,.. 
• AO•• 
~:"',:".~ •~,.." '''" 
..... ,, .. , "--\A-..~.._. .., 
e fl,TERCONNECTIONS 
-4 TRANSFER POINTS 
I WA$HINOT0N WAT!:11,0W[II CO. 
l PAClf'M: ,OWCll 8 LIGHT CO, 
) PUG[T SOUtrrD ~fJt a L tGHT CO. 
4 fl'OIITLAND G[N[flAL [ Ltcn.1C CO. 
, CL. AfSUNI[ P.U. 0 , 
a CITY 0' $UTT\.[ 
T ClTT CJ, UCOMA 
• CITY o, C[NTIIAL.IA 
t CITT c, [UG£N[ 
10 CI T"t 0, [LL [NSIURG 
I I CI TT 0, -M011NVILL[ 
11 GltAT1 HAJIIOllt P.U.D, 
U COWL.In: CO. P. U. O. 
. c,,u , u 14 MOUNTAIM STATCS l"OWOI CO. 
IS PAClflC COUNTY l'. U.0 . 1111 :t i 
I I pr,i()IITH[JIN [L[CT IIII C CO. i 
0 R E G 0 N .1o,.,,11v111.., .\ 
0 ; 
' ! i ICAt.l[ Of' Milts I ·- l i ~------A-,- ----------·------J·'  
LEGEND I 
SY/ITCHING lhTER - TR.#.9A. UNIT[O $TATU OCPAIIITN lHT Of TH[ INTElll 
SLJ8STATICH STATION CCHNECTICH CIRC\JITS BONNEVILLE POWER AOMINISTF 
• ♦ •• 
fl S.MC'I . l'AUL J. UVU , AOMINISTIIATOlt 
Ill •  A4dittonl ""6w C'ONl1ft 
4 ~ 0 l.lMiwCOMtn.cttOI\ 
o.-., STATUS OF . "' ~ · o 
0 . o ...."' v 0 ..
......,.. .. TRANSMISSION SY! 
AS Of DECEMBER 31,19«, 
0*PC  .....,_o.,.,..~Co,pcntiDAFoclCty llrdoet.CDNtNC'tliM,_.__,.,.mc1 
• "-'cat. ...... [ada9 lntwconMctioft 
INlic:iatat ,.._. INMfw point .t.o,,. _•n.l_ntO 1.P.A. -,~ wittl 1.P.A •  
FIGURE 2. Map of the Master Grid, 1944. (BPA, Annual Report, 1944.) 
77 
approximately 60 percent of energy production." This "preponderance of publicly owned, 
high-voltage transmission lines in the Northwest" was a far cry from the region's private 
utility monopolies of the 1920s and 1930s. 121 In addition, the Second World War 
prompted the establishment of the Northwest Power Pool, which formally marked the 
beginning of the Pacific Northwest's modern electrical transmission landscape: an 
integration of public and private distribution systems anchored by federal dams and the 
master transmission grid of the BP A. 
The engineering and technological lessons learned during the construction and 
operation of the master grid set the foundation for a BP A transmission network that 
eventually grew to encompass nine states with over 15,000 circuit miles of transmission 
line; from marketing the power from one dam to marketing the power from thirty. Before 
World War II was even over, it was obvious to Congress that the BPA's transmission 
network was a success. In October 1945, Congress directed the BPA  to market power 
from several newly authorized federal dams: Hungry Horse Dam on Montana's Flathead 
River; McNary Dam on the Columbia River; the Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little 
Goose, and Lower Granite Dams on the Snake River; and the Lookout Point, Quartz 
Creek, and Detroit projects on Oregon's Willamette River. Because the master grid 
components were designed with the anticipation of future growth, the influx of power 
12 1 SPA, Annual Report, 14-15. 
78 
created by these new dams was easily integrated into the BP A system. In addition, the 
master grid's closed loop design provided a high rate of reliability, "giv[ing] a customer a 
two-way feed as compared with a single feed from a radial line.11122 This meant that the 
BPA  system could be expanded, maintained, or repaired without interrupting electrical 
service. 
The master grid represents the intent of the Bonneville Project Act to "encourage 
the widest possible use" of electric energy generated by Pacific Northwest hydroelectric 
plants. The master grid finger lines, secondary loops on the network, stand as tangible 
reminders of the transformation, of what was once primarily a rural region, made possible 
by the REA and by the BP A's unique "postage-stamp" rate which made Columbia River 
power affordable no matter how far it was transmitted. Finally, the BP A master grid 
embodies a public power ideology shared by BP A's first administrator J. D. Ross and 
Franklin D. Roosevelt. Roosevelt's conviction that the federal government would "never . 
. . part with its sovereignty or with its control of its power resources, while I am President 
of the United States," established the policy setting within which the master grid 
developed, and which changed forever the social and physical landscape of the Pacific 
Northwest. 123 
122 Norwood, 174. 
123 Rosenman, as quoted in Tollefson, 110. 
79 
CHAPTER II 
IDENTIFICATION 
Purpose and Methodology 
The purpose of this chapter is to identify resources associated with the 
Transmission of Hydroelectricity by the Bonneville Power Administration, 1939-1945, as 
outlined in the Historical Overview. In this phase, property types are defined, and 
resource information is compiled and presented. 
Several methods were used to identify property types. Research undertaken in 
preparation of the historical overview revealed specific property types, and general and 
specific locational data; and a search for previous inventories and surveys in Washington 
and Oregon revealed a National Register nomination prepared for several master grid 
properties. Together with BPA Annual and Engineering Reports and additional BPA 
documents and files , these sources provided the basis for a limited field study of property 
types in Oregon and Washington. 124 
124 Although the BPA has an updated list of all the substations on their system, these lists do not 
include dates. Identification of the 55 original substations was made from a combination of maps dating 
from 1944 and 1946, figures from annual reports, and current locational data. Substations shown in current 
80 
The National Register nomination, prepared in 1987, nominated fourteen BPA 
substations and six transmission lines as part of a discontiguous district. The document 
presented detailed descriptions of fourteen substations on the master grid built between 
1939 and 1945 by the BP A. It also gave a brief description of several properties that were 
not included in the nomination. Using this existing information as a starting point, six 
substations were chosen for site visits. Substations at Eugene, Oregon; Troutdale, 
Oregon; and Ellensburg, Washington were chosen because they represented the three 
methods of construction used by the BP A during the period of significance. The Salem, 
Oregon substation was selected for the reason that it was the only one on the system that 
illustrated a peculiar variation of two property subtypes: the structural combination of a 
control house and an untanking tower. The Vancouver, Washington substation named for 
J. D. Ross was picked because it was designed as the dispatching center for the entire 
master grid. It remains the largest substation on the grid. Finally, the substation at 
' 
Astoria, Oregon was chosen as it typified a substation that was originally built by the 
data to be located on the identical sites of substations shown in historic data are presumed to be the same 
substation, even though they may have different names; sources consulted for this section include: 
Bonneville Power Administration, "Building Data: Control Houses," 2 July 1990, BPA, Portland; 
Bonneville Power Administration, "BPA Definitions," 1975, BPA, Portland; Bonneville Power 
Administration, "Location of Substations, Radio Stations, Hydromets," 1989, BPA, Portland; Bonneville 
Power Administration, "Transmission Line One-Line Diagrams-Cross Index," I 5 April 1991 , BPA, 
Portland; Craig Holstine, "National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form: Bonneville 
Power Administration Master Grid," 1987, Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, Salem; Michael 
Hall, "lrrigation Development in Oregon's Upper Deschutes River Basin, 1871-1957: A Historic Context 
Statement," 3 I August I 994, Deschutes County Community Development Department, Bend, Oregon. 
81 
BPA  but has since been transferred out of BP A's ownership. In addition to the reasons 
stated, time and financial constraints were factors in the sites chosen for field verification. 
Site visits included tours of the building and grounds, interviews with BP A substation 
operators, and photographic recordation of features. 
Two major property types were found to be associated with the transmission of 
hydroelectricity by the BPA between 1939 and 1945: electrical substations and 
transmission lines. Tables 1 and 2 at the end ofthis chapter quantify the identified 
property types, while Figures 4 through 36 at the end of this chapter show the identified 
property types. 
Property Type: Electrical Substation 
There are approximately fifty-five substations associated with the transmission of 
hydroelectricity by the Bonneville Power Administration between 1939 and 1945. The 
electrical substation is made up of several components; correspondingly, four sub-types 
were identified within the property type. A BPA  substation may contain one or all of the 
following structures: 
Subtype: Control House 
Control houses were the operations hub of an electrical substation. Character-
82 
defining features of the control houses were identified through field survey, construction 
drawings, and BP A documents that discussed certain design features that were 
standardized throughout the grid. In general, control houses built by the BPA  can be 
identified by their simple, unit-based plans and stripped-classical architectural style. This 
style is manifested through symmetrical facades ; flat roofs; plain wall surfaces; and 
fenestration that includes generous, vertical, multi-light, steel-sash windows and metal-
frame doors. In addition to establishing a unified architectural style for the buildings, the 
BPA  made efforts to achieve "natural, dignified, and pleasing structures" by surrounding 
their substation control houses with landscaped grounds. The level of effort varied with 
the importance of the substation on the grid. Originally, landscaping features ranged from 
water fountains and decorative outdoor lighting to simple lawns or gravel yards. 
Contemporary landscaping immediately surrounding the control house could include 
lawns, crushed gravel yards, sidewalks, large trees and bushes, and flower gardens. While 
there is little elaboration found at the control house grounds these days, all landscaping is 
tidy and well manicured. 
Range of Variation 
According to available information, control houses were built at twenty-three 
substations by the Bonneville Power Administration between 1939 and 1945. While the 
control houses clearly reflect a unified design concept, there was variation in materials 
83 
used, building plans, building size, decorative detailing, and construction methods. 
Approximately seventy percent of the buildings are built of board-formed, reinforced 
concrete. The remaining thirty percent are built of wood-frame construction, with the 
exception of two that have steel frames and brick walls. Plans are typically rectangular, 
with modest projecting wings whose locations were dep ndant on the site. Most of the 
control houses have one story over full basements containing additional rooms, but some 
were built over crawl or tunnel spaces just large enough to permit maintenance personnel 
to access underground equipment. The size of the control houses was determined by the 
type and quantity of equipment needed at their locations. Some control houses exhibit 
overhead garage doors, although most have only personnel doors. One control house out 
of the twenty-three is structurally combined with an untanking tower. All the others stand 
alone. Whether concrete, brick or wood, decoration on the buildings was minimal. 
However, there were some features used consistently throughout the system, albeit 
randomly enough to allow each building a distinct personality. Cast stone capped parapet 
walls, and concrete formed <lentils, corbels and beads around window and door frames. 
Both concrete and galvanized steel were used for canopies over secondary entrances. 
Exterior stair railings were of wrought iron or pipe. Glass block was utilized a great deal 
in transoms and sidelights. Many of the concrete control houses and at least one of the 
wood-frame ones are painted a beige tone. Sources consulted during the course of this 
study made no mention of the original paint color, if any, ~n these buildings. Today, 
some variation of paint colors among substations can be found. 
84 
Description/Concrete 
According to available information, there were sixteen board-formed, reinforced 
concrete control houses on the BP A grid. This type of construction was used on the 
earliest control houses and continued to be the most common type through 1945. 
Concrete had some distinct advantages. It was fireproof and readily available. Many of 
the sites of the control houses sites were remote, and the cost of trucking in materials 
would have been costly. Concrete could be mixed on-site. Poured concrete construction is 
completely sealed, providing excellent protection for the equipment inside. In addition, 
with the prospect of war looming over the early planning years, it is likely that the BP A 
made a conscious decision not to invest in a construction program based on steel. 
The Eugene substation control house is representative of a medium-size, 
reinforced concrete control house on the master grid, displaying all of the character-
defining features listed above. The building is set back about ninety feet from the east 
side of Highway 99W across a wide expanse of lawn. The grass wraps around its 
northwest end, while a paved parking lot extends off the south comer. Directly behind 
(northeast) the control house, a chain-link fence encloses a large switchyard. 
The control house is a one-story, reinforced concrete structure with a concrete 
foundation and flat roof. Measuring 57'-0" wide and 40'-4" deep, its rectangular plan 
contains approximately 1, 869 square feet. The walls are sheathed in stucco, and in some 
places, covered with fiberglass cloth. At the roofline, tiered parapet walls are capped with 
85 
metal coping. The built-up, concrete-slab roof is pierced at the southeast end by a gabled, 
6' x 4' skylight with wired glass. A canted watertable circumnavigates the building 2'-10" 
from grade. The entire structure is painted a beige tone. 
The primary facade of the control house faces southwest. A shrubbery-lined 
concrete walk leads to the front entrance, which is located at the southeast end of the 
facade. Short wing walls flank a shallow flight of concrete steps that ascend to a concrete 
stoop. A central opening, 11' tall x 7' wide, dominates an entry bay, which projects 7'-4" 
forward from the main volume of the building. Slightly recessed within the opening is a 
bronze-finished, aluminum frame. The frame, divided into six sections, contains a glazed 
aluminum door, also with a bronze finish; two plate-glass sidelights; and a three-light, 
plate-glass transom. Fluorescent bulbs light the entry from within very slender metal 
casements located on each side of the doorframe, in the narrow wall plane between the 
frame and the main facade . There are three casements on each side, filled with fluted 
glass and set vertically in a continuous metal frame. Above and adjacent to the entrance 
are metal letters reading, "Columbia River Power, Eugene Substation," and "Bonneville 
Power Administration." In contrast to the rest of the building, the capped parapet walls of 
the projecting entry bay are double-tiered. In addition, the entry bay is distinguished by a 
canted belt course that runs just above the watertable. 
Directly southeast of the entry bay, the southwest facade extends just two feet. On 
the other side of the bay, the facade stretches 34'-6" to the northwest end. Three, vertical, 
ten-foot-tall window bays dominate this portion of the primary facade, rising from the 
86 
water table to the top of the wall. Each bay is filled with three, four-light, steel sashes. 
The top one opens for ventilation in an awning style; the bottom one in a hopper style. 
The middle sash is fixed. A concrete spandrel panel surmounts each window. The 
window bays are slightly recessed, relieving the main wall plane in a rhythmic sequence. 
The symmetrical fenestration of the northwest facade displays a pair of window bays 
identical in style to those on the front. Also evident from this end is the northwest side of 
the projecting entry bay, which has a very narrow, seven-foot tall , multi-light casement 
window recessed into the wall. On the other side of the northwest facade, a portion of the 
building's back porch is visible. A chain-link and barbed-wire fence extends northwest 
off the north corner of the building, separating public space from the switchyard. 
The rear facade faces northeast. Located in the switchyard, this side of the 
building is accessed from a concrete walk that cuts through the graveled yard. This facade 
is divided into two sections along the same line that separates the projecting entry bay 
from the main volume of the building at the front facade. Three window bays in a pattern 
identical to the front dominate the main volume. The remainder of this side consists of a 
wing projecting 5'-9" out into the switchyard. At the juncture of the main volume and the 
rear wing is a small porch sheltered by a square, concrete canopy with rounded corners. A 
short wing wall extends toward the northwest, containing four steps and supporting an 
original, curved, Moderne-style steel handrail. The porch's concrete stoop provides access 
to two glazed metal doors; one that faces northeast and another facing northwest. Next to 
the porch, on the wall of the rear wing, an access ladder rises the height of the building. 
87 
The facades of the rear wing and the projecting entry bay comprise the southeast end of 
the building. At the east corner of the wing, the chain-link and wire fence extends to the 
southeast. The wing displays symmetrical fenestration, with a pair of window bays in the 
typical style. Directly adjacent, the entry bay holds a single window bay, also in the 
typical style. 
Inside the control house, clay-tile walls divide the building into four principal 
rooms. Throughout the building, ceilings and walls are finished with painted plaster over 
metal lath; floors are asphalt tile with rubber bases. Most of the windows are covered 
with a steel mesh for added security. Electric-heat radiators and ducts throughout the 
building are covered with plated steel grilles. 
Visitors enter the control house through the main entrance. Suspended overhead 
in the small lobby is the only original light fixture in the building: a streamlined bowl 
with a bronze finish. Through a door to the left, is a hallway containing a small bathroom 
to the left, and a closet to the right. Inside the closet is a trap door for a ceiling storage 
space and access to a crawl space under the building. Through the hallway is the control 
room, which is contained in the main volume of the building. 
The control room is the command center for the substation. An eight-foot-tall, 
steel switchboard unit runs down the center of the room. The unit is comprised of two 
instrument and control panels placed back-to-back; a small aisle between them permits 
access to the backs of both panels. From these control panels the main power circuits in 
the switchyard are opened, closed, metered and relayed via cables that travel between the 
88 
switchyard and the control house. These underground cables enter the building through a 
conduit run in the foundation wall and travel through a trough in the crawl space, 
reaching the control panels through removable metal plates in the floor under the unit. 
The control panels represent an array of functions that take place at the substation, and 
are covered with meters, gauges, instruments and handles. On the face of one of the 
panels is a single-line diagram of the substation's main bus and feeder transmission 
lines. 125 Known as a "mimic bus," this diagram provides operators with a physical 
representation of the circuitry being controlled. Once manually operated twenty-four 
hours a day, this substation is now automated; its operations are under supervisory 
control of the Dittmer Control Center at the J. D. Ross Substation in Vancouver, 
Washington. Nevertheless, the control panels remain fully functional, monitoring 
switching operations and allowing manual switching on a routine and maintenance basis. 
In addition to the control panel unit, the control room contains several tables, an 
operator's desk, office equipment, and vertical and flat file cabinets. The room is lit by 
modem fluorescent fixtures suspended from the plaster ceiling. Venetian blinds provide 
window coverings. 
From the control room there is access to the back porch through a door at the east 
comer of the room. In addition, a door at the southeast end leads into a communications 
125 A "bus" at a substation is a rigid conductor that interconnects equipment of the same voltage. 
89 
equipment room. Filled with electronic racks laden with transmitter and receiver 
apparatus for carrier and land telephone, radio and microwave equipment, this room is lit 
by a gabled skylight with wired glass. On the other side of the communication room's 
northeast wall is a battery room. This space is entered from the second door off the back 
porch. The battery room holds three, narrow, built-in platforms; run along each side of 
the room, one runs down the middle. The platform surfaces are covered with sand and 
support rows of battery cases. In addition, the battery room has an original, built-in lead-
sheathed sink and counter. These batteries provide direct-current power to equipment in 
the switchyard and the control room. 
Description/Steel and Brick 
There were two control houses on the master grid that were built with steel frames 
by the Bonneville Power Administration between 1939 and 1945. In distinct contrast to 
the control houses on the rest of the grid, those at Troutdale and Tacoma had steel frames 
and red-brick walls . Both were built in 1942-43 to service war-time aluminum plants 
owned by the Defense Plant Corporation. They have identical measurements. The reasons 
for the dramatic change in materials in just two of the control houses can be explained by 
another feature the two buildings share: they are both built on weak soil. The Tacoma 
substation stands on silty alluvium, or sediment, from Puget Sound. The Troutdale 
substation was built on silty, Columbia River sediment. Steel and brick construction was 
90 
lighter and more flexible than the poured concrete used at most of the other BPA  
substations. BP A engineers chose a construction method that would absorb the settlement 
associated with poor sub-soil conditions without the structural cracking that would occur 
with a concrete structure. 
The Troutdale substation control house is representative of the two steel-and-brick 
control houses on the master grid, displaying all of the character-defining features listed 
above. The building is located just east of Sundial Road between the Columbia River and 
Oregon State Highway 84. It faces west across an access road toward an enormous 
switchyard that wraps around the south facade. A manicured lawn surrounds the north 
end and east side of the control house, while the west side is bordered by mature bushes. 
The Reynolds Aluminum Plant abuts the switchyard to the south. 
The Troutdale control house has a rectangular plan consisting of a one-story main 
volume with a wing at each end. Both wings are set back slightly from the main volume 
at the front (west) and rear (east) facades, and are seven feet shorter than the main 
volume. Measuring 81'-3" wide and nearly forty-three feet deep, the building contains 
almost 3,500 square feet. Atop a concrete foundation and crawl space, the control house 
has a fram of steel, and walls of red brick laid in a common bond. On the main volume 
as well as the wings, the roof is essentially flat and the short parapet wall that surrounds it 
supports a metal fascia. The upper two feet of the concrete foundation wall 
circumnavigates the building, its beveled cap serving as a watertable. 
The front and rear facades of the control house are very similar to each other. On 
91 
both, the main volume is divided into three bays by full-height brick pilasters. The 
pilasters indicate the location of the building frame's steel columns. The north and middle 
bays each hold a 10-foot-tall, 5-foot-wide, steel-sash window. The window's fifteen lights 
are vertically arranged in three columns of five lights each. In contrast to small lights in 
the outer columns, the middle column exhibits much larger panes of glass. All sashes are 
fixed except for two in the middle column. The south bay holds a glazed, metal door 
surmounted by a small metal canopy. At the front facade, this door is preceded by a 
concrete stoop with four steps and a metal handrail, and opens into the switchyard. There 
are no stairs at the rear entrance. The control house wings hold one window each at the 
front and rear facades. In contrast to the dominating windows of the main volume, the 
steel-sash wing windows are just five feet tall, each with three lights divided by 
horizontal muntins. On the front facade of the north wing, there is a glazed, metal door 
identical to the one on the main volume. With the same metal canopy, concrete stoop, 
steps and handrail, this door serves as the public entrance to the control house. Access to 
the south half of the control house is prevented by a chain-link sliding gate that extends 
west from the middle bay of the front facade. 
The north facade of the control house comprises the north wing, and displays 
three symmetrically placed windows: two are steel-sash windows in the three-light style 
previously described, one is a smaller, two light example, also with steel sash. Between 
two of the windows is a prominent metal downspout providing drainage to a roof-line 
scupper in the wing's parapet wall. Above the wing is visible seven feet of the main 
92 
volume. Prominent downspouts near each corner break the wall plane, draining scuppers 
in the parapet wall. A chain-link fence extends to the east off the northeast corner of the 
building. 
The south facade is comprised of the south wing, which is located in the 
switchyard. The south wing has two, steel-sash windows in the three-light style, and a 
glazed, metal door located near the southeast corner. This entrance, which is surmounted 
by a large security light, opens onto a concrete stoop with steps and a metal handrail. 
Between the door and a window is a prominent downspout providing drainage to a roof-
line scupper at the wing's parapet wall. Above the wing, on the wall of the main volume, 
there are two scupper downspouts near each corner. 
Inside the Troutdale control house, brick walls separate the wings from the main 
volume. The main volume holds one large room, while clay-tile partition walls divide 
each wing into individual rooms. Walls are furred with wood and covered with metal lath 
and plaster, except for those in the south wing where the brick is exposed and painted. 
Ceilings are suspended and plastered, with the exception of the south wing where the 
steel truss remains exposed. Currently the exposed ceiling is covered with reflective foil. 
Floors throughout the building are of asphalt tile. 
Visitors enter the control house through the door in the north wing at the front 
facade. From a small lobby, a doorway to the right opens into a control room. Four, 
eight-foot-tall, steel switchboard units run parallel to each wall. Each unit is comprised of 
two instrument and control panels placed back-to-back; a small aisle between them 
93 
permits access to the backs of each panel. From these control panels, the main power 
circuits in the switchyard are opened, closed, metered and relayed via cables that travel 
between the switchyard and the control house. These underground cables enter the 
building through a conduit run in the foundation wall and travel through troughs in the 
crawl space, reaching the control panels through removable metal plates in the floor 
under the units. The control panels represent an array of functions that take place at the 
substation, and are covered with meters, gauges, instruments and handles. On the face of 
one of the panels is a single-line diagram of the substation's main bus and feeder 
transmission lines. Known as a "mimic bus," this diagram provides operators with a 
physical representation of the circuitry being controlled. Although this substation is still 
manned, many of its operations are under supervisory control by the Dittmer Control 
Center at the J. D. Ross Substation in Vancouver, Washington. Nevertheless, the control 
panels remain fully functional, monitoring switching operations and allowing manual 
switching on a routine and maintenance basis. In addition to the control panel units, the 
control room contains several tables, an operator's desk, office equipment, and vertical 
and flat file cabinets. The room is lit by modern fluorescent fixtures suspended from the 
ceiling. Modern blinds provide window coverings. 
The south wall of the control room has doorways at each end that provide access 
into the south wing. Originally housing the "relay lab" and a separate office, this space is 
now one room, holding several work stations and modern office equipment. A glazed, 
steel partition wall spans the width of the wing at the east end, separating the office space 
94 
from an additional work space, and traffic flow near the wing's south-wall entrance. 
The north wing is divided into three primary spaces, each accessed by doors in the 
north wall of the control room. A communication room at the east end contains vertical 
electronic racks laden with transmitter and receiver apparatus for carrier and land 
telephone, radio and microwave equipment. Next door, to the west, is a battery room. 
Along the east and west walls ofthis room are built-in battery platforms, covered with 
sand and holding rows of battery cells. These batteries provide direct-current power to 
equipment in the switchyard and the control room. The rooms at the west end of the wing 
includes the small lobby, a kitchen, a bathroom, a dark room and a storage room. A hatch 
in the storage room floor, and one located just across the wall in the control room, 
provides access to a five-foot-high crawl space underneath the building. 
Description/Wood Frame 
According to available information, there were five wood-frame control houses 
built by the BPA between 1939 and 1945. These tiny, inexpensive buildings represented 
small substations serving local loads along the master grid. The control houses at the 
smaller substations were usually one-room buildings of wood frame construction, 
plywood walls and metal roofs. 
The Ellensburg Substation control house is representative of the five wood-frame 
control houses on the master grid. These small control houses do not share the character-
95 
defining features found on the concrete and brick substations. The control house at the 
Ellensburg Substation control house is completely enclosed inside a switchyard located 
just west of Ellensburg, Washington. The switchyard is circumnavigated by a chain-link, 
barbed-wire fence, and is entered at several points through chain-link gates. The control 
house faces north, surrounded by a groundcover of crushed rock. A concrete walkway 
• leads to the front door, and parallels the east and south walls of the building. 
The Ellensburg control house has a wood-stud frame over a concrete foundation 
and crawl space. When constructed in 1941, it measured just fourteen feet wide by twelve 
feet deep. In the early 1950s, the building received a seamless, 1O ' x 1O ' addition to its 
west end, raising its volume to a total of 288 square feet. The control house has a hipped 
roof covered with standing-seam metal, and plywood walls sheathed with vertical Tl-11 
plywood siding with wood comerboards. The building's original siding was waterproof 
plywood with horizontal battens spaced a foot and a half apart. At the center of the roof, a 
short shaft supports a capped and louvered ventilator. Closed eaves support metal gutters, 
which are drained by downspouts at the north, east, and south facades . Just beneath the 
eaves, a wide metal frieze surrounds the building. The entire structure is painted beige. 
The primary (north) facade of. the control house represents the original section and 
the later addition. The original section holds a centrally placed front door. Two windows 
abut the door, one on each side, in contiguous batten frames . A simple wood casing, 
affixed to the siding, follows the outline of the fenestration from the wide metal frieze 
above to the bottom of the door. Both windows and the door are wood with fixed-sash, 
96 
three-light glazing and horizontal muntins. The door is obscured by an aluminum screen 
door. To the west, the addition is set back two feet from the original section. It displays a 
wood, fixed-sash, six-light window, also surrounded by a simple, wood casing affixed to 
the siding. At the juncture of the two sections is a downspout and a small switchbox and 
metal conduit attached to the wall. 
The west end of the control house is an unbroken wall plane. The south (rear) 
facade is also unbroken. The twenty-four-foot expanse has been fitted with metal hooks 
for storing large equipment. A ladder hangs horizontally against the wall, a large conduit 
is suspended just below. On the ground, just off the rear facade, is a square access-hatch 
cover and a large black box known as a spill response unit. The east facade of the control 
house is broken only by a small window high in the wall that contains a prominent air-
conditioner unit. The unit is screened on three sides. The window opening is surrounded 
by a wood casing affixed to the siding. A downspout runs near the northeast comer. 
Inside the one-room control house, walls are of painted plywood with widely 
spaced vertical battens. Insulation tiles sheath the ceiling, which is pierced in the middle 
by a grated vent. The concrete floor is covered with industrial carpeting. A vertical, steel 
switchboard unit, eight feet tall and eighteen feet long, rises to the ceiling, filling most of 
the room. The unit is comprised of instrument and control panels from which the main 
power circuits in the switchyard are opened, closed, metered and relayed via cables that 
travel between the switchyard and the control house. These underground cables enter the 
building through a conduit run in the foundation wall and travel through troughs in the 
97 
crawl space, reaching the control panels through removable metal plates in the floor 
under the unit. The control panels represent an array of functions that take place at the 
substation, and are covered with meters, gauges, instruments and handles. Along the west 
wall is a three-level metal rack holding rows of battery cases. These batteries provide 
direct-current power to equipment in the switchyard and the control room. In addition, 
there is a desk on the north wall, and a full-height cabinet built-in to the east wall. The 
room is lit by overhead, fluorescent fixtures. 
Distribution Patterns 
Several factors determined the distribution patterns of the BP A control houses. 
Firstly, they were always located at a substation. Secondly, the locations of the 
substations were dictated primarily by the technological requirements set forth by the 
transmission of electricity in an alternating-current system. The stepping up and down of 
voltages had to occur at different points on the transmission line; points that were 
determined by engineers based on the length, direction, and voltage level of the line. 
Consequently, the substations followed the rights-of-way of the transmission lines. For 
these reasons, the control houses built between 1939 and 1945 can be found along the 
routes represented by maps of the master grid drawn between 1939 and 1945 (Figure 3). 
However, only about forty-two percent of the substations built during that time had 
control houses. They typically occurred at the substations that served larger loads: 
98 
populated areas and/or industrial plants. For this reason, control houses are most likely to 
be found at the substations located near cities and near the sites of the wartime industrial 
plants along the master grid. 
According to available information, the BP A built twenty-four control houses 
between 1939 and 1945. It is possible, however, that control houses were built at four 
substations that were built by the BP A during the period of significance but have since 
passed out of BP A ownership. Sites such as these are not represented in any detail in 
current BPA  locational data, and time constraints did not permit field verification of these 
substations (Table 1). Although the BPA system has expanded greatly since 1945, most 
of the transmission rights-of-way represented by the master grid maps of 1939 through 
1945 are still in use, consequently, so are the substations located on the lines. Because 
they were built to serve such a specific function, and because that function is still 
required of them, most are estimated to all be in use today, with the exception of South 
Bank Substation. Comprised of a control house and switchyard, the substation was 
demolished when the Army Corps of Engineers built a new lock system at Bonneville 
Dam in 1987. In general, however, property loss over time has been minimal because of 
the continuity of function. For the same reasons, the condition of the BP A control houses 
can be generally characterized as good to excellent. They are well maintained because 
they are still in use. 
99 
Subtype: Untanking Tower 
Untanking towers were used to house maintenance and repair activities at the 
substation. Multi-ton traveling cranes on overhead beams facilitated the "untanking" of 
power transformers and other giant, oil-immersed equipment. The enormous size of the 
equipment being serviced necessitated the extreme height typical of this property type. 
Character-defining features of the untanking towers were identified primarily through 
field survey and historic photographs. In general, untanking towers built by the BPA  can 
be identified by their unit-based plans, extreme vertical proportions, and stripped-
classical architectural style. This style is manifested through symmetrical facades; flat 
roofs; plain wall surfaces; and fenestration that includes enormous, symmetrical banks of 
multi-light, steel-sash windows and giant, overhead steel doors. Like the control houses, 
the untanking towers were surrounded by landscaped grounds on at least the primary 
facade. One or more sides of the tower was enclosed within the switchy ard. Landscaping 
features could include lawns, sidewalks, large trees and foundation plantings. 
Range of Variation 
According to available information, untanking towers were built at six substations 
by the Bonneville Power Administration between 1939 and 1945. All of the six are 
constructed of reinforced, board-formed concrete. Some variation in building plans have 
100 
been identified, and in the height of the towers, which range from fifty to seventy feet 
high. Only one of the towers is structurally combined with a control house (Salem), all 
the others are free-standing buildings. Decoration was used on a few of the towers: some 
have porthole windows in the entry bay, some have concrete corbelling and lintel 
detailing around the doors and windows. 
Description 
Although it is the only tower in the system that contains a control house, the 
Salem Substation untanking tower is a good representative of this property type. The 
building's unit-based arrangement is very similar to the majority of the other towers; 
instead of housing control house rooms, the other towers would house shop, tool, oil and 
storage rooms. In addition, the Salem untanking tower displays all of the character-
defining features listed above. The Salem Substation is sited on a hill overlooking State 
Highway 22 and the Willamette River just west of Salem, Oregon. Access to the site is 
provided by a road from the highway located west of the building. The access road, 
which continues north on the hilly site, branches off to abut the west side of the building. 
A wooded hillside rises directly behind (north) the tower. The building anchors the 
southwest comer of a large switchyard that covers the hillside. 
The Salem untanking tower is a reinforced-concrete structure over a basement and 
a concrete foundation. The building has a cross plan, with the tower serving as the central 
101 
volume. Measuring thirty-three feet wide by eighty-four feet deep, the untanking tower 
rises to a height of forty-three feet. Two one-story wings flank the tower at its south end, 
each measuring thirty-three feet wide, forty-six feet deep, and 16'-6" tall. A shorter, one-
story entry bay projects from the south end of the tower. All components of the building 
have flat roofs with parapet walls topped with metal caps and fascia. The walls are 
sheathed with stucco and painted beige. All windows have multiple lights, and ventilated, 
steel sash. 
The primary facade of the Salem untanking tower faces south. It consists of all 
four components: the tower, wings and entry bay. At this facade, the wings project 
several feet south from the tower; the central entry bay projects several feet south from 
the wings. Short wing walls enclose a concrete terrace that precedes the entrance to the 
building, which is located in the entry bay. Three, symmetrically placed, ten-foot-tall, 
five-feet-wide bays dominate the entry's facade. The center one is filled with a modem 
metal door surmounted by an original, multi-light transom. The other two are filled with 
steel-sash windows, also with multi-light transoms. The windows and door are deeply 
recessed; concrete corbels run the length of the bays, filling the space between the wall 
plane and the window (or door) frame. Lintel soffits hold lighting fixtures set flush with 
the concrete. Above, the lintel edges are beveled, divided into sections that are alternately 
recessed, creating the illusion of <lentils. Above the entry bay, three columns of narrow, 
twenty-foot-tall windows with horizontal muntins dominate the south facade of the 
untanking tower. These windows are also recessed, with corbelling running the length of 
102 
the bays. To the east and west of the entry bay, the two wings each exhibit three, ten-foot-
tall windows. The bays are recessed, with the same corbelling found at the entry. 
Spandrel panels surmount each window, also recessed from the wall plane. 
The east and west facades of the untanking tower are virtually identical. At these 
sides, each one-story wing has four, ten-foot bays containing recessed windows. The 
tower section exhibits symmetrical fenestration characterized by tall openings at the floor 
level and shorter openings at the upper level. Four, seven-foot wide, thirty-foot-high 
pilasters divide this facade into three bays. The long central bay is dominated by a 
twenty-foot-tall overhead door located at the crux of the wing and tower. On the west 
facade, this door is made of solid steel; on the east it is a steel grid, glazed with multi-
light, steel-sash windows. Above the door, the central bay is pierced by a row of five 6'x 
4' windows. Next to the door are two, small square windows. The north bay is filled with 
an eight-foot-wide window that rises to the same height as the door, surmounted by a 
recessed concrete spandrel. Above the spandrel is a second window, nearly six feet tall. 
The south bay is filled with the same upper-level window and spandrel panel; the lower 
window is smaller, as it sits above the roof of the one-story wing. All the second-level 
windows are aligned with the tops of the pilasters, leaving the upper fourteen feet of wall, 
on all sides of the tower, unbroken. 
The north end of the tower is dominated by three, narrow, thirty-foot columns of 
multi-light, steel-sash windows; the upper six feet of each window is separated from the 
lower sections by a recessed spandrel. The one-story wings at this facade each exhibit 
103 
three window bays filled with ten-foot-tall windows. 
Inside the building, the one-story wings hold the facilities typically found in a 
control house; components which, at a more typical substation, would be housed in a 
separate building. Interior finishes in the wings include asphalt tile floors; structural tile 
walls sheathed with painted plaster over metal lath; and painted plaster ceilings. The 
control room, located in the east wing, exhibits glazed-tile window sills and a horizontal 
beadcourse that circumnavigates the room, halfway up the wall. 
Visitors enter the building through the entry bay at the front facade. The north 
wall of the lobby holds a glass-block window, and a door that leads into the untanking 
tower. A glazed door and sidelight in the east wall of the lobby leads to the control room. 
An eight-foot-tall switchboard unit dominates the room, running from one end of the 
room to the other, parallel to the east wall. Two smaller ones run parallel to the north 
wall. The large unit is comprised of two instrument panels placed back-to-back; a small 
aisle between them permits access to the backs of both panels. From the control panels on 
all three units the main power circuits in the switchyard are opened, closed, metered and 
relayed via cables that travel between the switchyard and the control house. These 
underground control cables enter the building through conduit runs in the foundation wall 
of a basement cable room. The cable room is located directly beneath the control room. 
Cables then travel up through vertical, steel, terminal cabinets where they enter the 
control room switchboard units from the bottom, through metal plates in the cable-room 
ceiling. Much of the buswork in the cable-room cabinets still dates to the 1940s.The 
104 
control panels in the control room represent an array of functions that take place at the 
substation, and are covered with meters, gauges, instruments and handles. The large unit's 
control panels display a single-line diagram of the substation's main bus and feeder 
transmission lines. Known as a "mimic bus," this diagram provides operators with a 
physical representation of the circuitry being controlled. Once manually operated twenty-
four hours a day, this substation is now automated; its operations are under supervisory 
control of the Dittmer Control Center at the J. D. Ross Substation in Vancouver, 
Washington. Nevertheless, the control panels remain fully functional , monitoring 
switching operations and allowing manual switching on a routine and maintenance basis. 
In addition to the control panel units, the control room contains several tables, an 
operator's desk, office equipment, and vertical and flat file cabinets. The room is lit by 
modem fluorescent fixtures set flush with the surface of the ceiling. Venetian blinds 
provide window coverings. There is a glass-block window in the west wall. A door in the 
west wall leads into the untanking tower. 
Access to the west wing facilities is provided from inside the untanking tower. 
Maintenance and equipment storage room, bathrooms, and a communications room are 
found in the west wing. The communications room contains vertical racks laden with 
transmitter and receiver apparatus for carrier and land telephones, radio, and microwave 
equipment. Original hanging light fixtures light the room. 
The untanking tower is open from the painted concrete floor to the ceiling forty-
three feet above. Banks of twenty- to thirty-foot-tall windows light the "cathedral-like" 
105 
space. Rails embedded in the floor run under the east-wall door, out into the switchyard. 
On these rails, transfer cars move giant transformers from the switchyard into the tower 
for maintenance. Two overhead travelling cranes, one fifteen-ton; the other sixty-ton, are 
suspended on steel beams overhead. The cranes enable crews to extract the core and coils 
from the transformer tank during maintenance procedures. Near the south end of the 
tower, the outline of a concrete pad remains on the floor. The pad used to hold a large 
piece of equipment known as the synchronous condenser. Essentially a giant electric 
motor, the condenser used to regulate circuit voltage at the substation. The machine was a 
key component of most substations along the master grid until they became obsolete with 
the introduction of other, more compact regulation equipment. Open stairwells parallel 
the north and south walls of the tower, descending to the basement. 
The basement contains a battery room, the cable room, and a smaller 
communications room .. The battery room holds three built-in platforms; two run along 
each side of the room, one runs down the middle. The platform surfaces are covered with 
sand and support rows of battery cases. These batteries provide direct-current power to 
equipment in the switchyard and control room. 
Distribution Patterns 
Several factors determined the distribution patterns of the BP A untanking towers. 
Firstly, the towers are always located at a substation. The locations of the substations 
106 
were dictated primarily by the technological requirements set forth by the transmission of 
electricity in an alternating-current system. The stepping up and down of voltages had to 
occur at different points on the transmission line; points that were determined by 
engineers based on the length, direction, and voltage level of the line. Consequently, the 
substations followed the rights-of-way of the transmission lines. For these reasons, the 
untanking towers built between 1939 and 1945 can be found along the routes represented 
by maps of the master grid drawn between 1939 and 1945 (Figure 3). However, less than 
fifteen percent of the substations built during that time had untanking towers. It is not 
known what specific factors were considered when determining where to place the 
towers, however, locational patterns indicate that the towers were built at the largest 
substations on the grid, and perhaps were distributed to provide regional coverage, for 
example, one in Oregon's Willamette Valley, one in central Washington, one in the Puget 
Sound area, etc .... It is known that transformers across the system that needed repair 
and overall maintenance were, and still are, shipped to substations with untanking towers 
for servicing. 
According to available information, the BP A built six untanking towers between 
1939 and 1945. 126 It is possible, however, that untanking towers exist at two substations 
126 There is an untanking tower at the Troutdale substation, but available information suggests that 
it was built by the Defense Plant Corporation for use by Alcoa, which ran the aluminum plant adjacent to 
the substation . The untanking tower at Troutdale, which also housed a synchronous condenser, displays 
none of the character-defining features identified above, and lacks the proportions and architectural 
consistency of towers built by BPA. In addition, site plan drawings dating from 1941 show the building 
107 
that were built by the BP A during the period of significance but have since passed out of 
BPA  ownership. Sites such as these are not represented in any detail in current BPA  
locational data, and time constraints did not permit field verification of these substations 
(Table 1) . Oil-immersed equipment is being gradually replaced by that which does not 
require oil insulation, therefore the untanking towers are not as busy as they used to be. 
However, they remain fully equipped and operational to function as they were originally 
intended and remain a vital component of their respective substations. There has been no 
property loss over time because the towers have been in continual use for over fifty years. 
For the same reasons, the condition of the BPA  untanking towers can be generally 
characterized as good to excellent. They are well maintained because they are still in use. 
Subtype: Oil House 
Pumps housed in small, semi-subterranean substation oil houses pumped oil out 
to oil-immersed equipment in the switchyard, such as power transformers and power 
circuit breakers, through a complex system of underground pipes. This process flushed 
dirty oil from the equipment, refreshing it with clean oil. Character-defining features of 
the oil houses were identified through field survey and historic photographs. In general, 
marked as "Alcoa Condenser Building." 
108 
oil houses built by the BPA can be identified by their semi-subterranean setting, plain 
wall surfaces, flat roofs, and glass-block or steel-sash fenestration. Oil houses are always 
enclosed within the switchyard fence, surrounded by a crushed rock yard and sidewalks. 
Typically the oil that is drawn by the oil-house pumps is stored in vertical tanks on a 
concrete pad close to the oil house. 
Range of Variation 
Construction methods and materials used to construct oil houses mirrored those 
used on the control houses at the substations. Substations with a concrete control house 
had a concrete oil house. Substations at Tacoma and Troutdale, which exhibit the only 
brick control houses on the system, both have brick oil houses. Variations were also 
identified in the size of the oil houses, although most contained only one, semi-
subterranean room. The biggest variations were identified in an oil house at the J. D. 
Ross Substation in Vancouver. This structure has an above-ground first floor and a full 
basement, with louvered windows that look out into a huge pit where horizontal oil tanks 
lay side by side. 
Description/Concrete and Brick 
Oil houses on the master grid, whether concrete or brick, follow the same general 
109 
design; most encompassing all of the character-defining features listed above. Anchored 
by a reinforced concrete foundation, the nearly square building stands less than four feet 
above grade. The roof are flat and glass block and opaque glass fill windows that 
typically occur on three sides of the building. Wing walls contain the door, which stands 
approximately five feet below grade, at the bottom of a steep flight of concrete steps. 
Inside the single room, the concrete foundation walls, floor, and ceiling are 
unfinished. In the brick houses, the walls are painted and the ceiling is finished. Industrial 
light fixtures, typical of the 1940s, hang from the ceiling. Pumping equipment was 
removed from all the oil houses on the system in the early 1990s, leaving behind 
pumping gauges, valve nests, pipes and gears that date from the 1940s. 
Distribution Patterns 
According to available information, oil houses were built at eight substations by 
the Bonneville Power Administration between 1939 and 1945. It is possible, however, 
that oil houses exist at two substations that were built by the BP A during the period of 
significance but have since passed out of BP A ownership. Sites such as these are not 
represented in any detail in current BPA  locational data, and time constraints did not 
permit field verification of these substations (Table 1). Like the control houses and the 
untanking towers, the distribution patterns of oil houses depended on the locations of the 
substations of which they were an integral component. Locations of the substations were 
110 
dictated primarily by the technological requirements set forth by the transmission of 
electricity in an alternating-current system. The stepping up and down of voltages had to 
occur at different points on the transmission line; points that were determined by 
engineers based on the length, direction, and voltage level of the line. Consequently, the 
substations followed the rights-of-way of the transmission lines. For these reasons, the 
control houses built between 1939 and 1945 can be found along the routes represented by 
maps of the master grid drawn between 1939 and 1945 (Figure 3). However, less than 
fifteen percent of the substations built by the BP A during that time had oil houses. It is 
not known with certainty why some substations had oil houses and some did not, as every 
substation had equipment that needed periodic oil changes. It is reasonable to assume that 
if the cost was justified, such as at substations with large switchyards and lots of 
equipment, an oil house would be built on the grounds. In at least one case, at the 
Chehalis Substation, oil pumps were installed in the basement of an untanking tower. In 
all the other cases, portable oil pump units must have been utilized to bring oil to the 
substation and flush out equipment as needed. Based on these suppositions, oil houses 
could likely be found at the substations serving the largest loads. 
Environmental regulations, an increasing use of portable pumping units, and gas 
or air for insulation have eliminated the need for pumping equipment originally housed in 
the oil houses. Consequently, most of the original pumping equipment has been removed 
from them. However, there is no indication that the oil houses are being removed from 
the substations. They currently stand empty or are utilized for storage. The overall 
111 
condition of the oil houses can be generally characterized as fair to good. 
Subtype: Switchyard 
The switchyard is an installation of equipment designed to control power flow 
• and transform voltages for distribution. The switchyard contains the fundamental 
electrical components that comprise an electrical substation. Character-defining features 
of the switchyards were identified through field survey, interviews, engineering literature 
reviews and construction drawings. These features consist of transformers and power 
circuit breakers, steel lattice-work support structures, giant dead-end transmission towers, 
smaller feeder transmission towers, wrought-iron and aluminum buswork, and outdoor 
lighting fixtures. Switchyards are enclosed by a chain-link, barbed-wire fence. Ground 
cover is crushed rock crisscrossed by concrete sidewalks. 
An installation of equipment similar to a switchyard is also found along the 
master grid. Known as switching stations, these installations are unmanned and contain 
only that equipment necessary for the control of power flow. Voltage is not transformed 
at switching stations. The BPA did not typically make the distinction between substations 
and switching stations in their early documents, therefore, the number of switchyards 
identified along the master grid presumably includes switching stations. 
112 
Range of Variation 
All equipment inside the switchyards are industry standard. Equipment located in 
each switchyard varies according to the substation's size and function within the grid. 
Some switchyards contain just a few components, while the larger ones display more 
variety. During the period of significance, only forty percent of the switchyards contained 
major buildings. Since then, buildings have been added to many of them, ranging from 
control houses to storage sheds. 
Description 
High-voltage transmission lines on the master grid dead-end at steel towers 
located in the switchyard. From the towers, circuits are carried down to wrought iron or 
aluminum connecting busses mounted on tubular steel pedestals that may reach a height 
of twenty-eight feet. The connecting busses extend horizontally, carrying circuits to 
disconnecting switches mounted on steel supports, then to power circuit breakers, and 
finally through other disconnecting switches before reaching the main busses. Main 
busses are mounted approximately sixteen feet above the ground. From the main busses, 
circuits reach power transformers where circuit voltages are stepped down. Feeder lines 
from the main bus then carry the circuits to transmission lines running out of the 
substation to local customer distribution lines. 
113 
The size of the substation and its function on the grid determined the number, size 
and type of equipment a switch yard would hold. The following is a list of some of the 
major components found in a typical master-grid switchyard. These are virtually the same 
features that the switchyards held between 1939 and 1945 with the exception of the 
capacitors and reactors. Capacitors and reactors regulate and correct voltage on the 
system. Between 1939 and 1945, this function was served by a giant electric motor 
known as a synchronous condenser. This massive motor sat horizontally on a concrete 
pad and saddles in the switchyard. If economic considerations warranted, the machines 
would be placed indoors. It is known that condensers were located indoors at Salem, 
Troutdale and Tacoma. Most, however, were located outdoors. Condensers were removed 
in the 1970s, as the static capacitors and reactors were easier to house and maintain than 
the giant mechanical condenser. There is only one condenser left on the master grid, at 
Tacoma. It is enclosed in a small, one-story brick building next to the control house. 
Buswork - Busses are rigid conductors that carry circuits between equipment in a 
substation. There is a separate bus for each voltage level entering a substation ( i.e. 
13.2kv, 115kv, 230kv). Comprised of hollow, pipe-like conductors, buswork at the 
earliest switchyards was wrought iron which could be bent and welded on site which 
greatly facilitated erection. As aluminum became plentiful during the war it replaced the 
wrought iron. Buswork is supported at various heights by pedestals depending on 
whether they are connecting or main busses. 
Steel Framework - Utilized to support electrical apparatus including light fixtures, 
114 
these lattice-style structures were standardized throughout the BPA system, resulting in 
lower costs and rapid erection. Steel lattice framework was arranged in the switchyard in 
such a way to permit the addition of lines and transformers with minimum of shut-down 
expense. 
Power Transformer - Transformers step current down to voltages suitable for 
local distribution. Each AC current is 3-phase, therefore transformers usually occur in 
banks of three, single-phase units. The core and windings of the transformer are 
contained within a case or tank, and are immersed in oil which serves as an insulating 
medium. The tanks are fluted for better cooling of the oil, a system sometimes augmented 
with fans. Busses meet the transformers through antennae-like, insulated extensions 
projecting off the top of the transformer tanks. 
Power Circuit Breaker - These giant breakers are designed to open, or break, a 
• circuit in the event of an overload or short-circuit on the system. Power circuit breakers 
used oil, then later, compressed air and compressed gas to quench the arc that forms 
when a circuit under load is opened. Power circuit breakers take the form of tanks: large 
vertical ones for the older oil-filled type; smaller horizontal ones for the modern gas-
filled type. Busses connect to the circuit breakers through antennae-like projections much 
like those on the transformers. 
Dead-End Tower - Typically the tallest structures in a switchyard, these towers 
mark the end of the line for high-voltage lines entering a substation. 
Feeder Tower - Smaller than the dead-end towers, these structures support the 
115 
transmission lines that radiate out to local customer distribution lines. 
Capacitor - Designed to increase voltage at the end of a transmission line, 
capacitors are stored in small, square metal tanks mounted one after another on tall, open, 
steel racks in the switchyard. 
\ 
Reactor - This devices is essentially an auto transformer, serving to limit the 
system voltage. Reactors take a cylindrical form and occur in banks of three, supported 
on a steel structure. 
Disconnect Switch - These are manually or motor operated devices that open 
circuits not under load in order to isolate specific equipment. Typically suspended high 
above ground on steel support frames, disconnect switches can be identified by their 
accompanying sets of vertically suspended insulators. 
Lighting Fixtures - Outdoor lighting fixtures used in the switchyards were also 
industry standardized. The most common outdoor type found on the system was a fixture 
consisting of an egg-shaped globe cupped by a glazed steel-frame bowl. The fixtures 
were found either mounted to the switchyard's lattice framework or fitted to the tops of 
tall , slender posts which were regularly spaced along the switchyard sidewalks. 
Distribution Patterns 
Every substation had a switchyard. Although a substation is made up of many 
integral components, the switchyard is, in effect, the substation. The yard contains the 
116 
equipment that performs the voltage and circuit switching the makes long-distance 
transmission possible. The locations of the switchyards were dictated primarily by the 
technological requirements set forth by the transmission of electricity in an alternating-
current system. The stepping up and down of voltages had to occur at different points on 
the transmission line; points that were determined by engineers based on the length, 
direction, and voltage level of the line. Consequently, the switchyards followed the 
rights-of-way of the transmission lines. For these reasons, the switchyards installed 
between 1939 and 1945 can be found along the routes represented by maps of the master 
grid drawn between 1939 and 1945 (Figures 1-3). 
According to available information, the BPA built at least fifty-five substations 
between 1939 and 1945. Although the BPA systems has expanded greatly over time, 
most of the transmission rights-of-way represented by the master grid maps of 1939 and 
1945 are still in use today, and consequently, so are the substations located along those 
lines. Because they were built to serve such a specific function, and because that function 
is still required of them, most are estimated to all be in use today, with the exception of 
South Bank Substation. Comprised of a control house and switchyard, the substation was 
demolished when the Army Corps of Engineers built a new lock system at Bonneville 
Dam in 1987. At least six of the fifty-five or more substations built between 1939 and 
1945 have passed out of BP A ownership, but are still in use (Table I). Although overall 
property loss over time has been minimal because of the continuity of function, there are 
five properties that appear on historic maps but are not represented on contemporary 
117 
maps. Whether these switchyards have truly been de-installed in unknown. In addition, 
individual components of switchyards have been lost over time because of failure, age, 
and improving technology. The BPA switchyards are impeccably maintained because 
they are an integral part of a functioning transmission system. 
Property Type: Transmission Line 
Transmission lines were the first structures built by the BPA . Most of the lines on 
the master grid operated at 230kv or 11 Skv and carried aluminum or steel-reinforced 
aluminum conductor cables. Character-defining features of the transmission towers on 
these lines were identified through field survey, construction drawings, and engineering 
literature. Most of the transmission towers on the master grid are made of steel, although 
there were some lines built with wood structures. Most of the steel towers are suspension 
towers, defined by the BP A as "towers designed to support conductors strung along a 
virtually straight line with only small turning or descending or ascending angles." 121 Steel 
transmission towers are characterized by their truss framework. From this basic structure, 
components are added depending on function, topography, and electrical considerations. 
Steel tower components include: the tower body, which is the basic trunk of the tower, 
127 BPA Definitions, T-5 
118 
designed in standard heights; the crossarm or bridge, which is the horizontal component 
near the top of the tower to which insulator strings are attached; leg extensions, which 
comprise the lowest part of the tower and are designed in various lengths to permit 
towers of differing heights and stability on uneven ground; and ground-wire brackets, the 
vertical brackets attached to the crossarm that support an overhead ground wire for 
lightning protection. 
Wood transmission towers are characterized by their simple H-frame, which is 
also comprised of distinct components. Made of Douglas Fir, these components include 
the pole, which is the basic vertical trunk of the structure; the crossarm, which is the 
horizontal member that supports insulator strings; various plates and braces, their uses 
determined by specific function and location on the line; and guy-wires, steel wires used 
to anchor or support a structure. 
Range of Variation 
There are five primary steel transmission tower designs used on the master grid: 
Single-circuit suspension, double-circuit suspension, dead-end, crossing structures, and 
lattice pole. Within each design the towers are typed alphabetically (A-F); each type 
representing different weights, heights, strengths, and functions, although most of these 
differences are subtle enough to the untrained eye that they are nearly impossible to 
identify in the field. 
119 
There are two primary wood transmission structure designs used on the master 
grid: the H-frame and single pole. Within the H-frame design, structures are typed 
alphabetically (A-F, TE); each type representing a specific function on the line. Types are 
physically distinguished from each other by various cross-braces, plates and bracket 
arrangements, and placement of the insulator strings on the frame. The second design is 
the single pole structure anchored with guy wires. Variations of this design include guy 
numbers and locations on the pole, and ground wire installations. Variations range with 
function and location of the pole on the line. 
Description/Steel 
Single-circuit Suspension - This design is identified by its "hourglass" shape with 
a central "throat" or open space under the crossarm component; and a body height of 
between fifty and seventy feet. Insulator strings hang from each tip of the horizontal 
crossarm and from the crossarm's middle, in the tower throat. Leg extensions are either 
set square in the direction of the line, or rotated, like a diamond in the direction of the 
line. Ground-wire brackets sit like horns on top of the crossarms. 
Double-circuit Suspension - Ranging from sixty to sixty-five feet in height, this 
design is identified by its tall, tapered body and three crossarms, vertically stacked, near 
the top of the tower. Insulator strings hang from the tips of the crossarms, one circuit 
(three conductors) on each side of the tower. 
120 
Single- or double-circuit Dead-end - These towers are used for turning large 
angles on a line, or terminating a line at a substation. On a line they take the form of 
either the single or double circuit tower, with variations that make it heavier and stronger. 
These variations result in a tower that looks shorter and stockier than its suspension-type 
cousins. In a substation, dead-end towers take the form of giant pylons, tapered to a point 
at the top. Standing several feet apart, the towers are connected to each other by 
horizontal lattice crossarms to which strings of insulators are attached. These structures 
are found typically straddling banks of power transformers in the switchyard. 
Single-circuit Crossing Structures - There are only four of these towers on the 
master grid. Designed to cross the Columbia River at Bonneville Dam, they are the tallest 
towers on the master grid, ranging from ninety-five feet to over 300 feet. Their cross-
braced truss frames take the form of a slightly tapered pylon with a short crossarm at the 
very top of the tower. Hom-like brackets support ground wires above the crossarms. The 
towers retain their original orange and white paint scheme. 
Single-circuit Lattice Pole - This design, used at angle points on a line, consists of 
three steel lattice poles supporting a lattice crossarm. Insulator strings hang from three 
points on the crossarm. This type of structure requires guy wires for support. 
Description/Wood 
Single-circuit H-frame - This design consists of two poles supporting a wood 
121 
crossarm. There are many variations of the H-frame, which is is modified by adding 
various braces, plates and crossarms to the basic frame. This type of structure requires 
guy wires for support. 
Single pole - This design consists of a single pole. Insulator strings hang from a 
simple wood crossarm at the top of the pole. This type of structure requires guy wires for 
support. 
Distribution Patterns 
The master grid transmission lines were designed to connect the major population 
centers with Bonneville and Grand Coulee dams in a giant loop. Secondary loops and 
segments radiated out to connect with smaller communities and rural lines. Once those 
general routes were determined, specific rights-of-way were chosen with preference 
given to the most direct route over the smoothest terrain. In addition, BP A historian Gene 
Tollefson indicates in his 1987 history of the agency that some lines were located along 
rights-of-way that were highly visible to promote the government-funded project during 
the Depression.128 
Most lines on the master grid were supported by a combination of steel tower 
128 Tollefson, 156. 
122 
designs, although it is known that the Spokane-Grand Coulee lines No. 1 and 2, the 
Walla Walla-Lewiston line, and the Vancouver-Eugene line were originally built with 
wood H-frame structures. 
Approximately ninety-one transmission lines comprise the master grid (Table 2). 
The total number of transmission towers on those lines was not available among current 
locational data. That number remains undetermined because of time and geographical 
constraints. Today it is estimated that most of the steel structures on the original master 
grid transmission lines are original. However, some lines have been relocated over time 
or include towers that have been replaced in-kind with identical design types. Wood 
structures are much less likely to be original. Although treated to retard deterioration, 
they required more maintenance than steel towers and were replaced more often. If 
locational and electrical requirements allowed, they were more likely to be replaced with 
steel towers than with new wood structures. All original conductor cable on the master 
grid is assumed to have been replaced. 
Condition of the transmission lines is estimated to be excellent. Although the 
BP A system has expanded greatly over time, most of the transmission line rights-of-way 
represented by the master grid maps of 1938-1945 are still in use. Transmission line and 
tower deterioration and loss has been minimal because of this continuity of function. 
They are well maintained because they are still in use. 
• 
-- , 
WAS H I HGT O H y i . I 
......... \ ro,rr11 C-Ath ~\tt <;>' I ' \ ' I jI  / 
-••-•-•J :"" \•.. .. . ,.".'A·-.~.~ ·,..,  <-:.,. .... A,  ,. .... J1.. l Pr• l o, ..1 1,,. ,isl-·"· 
n..,  --- ---- --- -- ·J-.~4 "'-~'.'.~J 7-• ••i • ~ ··, \ •'  /- ..,,,, \ '"o\~· : i dr ,' ,,.,.,, ..I.fI.  ~ , -U • 
,..  ,.. ",.,._·,~  I. ."...'." ,"  ='= - •~ ~:!\fJ~.l)1  ..,-, ., .",. £"'•'"•oo ,i'l· J'
· · 
COlu • "• 0,0KA OI .f 
1,, .,,-.L .. ••m Ai 1!!J' .._ ,;'" " " 
l U. t NU UIIIO ~~  \r'(t :A L O ,( II  ' . ,.,.,.~ •}  __,A ...... 'I 
ALIS I w,o ... , '· ;::>~ 0 J 110 • 
ft..._-A:~ OJ •O J , M 
11 ,;,}::,,~'-! 
V>[W ,,. MOO • »·• d', 0'i)· 
"" -~,,<;>'"' ti. .. .,,... .... ~ .... , • f 1} 
• •,, «"'A= ·; ;,.i._. . .. ···••' ........ "..~.;• • , ./ s 'b ...... ,.t,.,-.. i "\....F "" 
_.,. ~'t:.W,1"':• . t, !J t:5.c ~~-,· ........._ .._ . i·J) · ";fa" •'!:°"~ .""!.' f'!ffJ~~  I '.:.':~.!"' '"1i···.  f\: ?;;;,,,,u•" , !!. ..~ -- 1 ~.t,..,.,. . • •i ~ 1 ,•;, . /.. 
Ii"'''" "~• :.l"6'"'=°"! T!!?•••u \ ••• """' ' , ,ltl "• .," · ·A; -K.[c. i,&--- ;,i·J . "ro"o ruo: •' •,, , ',, °'""" !lvUoIuWrIN"•.4•r •..Ci·,  ,',  CH(o ..,  '• , ,. "-' •" "" °' t,t~ 
- . ~~l ll • ~(~.,. ..... ~ 
too • ··· "'•L••iu Otr•oir 0 G 0 H 0 A H 0 !)f:f1 
iu, s• u11a lt 1> 1 
l\ ,.,rH ,,,.,,, 
~ i;. ""'':1'o•A ,,;·1_:,·;:1· ( UO(lil 
." ""·), ~::~.:~~• u. 8P A ?4/~ ~ .o.,.,_ ct• II ,'!I . , .:,f' , lJ.,, ,.t>t,..,,.u t r - i ,>>tf,-,l•(tlft ' ) , '" f"· ' o,u ,.. o, ·~ 80 : , 4,.C#<.A ,. ,Olf iU fl . 'l~e N '• I j. ~:it'.::'Jf1 TR At I S STEM l ' ', ) · . ·'.: ·l\t•1/".·I 
()'i \ . . mlf•OHc:f<. .. . ~j,!t f-<1 •f )' ' I , ........ ........ Of I 1.1
' .,•,,,I -,-" .·.••,. ! .I .!.  
,,✓..  iA '~f•;,t::I.;~11--':~-~ :,1~l--. 1
E ,.. •~~,, 1 I, , . fl , •L L EE  GG  N 0 .-.1'\  ..,. . ... ,.,.. ... ~l-lt'i" ::":lI, i',•, !..'i ii1 ,. ? 
Ill,f,·- ,- E£XlI5STrJIN(J Tr RANSMIfS' SION S'rSTEM I ) . , ,.10 01<,. OHi : , , : }, ~~ ';° •,~ J'L 
l;~. - - - APPROVE/I FOR CcoO;N STRUCTION 
,' •• -. --- - A,.·.~-  A001r10N4l FACIL I TIES APPROVED . 1~NoroF,RrC,ofJNft.'4/IIlE CFAT,COINU  WITH OTHER UTILITY • '/'h ;s '.:!!P does not show scheduled pro1ects covermg- survoy & desr: ·_Jti}\•}1 -i~ .l!>',l'~-:'i,]C- ,, , . ._, . ENJOfESRTICNOG• 'ONAFMC TaIO HN'f 'ORO DEVELOPMENT 
= AUTHORl/£O DAM 8 HYDRO OEVELOP,WENT t , ~ · - .. ,, .,.,~""""'~'"1.7~~••~••':',:f,;'f.'fr:~. ! •. l :~,_.J 
FIGURE 3. Map of the Master Grid, 1946. (BPA, Annual Report, 1946.) 
...... 
N 
w 
TABLE I. Substations Identified 
Name Date County State Status Control Untanking Oil 
House Tower House 
Ainsworth C. 1940-1944 Walla Walla WA unclear 
Albany 1940 Linn OR 
Alcoa 1940 Clark WA X 
Allyna 1942 Mason WA 
Astoriab 1941 Clatsop OR X 
Bayviewc C. 1940-1944 Kootenai ID 
Bell, G. H. 1942 Spokane WA X X X 
Boyerd 1943 Yamhill OR ? 
Bremertone 1942 Kitsap WA X 
Cathlamet C. 1940-1944 Wahkiakum WA 
Chehalis 1940 Lewis WA NRE X X 
Colfax C. 1940-1944 Whitman WA X 
Columbia 1942-1944 Chelan WA NRE X X 
Conditr 1940 Skamania WA 
Cosmopolis 1940 Grays Harbor WA X 
Covington 1941 King WA NRE X X 
Cowlitz 1945 Cowlitz WA 
Creston 1942 Lincoln WA 
Ellensburg 1941 Kittitas WA X 
Eugene 1940 Lane OR NRE X 
Forest Grove 1940 Washington OR 
Grand Couleeg 1940 Grant WA ? ...... 
N 
+'" 
TABLE 1 (Continued) 
Name Date County State Status Control Untanking Oil 
House Tower House 
Longview 1941 Cowlitz WA 
McMinnville 1940 Yamhill OR 
Midway 1941 Benton WA NRE X X 
Monmouth 1940 Polk OR 
Mossy Rock 1941 Lewis WA 
Moxee C. 1940-1944 Yakima WA 
North Bonneville 1939-1940 Skamania WA NRE X X 
Oregon City 1940-41 Clackamas WA X 
Pascoh 1941 Walla Walla WA ? 
Pendleton 1941 Umatilla OR X 
Pendleton Airport 1941 Umatilla OR unclear 
Pomeroy 1943 Columbia WA 
Raymond 1940 Pacific WA NRE X 
Ross, J. D. 1939-43 Clark WA NRE X X X 
Salem 1940 Marion OR NRE X X X 
Salem Alumina 1944 Marion OR 
South Bank 1940 Multnomah OR NRE X 
demolished 
South Rentoni 1941 King WA 
St. Johns 1940 Multnomah OR NRE X X 
Svensod C. 1940-1944 Wahkiakum WA 
Tacoma 1941 Pierce WA NRE X X ..... 
N 
Vl 
TABLE I (Continued) 
Name Date County State Status Control Untanking Oil 
House Tower House 
The Dalles 1941 Wasco OR 
Tide Flatsk 1940 Pacific WA 
Tillamook 1943 Tillamook OR 
Trentwood 1942 Spokane WA 
Troutdale 1942 Multnomah OR NRE X X 
Valley Way 1945 Spokane WA 
Walla Walla 1941 Walla Walla WA NRE X 
Walla Walla C. 1940-1944 Walla Walla WA unclear 
Army Air Base 
Wells1 1940 Benton OR 
Wenatchee C. 1940-1944 Douglas WA unclear 
Westport C. 1940-1944 Clatsop OR unclear 
Willaminam 1943 Polk OR ? 
• Known currently as Belfair Substation. 
b Now owned by Pacific Power and Light. 
c Known currently as Athol Substation. 
d Now owned by Pacific Power and Light. Based on predictions made about subtype distribution patterns, it is possible that this substation 
...... 
N 
O"I 
TABLE I (Continued) 
could include a control house. Because the property is no longer owned by the BPA, detailed locational data on the substation is not available. 
• Now owned by the U.S. Navy. 
r Known currently as Carson Substation. 
s Now owned by Grant County P.U.D. Based on predictions made about subtype distribution patterns, it is possible that this substation 
couldinclude a control house, untanking tower and oil house. Because the property is no longer owned by the BPA, detailed locational data on the 
substation is not available. · 
h Now owned by Pacific Power and Light Based on predictions made about subtype distribution patterns, it is possible that this substation could 
include a control house, untanking tower and oil house. Because the property is no longer owned by the BPA, detailed locational data on the substation 
is not available. 
i Known currently as the Maple Valley Substation. 
i Known currently as Gray's River Substation 
k Known currently as Naselle Substation. 
1 Known currently as the Adair Substation. 
m Known currently as Portland General Electric's Grand Ronde Substation. Based on predictions made about subtype distribution patterns, it is 
possible that this substation could include a control house. Because the property is no longer owned by the BPA, detailed locational data on the 
substation is not available. 
_. 
N 
--...) 
TABLE 2. Transmission Lines Identified 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
Albany Bureau of Mines 1944 Albany-Bureau of Mines 
Albany -Wells 1940 Salem-Albany No. 2 
Bonneville-Coulee Line 1940 Underwood Tap to Bonneville-
Sifton No. 1 & Bonneville-Alcoa No. 2 
North Bonneville-Midway No.1 1941 Midway-Potholes No. 1 
Midway-Grand Coulee No. 3 
Bonneville-Coulee Line No. 2 1942 North Bonneville-Midway No.1 DE 
Bonneville-The Dalles Line 1941 Bonneville-Hood River No. 1 
Hood River-The Dalles No. 1 
Bonneville-Vancouver No. 1 Loop to Troutdale 1942 North Bonneville-Troutdale No. l 
Bonneville-Vancouver No. 1 Loop to Troutdale 1942 North Bonneville-Troutdale No.2 
Bonneville-Vancouver No. 1 and 2 1939 North Bonneville-Ross No. 1 DE 
Bonneville-Vancouver No. 1 and 2 1939 North Bonneville-Ross No. 2 DE ..... 
N 
00 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
Bonneville-Vancouver No. 5 and 6 1943 Bonneville-Sifton No. 1 and Sifton-Ross No. 1 
Bonneville-Vancouver No. 5 and 6 1943 Bonneville-Alcoa No. 1 and 2 
Bradford Island Crossing 1939 Bonneville-North Bonneville No. I DE 
Bradford Island Crossing No. 2 1939 Bonneville-North Bonneville No. 2 DE 
Bradford Island Crossing No.3 1940 Bonnevile-Sifton No. 1 DE 
Bradford Island Crossing No.4 1943 Bonneville-Alcoa No. 1 & 2 DE 
Chehalis-Centralia Line 1940 Chehalis-Centralia No. 1 
Chehalis-Covington Line 1941 Chehalis-Covington No. 1 
Olympia-White River No. 1 
Covington-While River No. 2 
Chehalis-Longview Line 1941 Lexington-Delameter (Cowlitz Co. PUD) No. 1 
Chehalis-Longview Line 1941 Lexington-Longview No. 1 
.... 
N 
\0 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
Chehalis-Mossyrock Line 1941 Mossyrock Tap to Silver Creek-Morton No. 1 
Chehalis-Mossyrock (Str. 21/2-15/10) 1941 Silver Creek-Leonard Road No.1 
Chehalis-Raymond Line 1940 Chehalis-Raymond No. 1 
Columbia-Moxee No. 1 1944 Columbia-Moxee No. 1 
Covington-Coulee No. 2 
Columbia-Ellensburg 
Covington-Grand Coulee Line 1942 Columbia-Grand Coulee No. I 
Covington-Grand Coulee No.2 1942 Columbia-Moxee No. 1 DE 
Covington-Seattle Line 1942 Covington-(SCL) Creston No. I 
Grand Coulee-Davenport 1942 Almira Tap to Creston-Davenport 
Grand Coulee-Davenport 1942 Creston-Davenport No. 1 
Grand Coulee-Spokane No. 1 1942 Grand Coulee-Bell No. 1 
..... 
w 
0 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
Grand Coulee-Spokane No. 2 1942 Grand Coulee-Bell No. 2 
Grand Coulee-Spokane Nos. 3 & 4 1943 Grand Coulee-Bell No. 3 DE 
Grand Coulee-Spokane Nos. 3 & 4 1943 Grand Coulee-West Side (WWP) #1 DE 
West Side (WWP)-Bell No. 1 
Hanford-Pasco 1941 Midway-Benton No. 1 
Hanford-Pasco 1941 Benton-Franklin No. 1 
Hanford-Pasco 1941 Franklin-Walla Walla No. 1 
Kelso-Chehalis Line 1940 Lexington-Longview No. 1 
Kelso-Chehalis Line 1940 Longview-Chehalis Nos. 1 & 3 
Longview-Astoria 1941 Longview-Allston No. 3 
Longview-Rainier No. 2 1942 Longview-Astoria No. 1 
Midway-Benton Line 1941 Benton-Taunton No. 1 (WWP) 
--vJ 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
(Hanford-Benton Section) 
(Midway-Hanford Section) Midway-Benton No. 2 
Midway-Columbia Line 1945 Midway-Vantage No. 1 
Vantage-Columbia No. 1 
Midway-Ellensburg 1941 Columbia-Moxee No. 1 
(Midway-Yakima Section) Midway-Moxee No. 1 
Midway-Walla Walla Line 1941 Midway-Benton No. 1 
(Midway-Hanford Section) 
(Hanford-Pasco Section) 
Midway-Walla Walla Line 1941 Benton-Franklin No. 1 
(Hanford-Pasco Section) 
Midway-Walla Walla Line 1941 Franklin-Walla Walla No. 1 
(Pasco-Wall a Walla Section) 
North Bonneville-Troutdale Line 1940 North Bonneville-Troutdale No. I 
North Bonneville-Troutdale Nos. 1 and 2 1939 North Bonneville-Ross No. 1 
...... 
w 
N 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
North Bonneville-Troutdale Nos. 1 and 1 1942 North Bonneville-Troutdale No.2 
North Bonneville-Vancouver Nos. 1 and 1 1940 North Bonneville-Troutdale No.2 
Potlatch-Bremerton Line 1942 Kitsap-Bremerton No. 1 and 
(Allyn-Bremerton Section) Shelton-Kitsap No. 2 (Allyn-Kitsap Section) 
Rainier-Longview Line 1943 St. Helens Tap to Longview-Astoria No. 1 
Rainier-Longview Line 1943 Longview-Astoria No. 1 
Raymond-Cosmopolis Line 1940 Raymond-Cosmopolis No.1 (Purchased) 
Raymond-Raymond Tideflats 1940 Raymond-Raymond Tideflats No. l 
Ross-St. Johns Line Nos. 1 and 2 1940 Ross-St. Johns No. 1 
Salem-Alumina Plant Line 1944 Chemawa-Salem Alumina No.1 
Salem-Tillamook 1943 Salem-Boyer No. l 
(Willamina-Grand Ronde) 
_. 
w 
w 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
Salem-Tillamook (Boyer-Tillamook) 1943 Boyer-Tillamook No. 1 
Service to Electro Metallurgical Line No. 2 1942 St. Johns-Gilmore Steel No. 2 
Service to Vancouver Shipyard 1942 Ross-Vancouver Shipyard No.I 
Shelton-Allyn Line 1942 Shelton-Kitsap No. 2 
Shelton-Allyn-Kitsap No. 2 1942 Shelton-Kitsap No. 2 
and Kitsap-Bremerton Mile 3 Relocation 
Spokane-Trentwood Lines 1 and 2 1942 Bell-Trentwood No. 1 
Spokane-Trentwood Lines 1 and 2 1943 Bell-Trentwood No. 2 
St. Johns-Astoria Line 1941 St. Johns-St. Helens No. 1 
St. Helens Tap to Longview-Astoria No. 1 
St. Johns-Astoria Line 1941 Longview-Astoria No. 1 
Trentwood-Valley Way 1945 Trentwood-Valley Way No. 1 
....... 
w 
-""' 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
Vancouver-Alcoa No. 2 1941 Bonneville-Alcoa No. 2 
Vancouver-Alcoa No. 2 1941 Bonneville-Alcoa Nos. 1 & 2 
Vancouver-Alcoa No. 2 1941 Sifton-Ross No. 1 
Vancouver-Alcoa Line Ross-Carborundum No. 1 
1940 Ross-Alcoa No. 2 
1940 Ross-Alcoa No. 2 
1941 Ross-Vancouver Shipyard No. I 
Vancouver-Eugene No. 1 1940 Ross-Clark County PUD NO.I 
Vancouver-Eugene Line 1939 Ross-St. Johns No. I 
Vancouver-Eugene Line 1939 Ross-Rivergate No. 1 
Vancouver-Eugene 1939 Ross-St. Johns NO. 1 
Vancouver-Eugene 1939 Ross-Rivergate No. 1 
..... 
w 
Vl 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
Vancouver-Eugene Line 1940 St. Johns Tap to Keeler-Oregon City No. 2 
Keeler-Oregon City No. 2 
Vancouver-Eugene Line 1940 Oregon City -Chemawa No. 1 (de-energized) 
Vancouver-Eugene Line 1940 Chemawa-Salem No. 1 
Vancouver-Eugene Line 1940 Salem-Albany NO. 1 
Vancouver-Eugene No. 1 1940 Ross-Clark County PUD No.2 
Vancouver-Eugene Line #2 1941 St. Johns-Keeler No. 1 Oregon City Sub 
Vancouver-Eugene Line No. 2 (Reblt 230 kV) 1945 Oregon City -Chemawa No. 2 
Vancouver-Eugene Line No. 2 1945 Chemawa-Salem No. 2 
(Oregon City-Salem Section) (Reblt 230 kV) 
Vancouver-Eugene Line 1940 Albany-Eugene No. I 
Vancouver-Kelso Line 1940 Ross-Lexington No. 1 
...... 
w 
0\ 
TABLE 2 (Continued) 
Constructed As Date Operated As NR 
Walla Walla-Lewiston Line 1941 Walla Walla-North Lewiston No. 1 
Walla Walla-Lewiston Tap to Pomeroy SS 1943 Pomeroy Tap to Walla Walla-North Lewiston No. 1 
Walla Walla-Pendleton Line 1941 Walla Walla-Milton No. 1 State Line Tap to Walla Walla-
Milton No. 1 Pendleton Tap to State Line Tap 
...... 
w 
-...J 
FIGURE 4. Control House, Eugene Substation, Eugene, Oregon. 
-w 
00 
FIGURE 5. Control House, Eugene Substation, Eugene, Oregon. 
....... 
w 
\0 
140 
FIGURE 6. Control House, Eugene Substation, Eugene, Oregon. 
FIGURE 7. Control Room, Eugene Substation, Eugene, Oregon. 
.... 
.~...  
---'Ii) 
....L-. 
[ ~. ~::.,~ '": ~. _, -:~:::tJ~:. -;_~~--~~J: -·~~~;s
• t • '... -~- -~--~---·:--r.-: 
~~• • ~- I ••. ,,,..-~] 
i h -- - .. . _J .. . ... I •. ' ' I . - . ,, :r~· :~:'.~_:fs tJ' !; Ii  
::u. ,' .I' L<;'=':"'- ":-:::.;,. .. :,;•-- ';' fr(il ·:i ! I ,. -+~ -·~··••u••~···· ·•·) .... - t :r. . ··.:·; __ :_ _ ,·, 
 
: ':- - -:~~~-::·::..:=-~~k4l I, I 1,- ---if 
1:© ,, I ; • • • ' . :.--:·;~;:r~J . 
t~ j'J_'_ _ _: _ JW \- 1. I 'f·,  'co J."• • <><>M ' , , J,.,,, • .,;,,,.t I· ;· /!  , I ....... .. .. ~-f•'  ._ I...1.  1••-•• i - !· w-: '<oM,>,••eo~,o- "'"'"'ill---,I  J1 i1I L -j -1 ~____1 ,,,1 ·'- ·I·  ""1 ; .x;:, -~·~t!! ::~~.~,;:.;: _ .: ~_·.;;:~~jj,~_~. ..4. --~i ] µI  
JrrA .f.···
;'' . ·-u ;·c.., ·_ _I _I  -.,-,-)J i i I ;;J ~..  _~,, ..~ ;: .;,.·,;,,•..,-,:,-..~, :,,.-, .:. ,-,..:, :..:.). .,  ~~ ·  :.., ::4 --.J.  Ii r '  .,, J: ,. ·i .•• ...... : .. --~- -· ··- -;--.:::: :.·.,f -:·j ~;1@ 1-: i •_ __-: j I l .: 7,,r ' • '·"" ,., ,..., - •· CJ;,••·• . , --~ . n • ,• ,, , . ; j ,. ,1.~j I . '.J:·: • j_i ' . .. ' ·'· - ~~ :1 ,---~'!'--·-:;~·:; ;;,~~;:_:.~:..:.~-~:. ! ~~ii; - • : : ch cb ct ~ , 'IAl'121 -~h-- - •' I 
I ' (iy • I ,_~!, ~ --
I'  : - •-j 
·: --, ----- I1  •~.....,,.-. .,. .I.  
1'--'I l1 • I !~~§~ ]1 _ ,... I .,.,· ---..::..  I • • 
~ -=1 
rOJJNOATIOM · PLA.N . r1osT • r LOOD. · P U,N 
_., ,_ ._.• .  ).' .1. ,,.,:..·t -,,..,.,.,.  GtNtDAL MOHS ;_ ~-...v1eiOL~ 
;;;:;;:1:~·;; ·;;.~:.~::;::;.~~;;~:· ~::;.: ·- .. ~-:,:•• § ~;: . -~- .. ·-"'' ~"-'•~' f. 
n. ... ~-~.U ., ___. ;_ ...... ... .,. ' 
· fOl lE' IJ LC: · <>r -111111111,s • • W l '- C'.2_W · S ~Ll :. DU L~ • D!)~~Ut ~li lt • •~ • , ,..,, • ' •• 0 ~• 111;,,:;'l 
,..,..T;;'-, ,..;,.,..,.. -•• •••i. .._,.;. •- .,.,r..!,'. :,'.;:;!,.,,r,o,, " ;~.-;. ... ' i ••• •••""t' 1 .,,r:i s1:;~.:flg~'.·,~.:~~-.: ·•--o, tc• c; .,_& ZtO •-:, ne,-, AO~•~;: ... ,--:,~ r.>• Tln•t' O,; . 
• 0 C'J~~AT10 , -t:_,f1Q5·- -:' I.OOQ·Pll.NS 
~J:::~.:~f:~~ ~i ::~ ~F~ ~ ~~ 41_~~~:?~: ~:£r~~ f ~ ~-· C:O:~TQOL· llOUSC · =-e 1 :.: uGt. tJC~. SL~ "::S"!~: "!IOr~t §~ : ·===0 i 
1
FIGURE 8. Control House Plan, Eugene Substation, Eugene, Oregon. (Drawing courtesy of the BPA.) 
...... 
.,i::. 
N 
FIGURE 9. Control House, Troutdale Substation, Troutdale, Oregon. 
-~ 
w 
FIGURE 10. Control House, J. D. Ross Substation, Vancouver, Washington. 
...... 
~ 
~ 
145 
FIGURE 11. Control House, J. D. Ross Substation, Vancouver, Washington. 
FIGURE 12. Control House, Ellensburg Substation, Ellensburg, Washington. 
-~ 
0\ 
FIGURE 13 . Control House/Untanking Tower, Salem Substation, Salem, Oregon. 
...... 
~ 
-...J 
FIGURE 14. Control House, Astoria Substation, Astoria, Oregon. 
-+>-
00 
FIGURE 15. Control House, Astoria Substation, Astoria, Oregon. 
...... 
~ 
\0 
FIGURE 16. Untanking Tower, Salem Substation, Salem, Oregon. 
..... 
Vl 
0 
151 
FIGURE 17. Interior ofUntanking Tower, Salem Substation, Salem, Oregon. 
FIGURE 18. Interior ofUntanking Tower, Salem Substation, Salem, Oregon. 
...... 
V, 
N 
153 
FIGURE 19. Untanking Tower, J. D. Ross Substation, 
Vancouver, Washington. 
.~ j,1- I -! 
;--.~. 
FIGURE 20. Oil House, Troutdale Substation, Troutdale, Oregon. 
...... 
V, 
~ 
FIGURE 21. Switchyard, Troutdale Substation, Troutdale, Oregon. 
...... 
VI 
VI 
FIGURE 22. Switchyard, J. D. Ross Substation, Vancouver, Washington. 
..... 
Vl 
0\ 
FIGURE 23. Buswork, Ellensburg Substation, Ellensburg, Washington. 
..... 
V\ 
-.....) 
FIGURE 24. Gas Circuit Breaker and Transformers, Eugene Substation, Eugene, Oregon. 
...... 
V, 
00 
159 
FIGURE 25. Oil Circuit Breakers, Salem Substation, Salem, Oregon. 
FIGURE 26. Capacitor Banks, Astoria Substation, Astoria, Oregon. 
0-\ 
0 
FIGURE 27. Disconnecting Switch, Troutdale Substation, Troutdale, Oregon. 
,,__. 
0,,__\.  
FIGURE 28. Switchyard Lighting Fixture, Ellensburg Substation, Ellensburg, Washington. 
...... 
°N'  
FIGURE 29. Transformer Fans, Troutdale Substation, Troutdale, Oregon. 
...... 
0\ 
l;.l 
FIGURE 30. Double-Circuit Suspension Tower, Bradford Island, Bonneville Dam. 
...... 
0\ 
~ 
~v  
t::- ~-
, Jf~---, 
V rt' 
FIGURE 31. Single-Circuit Crossing Towers, Bradford Island, Bonneville Darn. 
...... 
0\ 
V, 
FIGURE 32. Transmission Line Corridor, Oregon Side, Bonneville Dam. 
-0\ 
0\ 
1>0<I(C>()f( xbr><XP""''·~ 4 • & • !I ~ :,.t re• • • rl f!. ~ f".' 1 .)$0° .. . 
" ~ ~:~:·:., J ' • oc- • 
:, EC:T OOH A·A ...,.Tv •• A°?. Tow€", u s .. ... ., . !'t. • c, ~-
, , "'"' • ... :; 1 \ 'lit. 
.... ,. . C: I f"t. ., C.) 
::, ... ··-' .,.; ....... 
T""•"".!>"C"'i:>5, 
Ql!l-._.,11. ~"!_(NOOII' C:_l!OSs-4 .. M ,o I ~00 t ... (". , ... -: 
II , ., oa "' • • r, C't , r ~ 
400 • .,, ti,\ 
tJ I f. C> l" • ,., G": 
.. 11 1 e ro ' • • r : ... t"'': 11 -: or e' •• C'7 A r~,--r-,r> 1'- "' •-~ P'"'•'",... ,., •>1 P-" s1 Ito-. I\. t -~ •• 
~"" ..._. .. ll"'C .. T.,.~e::- Al TowG:~ .1,. , :.,•-·-· · · .. e>••·- ,.c .., ......... .. 
Lo .. a.,..-yp,.., ... L 
t., 1i ::, ,oo ' ,.. Gt I I ,1 ": • 5 o • ,., Cl•• C''l. 
1.0 . . .. 1,, 4~ ~>- ,:IrI  ~-'"'b'S•TIOM 0 " LO .... PS -;, 1-::,:•: :-.. .. IJt ,I .~ .,.  :.:.,  ~• · ". . .,,. .  . . ,. ....... - ........... _.. .. "' ........  .Y_ ,!_ ':> 'l l, 11..! 1.l, ,tj Ill , , . ., ~. ,,.,..i .. .... . .. o,.. . _ . ........ ... ,. _, . IV 1- • · c. • ,,:,. •• ·• •• · •• _e,. ... _.. ,._,. ., ., ... 
V • · • - ~ , .. , "'"'1 ,. .. ,1,,.,.., 1<,. ..... . 
~C .,1 I0!'" ,.,.,.,,,-1\ ' •-• ♦,.. __ .. ,..1..-,I,,.-
•1 l: UNIT STR.£!,;,c;5 Ii , 1f":-t, 
<.· •·•--.e, 1•,a,·· ,
' L, t • l.. , .. ~ !.· "' •! --.-,•,. :.a...  
:: ~~:: :.:  :,,l: 1 . .. . . .......... , .. . 1,.,. .. . ~••o•• ,... .. ·--.... ••• r · .. i· ': -: ..... I""•· ••et- ,-· ' 
C'o'"'P ... , ,·•••)-••"• I•,--::::, . ..- • l• ,_~,r 
. :~ :•:: ~ t, :~l:i· C'•-p -,
"<11/ .. . . , ,. ..........
••..n. .s .• c ~, ... • ,,..,,.,.• ... ,... T 1..,,.,,..•,..,., •'l.O•oo'..- , •l ,e.._.• . ... , 
C0N:tTR.UCilON : ·: '. ; · :: ; : .: ~ t~ : ~ :¼· fl•n• •"' •" lt•lis - 4C>no,,',•••· J •"oee•~ • • 
I /!A F"A.TEN,-1:Q I: M- : . J • · U t 11 l.· '1. ,,: , !_ ,,..,..SEC.T1 0N ~ - B 7a  .:  1, .• .;  ~~r . ft.  JIC - ,11 l " 4 • 4 , ,\ . r • . .!n : , c:.)1->,pc ,1, : ~e:c, :J:: :0:~" ~t~.1~:,~;~~,:•,.:,~.,: ;j --~:. .... ';::j ~:;: .::: ~, 0 ' -. ......t tt1 1 <1 ~ ,, k ~, ... ,., • ., .)lul MA"TCJtl"'I. •O" j,"wclw•• ' ) • .,,,,.,..,. ,,."I,. ., , ,.,.. • .,., PtP• .. , r .......... , QQ· S • 'tote '•• o • J..., • ., ') ' '""'-I c.• • Cl 0 - A •, " • , , - • ,. •· •• .. lt-, tke '!.,., .., . •• .,. . ,. • • J . .. ~ .Sp•• ~ ........... t, •• , .. . . . ~ , ...... 
~ 
~ ·- • 11- .- 1. . . ,.,~ .. 1. ...... . . . ... ~- .. ,. .. "" 
,:,o..... ., ..;.& prr , 1 , e.,.l,o., A1 1S cc..-,pw• -1101&.. .. <:. .., ~ boot• • •i·" ........ ... .. -
~,.ii:c, .. ,c .. 'T•ous ·IJ s 0.,. ...,..,- .. .,, e -' t- ....  
, .. ~e •l e,. ;&.pee l or • .. c "'""'""'•'"•••• P ~c, ..... . 
_, .ho.,• • •e.,.s,f ••" • 
. TRANSMISSION TOWERS 
~,·~;.  U.5 0[PAJU M E NT OF THE I MTEFf.1O~ . eo ...... ..,,,.,,_c P•o ~i,:,c,. ... •  11t .~0 l<V-:-"•NIIL'-. CJJlC:U.! ,:_Jill.t.H:.M T0..,£11t :0. TYpff Al A: Ak 5Y:tPEt:f2>: I ON TOWl!B~ ~ T"\',-,~ Alt At..5U!.P£N!.l0M TOWE R!, 
, > 1..1.,00....,____.mc!! AMlRICAN BRIDGE CO 
,.. _ , _ , . , 1 - l T • • • • • l"lfl ~IIJlt tM I"& •• 
FIGURE 33. Single-Circuit Suspension Tower. (Drawing courtesy of the BPA.) ..... 
0\ 
-...J 
(!9) -: _...:.__ _~ - - _""'~~ ~ }/:=• !-.-;- ,_.. .;• ._. ~_ ~. ..~ __ -.. r·  fl.. .. -,·... I ~If., ,;_ , ·. ' 
=-~•~-•--~·-- ~-~•-u ~•- ~;;;_. . '£.fgfj::;- • Ii.,.  
-·,~¥#A~-~~~~-~ _ tllVATIOlll•IUJ~.:::E.._ lllVATIOM.l:u., 'i !! 
Cl) lllYAJ10.:·:·;;..;- J WALKWAYS TOW[O C l.~✓_I_I ____  
-,,:  
1. I 
~ -Tt--~--a.l.  '-:-1; •·uf,f ~ - •·,rJ.. ..- - •1•"1•i'~ 7 ::· !l I 
.,11_) _ ,:;.~-~-h:, •. ,,.._. .il l ~ T i/ 
": I ,...~ 
b ,-.: :·::_ -._a ,w. .. ... .- -·· ll fl l 
t Ltv,now-lzur ( j •. 
., --r --- ~·1· ,! 
1- :1 I • 1 
!i ~ . _,,..·· -m'.  ..... _._._.._  -:::;jlj 
"1===f' TT t' 
DE:TAII. LADOER ELEV. • 159.0 
:i 
g ,, r;) , ,, .... ...., , ~d~ •·~. ..... ......... ....... ·-..... .. . 
,::if 
:.:.,r -:.;:_ . ~- -~~~;:...::.•~. .._. .. . ... '°" I T<W<II- Hl1·,, \· 
lll'IAllO N. . ta•. i;l ~-
• lotOTC • 
0,111""''""'"!"' n, ...... . ..,  ... ,. i...,, .... ,.. ••-.,t~••· 
- "-T_h; - l,tM • M"•Ul•• , ..,1,.i "'"'''"°"°'"  uM,>,j rt 1· ~ ! ...., .,~ o1,,._1 i.wtN ,.,.,-
 . ..4..,. .,,..  .·ia,ot,·.a,.. •c;..r, ... .•_ • ,11.1,,s  ,!: 
Tl\l• u,,lt-.1 lo,u,.oM• CA Ai 6f N-••I of \ ... u 1t.fflA ,,_ 
1 ' j _,_,. ·1t· a.. ·ct· ~ '•P11••1 ,ru,,4,.,,~ 1itt1 .,..,. 11,n. . ,.._1 
, ,., ' 'j!.-'1 ~ • 
i -,#-.),-•.-.,!. ,I. ~ ?l• _,,,..- ~-A,.II •*." uH •••""•"•• -11,-IJ •oo•ld•••• ~""''•11.11., ,1c. • ., , .., ..,. ·et·a . ·ct·•••. ,•."-".".-'"i.'', , 1to , 1,0 •• • -l• .-11111 u,.1. •nd p.-..,1,,_ t • I• IN "'•"• lfl ........ ;i .pru 1..i..,, u-l.,,,,.t.,-..1,1.1..0.•,,.l,"_f .M~•lln\et• n...r u-,f td ..cct•r••,.. -- ···-~-=..-:: ..•  H 
:f r:il · t ·+ 4=-·" '"\ ¥ I ll.l'IATIOfl• ,t31.0' ! 
1--
jp\ .I  1-- , ~ 1 r ~-· --::·.,:,•-r- - ·i-i: I EL(-V,t,T,I_ONS TOWER ·cs· ,,,..  LI,:.•_ o.u, ,.,c,_,·., ." ,.:.::_·,~df  £;,c _:1:;;. ffil _ _.,, .-. -•-t• -·--•·•-. I'f UNTl.0 51'A.1'CS0c~Alf1'MllN1'0,,~IN" 7 IOOIIIOK.U l'o•u AOlll•IUUIIO . .,.. ... ,._,_ 1'"" :i .: BRA~;,~;•,;;:;;~;~•~~-;! /7'"""''=-'-'!:::::.~ .. UlVATl,•131.0' ii - ~ ~--• NUMBER 3 
_._. .., .,, ~ TOM-• 
REST PLATFORMS II WALKWAYS. -:-- ~ ::.::-.::.::=' lOWER ARRANGEMENT~ 
c-c-u 
FIGURE 34. Single-Circuit Crossing Tower. (Drawing courtesy of the BPA.) ..... 
O'I 
00 
~ ~-?'rNSJSr'-.IS!SNS!'iliKNSIS-' - ,-:- ·-, -,-~ / . :-.:~~";~::.~: . --
. :· :,µ.:.. -- > J ' \"(.), ~ ~ 
..,.. .,... : --- -::-::c-------=--J •~ \i'\,' '. / \;::.:;•c.:: •.~• u 
........ &...••·····-• •.. - -- -.~~-+'6'-"'"'----l -~ . :· . ... ~·. : 0 
I ·,·t ....... ....... ....,.r.. 00-. ... , ~ 'ici<:-,c-r;:-rcis:-~EJ':I',"'--"11:bt-~,_----'\a,,_---~,_----'t-~:,~s-".--".::"-"'-c":;.,r_-~"l'~~:".1::a,..!. ..............~ - ' - . CJ,O•-, ·:!::~:i;.• :•. •.~ •":  ~:~. . ~--:-~·~  ! 
! .. ,,_. ... _ ...... ....... ....... r'· '!. ~ ~- \ l:;:: I ,') 
, , .~ I .• I, ., ..... 
• • .. , c. -~~.,- !" ' I ' I 
i: iI  I ~t~~",-':-1_-,:,, . ... ,_ ',;  ~ --:. +~•_ _1  
i'"  lI  ....  ·:;.::~· - :·•.·1·• ·~-e---j ~ ~.,.... ~ -.. --- ·-· .: . 
I ~~:·.. ~'":;;--~ I ( ~.: _· _, /--1 ~"t. . .~:· 't. ·,, ...  . ~ F .•.•... ~ i • 0 ,.I.  ~ ~ ' • .:J ,::.:::.::.:.,·• . ;-- I~ l'i Ij " ~ .; .~ .•. ' .o:,~ :·:-: =\ ..  .. .... ' 
i~; ' ~ '::.;:::;:,:.:·;:_4 . ,-:.: :~~ i·1 T; i~ :J;  ___ ::r '"1 ......... :{~. · -!-:, i-:, ,:, . . ; --~:.___, . ·" i ~~ .,] 'j i~ L _~{U r--k•···· 1 . • ~ -·11~ 
· I' '-1 'L: J t::::J,s::::==::.:.=:,:.;;:::====~ - · i:t===t;:f:: ...:..~:<-.-=rl'·f- ·· -··· -.7]-= 
~ NKl  : , ) -~..- ; _J·. . / ·,1 / ':  ' ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ I- ~ •.• , , . • 
~"-.K ''  '>i/-·.  • · ) -. ---= (" EJ·. / ··~' 1~- ~- , . o ..... -c I .• ,. , , ,.,,. I ; / / " J 
~,./ ~~.~;:\( - ,. ,... . I .,:::· . . __ __ .1 . -:.-. ,ro·· , :, · ·--t· . ~~----
~...:u · _ ; :::S::: ....... , J :·.::: .. ,·~.. · · ' · 
• -"- .•..:v .... _.,__ :: . ... ,...... . ... ~ I 
a·; '-=---""' - ... .. - _.,._,._ __ ,... . ..... "'~~ . . . • ,~i•  ,,,0 1 j ,. ; ·• ,• · . :-, I ......_ "-. · · I ,.. ... . I I ,. ' ' I I ,I  l,  / '\2 JJ· _,. I ~ ~.. . ........ .......... l ;J; J\. /Ll 1i! ,;, .• '"" - II • ~~ .\~;t;::} 'i/'"lS(?",;'1··A  ;·:y:.::· •··•  __..... ...
...... ,. ... .~ . ... _..J. . m"' -~--T-": "~ [~~::.-: 
?: -····=--·: M--/ ~- "'···~-... ..... ........ 1t~r;~ 
t~~. .  ,..._. .• - -~c: . . .,.,  _ Ir )iI   r:~.   :f ;. ':'1I 1 : : -( ' , ....... .. l: - .. j,r I !,.I,   ~,  ~, .: I I . \. ,. ... •MO.......... --' '. \ • 230 KV SING LI I : TRANSMISSION .J / I~ ~   :\/ ~ ,.,I  IJ .,  .,J"  -,.·:,-,,-.,•  ~·C-o·,·o,.,,,a, -,.,. ~. : \ ; LATTICE I :.-.- ··:=··;·,. .· _·:·.  :_··:·-···-··--·-··- ~.,  .r -· - .... •-.• ·..·..-. ··...  
FIGURE 35. Single-Circuit Lattice Pole Tower. (Drawing courtesy of the BPA.) -0\ 
\0 
~--~~- ~ 
~ 
= 11 ~ "•-~1 TI ,.,r-~--::; --.. ~+ ,_____ ,,<--+/:J_ -~:-,~  ~ ....._... 
-·ti-••• rt......rs-, ,· -,.,'\,, I T9P T~.g.T,~M§ f~ ~''L'-::•'•~• ._." __ 6.1 I ,' I 't , .,l(,-, -.-,-, ; ---,:,._ 
. +j:,, ''-,.-.-.·.-,-(-,- :1 /, ·-\;-~' : __ .. __' .::_..., 
~XJ X,A1No{:o,PrT£*,!.? 
I1/X , l.  
/ ,1l:~; ::t,. . ~ 
/ - -,. 1 •,, 
,,:.:_-f: .-,~t----• ~~-
/ ~ ~--·..  r. /....·....-.. ..\  .....-1 
~-:::::::r ,k-----···}D7:~ =" -'Ll>ll6ll.• • .,,. 
!!ot.(;.TION F"·" 
,/' --'-,;• :,_/-- -\,  A0o9:LT.UTuP~Hm-e)P9Dll 19 N 
/ ;/ ',,,J 
~:---.,..,:--•• I 
I / ', I 
I/ ··-.\ Q(,IGN <'.QNQ11 IQN ' 
' 
"'-'W'.:'f"a'~n•x£."!!. -~~.. ..' ~.. ~ .~--~ C..Lt>o4"'1 ~-.._. 6°Mnd 
~----r-·--,s_-----~ 
----J--~.>-·<t~'.>::j_><G-- =t!:~! :!:;~::..~~. <--w,,.~..il.,•r-TOWt"-.m;l>,.!'l·•C>10u 
T.-:::;;-.,,_ ..._ .,.....'-
 CM <.i .,_,.. ... 
W'1"11. Th•u ,,......_ , 
.,,,c .. +,--er. 
I-. <lZ~L.-::~121> ~~!.~.:~;~~ .!....:..!....... .~ ,.~-: ,. .:.:..;-~.\-:-, ..... ..,.. .........  .;~,,·,; . ,,,!,  ..... l·A :rt,,,.,ltobcD'\J,,q"' ~ 
~-:.r::-... V• c.tl> I u ::. " Ol"d o • ~ M• .,, t.tt, . u ,o,~. ,1 11. . , .,_ 
tlt1"! q •tM" ; 11•1 
ror' 01'lb¥w•• u•• 'Y• • 
~~!·--·-· fz:ID: 11 :-1- ' 
M• UNffm 9TATU 0-AI 
......... lo••l'f'JI..Lf l'OI P'AU\,._.J. - .... 
VANCOVY[F 
. .,. ~-fr 11!1KV Tllt&Nt• ~ 1i r;I\ \ ---=
•=1 I . i!!
, ,  N• 3 I 
"-'-=""'- T"-•"' •n1•-, 
FIGURE 36. Double-Circuit Suspension Tower. (Drawing courtesy of the BPA.) --....l 
0 
171 
CHAPTER III 
EVALUATION 
The purpose of this chapter is to set parameters for the evaluation of the properties 
identified in the Identification chapter. The property types will be evaluated according to 
criteria set forth by the National Register of Historic Places. Properties are eligible if 
they: 
A. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the 
broad patterns of our history; or 
B. Are associated with the lives of person,s sigQ.ificant in our past; or 
C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of 
construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or 
that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack 
individual distinction; or 
D. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in 
prehistory or history. 129 
129 National Register Bulletin, #16B, "How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property 
Documentation Form," 1. 
172 
In addition to meeting one of the above criteria, a property must possess integrity 
to be considered significant. The definition of integrity, as it is applied to National 
Register criteria, is the "authenticity of a property's historic identity, evidenced by the 
survival of physical characteristics that existed during the property's prehistoric or 
historic period." Historic integrity is characterized by seven qualities: location, design, 
setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven qualities do not need 
to be present for a resource to have integrity, depending on which qualities are most 
important to a particular property. 
In 1987, a National Register nomination form was prepared for fourteen BPA 
substations and six transmission lines under Criteria A and C in the areas of Engineering, 
Energy Management and Utilization, and Politics and Government. The nomination was 
approved by both the Oregon and Washington State Historic Preservation Offices but was 
held in suspension at the agency's request. Although the properties nominated were found 
to be eligible, there are currently no BP A substations or transmission lines listed on the 
National Register. 
Property Type: Electrical Substation 
Statement of Significance 
Electrical substations located along the original "master grid" transmission 
173 
network built by the Bonneville Power Administration between 1939 and 1945 are 
significant on national, regional, and statewide levels within the context, "Transmission 
of Hydroelectricity by the Bonneville Power Administration, 1939-1945." The 
substations are a functionally integral component of a system that was second only to the 
Tennessee Valley Authority in representing President Franklin D. Roosevelt's vision of a 
federal power system in the United States during·the New Deal years preceding World 
War II. During the war, power from the BPA system was used to operate regional 
aluminum plants that provided one-third of the country's total aluminum output. In 
addition, the BP A system brought power to private and naval shipyards, military air 
bases, and to Hanford, the nuclear power plant that created the plutonium for the bomb 
that ended the war. Regionally and statewide, the BP A system is significant for 
electrifying rural areas of Oregon and Washington, for diversifying the regional 
economy, and for bringing about an industrial transformation of the Pacific Northwest. 
Registration Requirements 
There are three methods for nominating the BP A's electrical substations: 
individually; as part of a multiple property submission; or as part of a discontiguous 
district. Whereas an individual nomination addresses just one property, a multiple 
property submission nominates groups of related significant properties. In both cases, all 
individual properties must meet the National Register criteria. In a discontiguous district 
174 
nomination, multiple properties are evaluated as one unified entity which can possess 
integrity even if some of its properties do not individually meet the National Register 
criteria. 
Registration requirements for nominating a substation individually or nominating 
several substations as part of a multiple property submission are essentially the same, as 
both evaluate the property as an individual entity. Under Criterion A, a substation must 
retain integrity of location, feeling, and association. The ideal substation is one that is 
most representative of all of BP A's activities between 1939 and 1945; it is an unaltered 
substation that includes all four property subtypes within its boundaries. The best 
example of this kind of substation is found at Salem, Oregon; another good example is 
found at Chehalis, Washington. An unaltered substation that includes just a control house 
and a switchyard is representative of typical BPA activity between 1939 and 1945, and is 
therefore considered eligible. The best example of this type of substation is found at 
Eugene, Oregon, and St. Johns, Oregon. A substation that consists only of a switchyard 
would not be considered eligible. Typically serving local loads as opposed to high-
population ar as, this kind of substation is difficult to interpret. It is hard for them to 
convey qualities of integrity, particularly if they do not retain any original equipment. It 
is also difficult to present a best example of this type of substation because control houses 
were added, after the period of significance, to many of the ones that were originally built 
without control houses. Also ineligible is a substation that no longer retains its ability to 
represent the BPA 's activities between 1939 and 1945; it is a substation that has been 
175 
moved, or altered badly enough that it no longer conveys feeling or association. An 
example of this type of substation is the Glenn H. Bell Substation near Spokane, 
Washington. Alterations and additions to the entire site have transformed the character of 
this substation so that it no longer retains integrity of feeling and association. 130 
Substations evaluated under Criterion C must retain integrity of design, materials, 
feeling, and association. They will include at least a control house. An ideal substation is 
one that is most representative of the BPA design principles presented in Chapter I: 
Historical Overview; it is an unaltered substation in which any or all buildings on site 
exhibit all the character-defining features identified in Chapter II: Identification for that 
subtype. The best example of this type of substation is found at St. John's, Oregon and 
Salem, Oregon. Also eligible is a substation where perhaps not all the buildings on site 
retain the character-defining features identified in Chapter II : Identification for that 
subtype. The best example of this type of substation can be found at Midway, 
Washington, where the untanking tower remains unaltered but the control house has been 
modified. A substation that is not eligible is one whose buildings no longer represent the 
BPA design principles presented in Chapter I: Historical Overview; it is one whose 
building or buildings have been so altered that they no longer retain any or the character-
130 BPA, "BPA Substations Dating 1939-1945 (Reviewed 1987-1987) for Inclusion in the Master 
Grid Discontiguous District Nomination to the National Register of Historic Places," typescript list in the 
files of the BPA , Portland, Oregon. 
176 
defining features presented in Chapter II: Identification, nor do they exhibit integrity of 
design, materials, feeling and association. An example of this kind of substation can be 
found at Oregon City, Oregon. The control house at this substation is "unrecognizable" 
from its original plan, and none of the character-defining features are present. 131 
Those properties eligible for architectural significance should be considered even 
if alterations to materials exist as long as the significant design is prominent and intact. 
Because the substations have been in continuous use since they were constructed, 
replacement of electrical equipment has been necessary to maintain quality of service and 
to accommodate new technology. Although many substations still retain some original 
equipment, the loss of original electrical equipment does not necessarily diminish 
integrity. 
Registration requirements for nominating a substation as part of a discontiguous 
district focus on the master grid as a whole. To be eligible for the National Register under 
Criteria A and C, the district must be able to convey the historical, functional, and spatial 
relationships between property types. For the master grid district to retain integrity as a 
unified entity, the majority of its components must themselves possess integrity. 
However, the integrity threshold for a contributing resource within a district is 
necessarily lower than that of an individually nominated property. That is, the integrity of 
131 Ibid. 
177 
properties within a district is based primarily on the relationships among the district 
properties and their shared historical associations rather than on individual distinction. 
It is recommended that the electrical substations built by the BPA  be evaluated 
within the parameters of a discontiguous district. This is the only way to preserve the 
interrelationships between the master grid components. The master grid was designed to 
function as a system and should be evaluated as a system. As such, every substation in 
the BPA system that was built between 1939 and 1945 is eligible for the National 
Register under Criterion A in the areas of industry, social history, and 
politics/government; and under Criterion C in the area of architecture. Within the district, 
substations can then be designated as a contributing or non-contributing resource based 
on their level of historic integrity. Because the relationships among the master grid 
properties has remained substantially unchanged since the period of significance, and 
because all the properties share historical and functional associations, it is expected that 
most of the fifty-five substations and ninety-one transmission lines on the master grid 
would be considered contributing resources in a discontiguous district nomination. 
Exceptions would include those properties whose integrity has been badly compromised 
by extensive alterations or modifications. 
178 
Property Type: Transmission Line 
Statement of Significance 
Transmission lines of the original master grid network built by the Bonneville 
Power Administration between 1939 and 1945 are significant on national, regional, and 
statewide levels within the context, "Transmission of Hydroelectricity by the Bonneville 
Power Administration, 1939-1945." The transmission lines comprise the backbone of a 
system that was second only to the Tennessee Valley Authority in representing President 
Franklin D. Roosevelt's vision of a federal power system in the United States during the 
New Deal years preceding World War II. During the war, power from the BPA system 
was used to operate regional aluminum plants that provided one-third of the country's 
total aluminum output. In addition, the BPA system brought power to private and naval 
shipyards, military air bases, and to Hanford, the nuclear power plant that created the 
plutonium for the bomb that ended the war. Regionally and statewide, the BPA  system is 
significant for electrifying rural areas of Oregon and Washington, for diversifying the 
regional economy, and for bringing about an industrial transformation of the Pacific 
Northwest. 
179 
Registration Requirements 
There are three methods for nominating the BP A's transmission lines: 
individually; as part of a multiple property submission; or as part of a discontiguous 
district. Whereas an individual nomination addresses just one property, a multiple 
property submission nominates groups of related significant properties. In both cases, all 
individual properties must meet the National Register criteria. In a discontiguous district 
nomination, multiple properties are evaluated as one unified entity which can possess 
integrity even if some of its properties do not individually meet the National Register 
criteria. 
Registration requirements for nominating a transmission line individually or 
nominating several transmission lines as part of a multiple property submission are 
essentially the same, as both evaluate the property as an individual entity. Under 
Criterion A, a transmission line must retain integrity of location, setting, design, 
materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Because the transmission lines have 
been in continuous use since they were constructed, replacement of towers, cable and 
other equipment has been necessary to maintain quality of service and to accommodate 
new technology. Although the presence of every original component is not essential to 
integrity, a transmission line eing nominated as an individual property must have most 
of its original equipment intact. An ideal transmission line is one that is most 
representative of the original master grid configuration designed during the period of 
180 
significance; it is a transmission line which includes a majority of original towers or 
poles, and follows an original right-of-way. A good example of this kind of transmission 
line is the double-circuit Bonneville-Vancouver line that runs from Bonneville Dam to 
Vancouver, Washington along the north shore of the Columbia River. A transmission line 
that follows the original right-of-way but includes a different type of tower or support 
than was originally used on the line would not be eligible. An example of this kind of 
transmission line is the Vancouver-Eugene line which runs from Vancouver, Washington 
south along Interstate-5 to Eugene, Oregon. Now supported by steel towers, this line 
originally had wood poles. 132 A transmission line that has been relocated along a later 
right-of-way, even if towers from the period of significance were utilized along the new 
route, would not be eligible. An example of this kind of transmission line is the western 
half of the Covington-Grand Coulee line, which has been converted to a higher voltage 
and completely relocated from its original right-of-way. 111 
Registration requirements for nominating a transmission line as part of a 
discontiguous district focus on the master grid as a whole. To be eligible for the National 
Register under Criteria A and C, the district must be able to convey the historical, 
functional, and spatial relationships between property types. For the master grid district 
132 Holstine, sec. 7, p.8. 
133 Ibid. 
181 
to retain integrity as a unified entity, the majority of its components must themselves 
possess integrity. However, the integrity threshold of a contributing resource within a 
district is necessarily lower than that of an individually nominated property. That is, the 
integrity of properties within a district is based primarily on the relationships among the 
district properties and their shared historical associations rather than on individual 
distinction. For a transmission line in a district, this means that the existence of original 
towers, cable, and electrical equipment is not essential to integrity. Within a district, a 
transmission line's ability to convey integrity depends more on the corridor within which 
it travels than its historic fabric. The corridors, or rights-of-way, were indeed the first 
representations of the master grid. So long as the corridors exist in their original 
configurations, one will always be able to interpret the design of the master grid. In other 
words, one could interpret a corridor without transmission towers, but one would never 
find a transmission tower without a corridor. Obviously, the more historic fabric that 
exists, such as a succession of transmission towers, the easier it will be to interpret the 
line, and the higher its level of integrity will be. 
It is recommended that the transmission lines built by the BP A be evaluated 
within the parameters of a discontiguous district. This is the only way to preserve the 
interrelationships between the master grid components. The master grid was designed to 
function as a system and should be evaluated as a system. As such, every transmission 
line in the BPA system that was built between 1939 and 1945 is eligible for the National 
Register under Criterion A in the areas of industry, social history, and 
182 
politics/government; and under Criterion C in the area of architecture. Within the district, 
transmission lines can then be designated as a contributing or non-contributing resource 
based on their level of historic integrity. Because the relationships among the master grid 
properties has remained substantially unchanged since the period of significance, and 
because all the properties share historical and functional associations, it is expected that 
most of the fifty-five substations and ninety-one transmission lines on the master grid 
would be considered contributing resources in a discontiguous district nomination. 
Exceptions would include those properties whose integrity has been badly compromised 
by extensive alterations or modifications. 
183 
CHAPTER IV 
TREATMENT 
The primary focus of the Treatment chapter is to determine research and survey 
needs defined during the Historic Overview, Identification, and Evaluation phases of this 
study. In addition, treatment strategies and mitigation measures are presented for the 
property types identified in Chapter II: Identification. 
Survey Needs 
In 1986, Bonneville Power Administration initiated a survey and inventory of its 
historic resources to comply with a 1983 Memorandum of Agreement between the 
agency and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Under contract with a 
Cheney, Washington consulting firm, Archaeological and Historical Services, a 
discontiguous district nomination to the National Register of Historic Places was 
prepared in 1987 for fourteen substations and six transmission lines under Criterion A 
and C. Reasons for not including the remaining forty-one substations along the master 
grid were not detailed in the document. The nomination was approved by the Oregon and 
Washington State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO) but was held in suspension at the 
184 
request of the BP A. To this date, the properties identified in the nomination are not listed 
on the National Register. As a result of the nomination, however, the resources are 
included in a general SHPO data base in each state. The nomination, entitled "Bonneville 
Power Administration Master Grid Discontiguous Historic District," is located at the 
Oregon and Washington SHPOs. 
Subsequent to the completion of the National Register nomination, the BPA 
initiated a Programmatic Agreement with the State Historic Preservation Offices in 
Washington and Oregon for the contributing properties in the nominated historic district. 
In the Programmatic Agreement, the BPA agrees to "on a continuing basis, consult with 
the Oregon and Washington SHPOs to conduct studies ofBPA's facilities to ensure that 
appropriate historic properties have been identified and eligibility for inclusion in the 
National Register determined." To date, no additional surveys ofBPA facilities have 
been conducted since the 1987 inventory. 
Because more than ten years have passed since the last survey of BP A facilities, it 
is recommended that future survey needs focus on BP A properties that were not included 
in the previous survey because they were not old enough. Specifically, properties 
constructed after 1946 that are now over fifty years old, and properties that are newer 
than fifty years old but that might be eligible under exceptional merit. It is also 
recommended that the Oregon and Washington SHPOs nominate the master grid 
properties to the National Register. It is most preferable to nominate the master grid as a 
discontiguous district. The second most preferable option would be to nominate the 
185 
properties as part of a multiple property submission. In some cases, it might be 
appropriate to nominate master grid properties individually. This approach might better 
accommodate local community planning strategies. 
Research Needs 
• 
There is a distinct lack of information available regarding the architectural design 
of electrical substation control houses. Although it was not within the scope of this study 
to investigate the evolution and precedents of control house design, it is a topic worthy of 
additional research and would contribute greatly to our understanding of the BPA  
facilities. It would be useful to know how private and federal ownership influenced the 
design of the buildings, and what kind of design evolutions took place when large 
electrical equipment moved from interior spaces to outside switching yards. 
Another related topic that was not investigated was the level of WP A involvement 
in the construction of the master grid. Literature reviewed for the historical overview 
made brief mention of the BP A utilizing WP A labor to clear rights-of-way and build 
maintenance roads. It would be valuable to know if WP A crews took part in the 
construction of the actual facilities on the master grid. 
The most compelling research need, however, is the one for additional oral 
histories. Interviews with BP A engineers and architects involved in the design, and crews 
who actually helped build the master grid are primary sources for information that may 
186 
not be available anywhere else. 
Treatment Strategies and Mitigation Measures 
In some ways, the BP A properties are better protected because they are 
government owned. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) 
mandates that federal agencies "take into account" any undertaking that will effect the 
historic property, including sale, transfer of ownership, demolition, alterations and 
modifications. On the other hand, because these buildings and structures are still in use, 
they are more vulnerable to some of these effects than privately owned buildings. In fact, 
the biggest threat to the properties are routine maintenance and retrofitting procedures. 
Secondly, historic preservation has not always been a priority for federal agencies and is 
too often seen as primarily a compliance problem. This attitude can prompt an agency to 
seek compliance waivers from their stewardship responsibilities, or to meet bare 
minimum mitigation measures, with no attention to quality. And finally, because the 
buildings are federally owned, they are vulnerable to shifting political values, budget 
cuts, and agency restructuring. 134 
The BPA  has procedures in place to comply with Sections 106 and 110 of the 
134 Balancing Historic Preservation Needs with the Operation ofH ighly Technical or Scientific 
Facilities (Washington, D.C.: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 1991). 
187 
NHP A. The BPA  initiated their first Memorandum of Agreement in 1983 in response to 
concern that the agency's energy conservation programs would effect historic properties. 
In 1984, the BPA 's environmental manual addressed in detail procedures for compliance 
with the NHPA . Later, the BPA initiated a historic properties survey, a nomination to the 
National Register, and a Programmatic Agreement. In the early 1990s the BPA took steps 
to integrate the Section I 06 process into systems operations so effects to historic 
properties could be identified early in the planning stages of maintenance projects or 
modification programs. They also prepared specific maintenance guidelines for the 
treatment of the fourteen master grid properties determined eligible for the National 
Register by the 1987 nomination form. 
However, more can be done by the agency to further protect their historic 
resources. Mitigation measures could include: 
I. Locating and archiving copies of construction drawings for substations and 
transmission towers. It appears that original construction drawings of substations are 
located in flat files at individual substation control houses. An inventory should verify 
this. Copies should be made of these drawings and stored at the control houses for use by 
the operators. The originals should be consolidated and archived at a central site. If 
inventory results suggest that some drawings are missing, documentation drawings 
should be prepared of the quality equal to those mandated by the Historic American 
Engineering Record of the National Park Service. 
2. Locating and archiving historic photographs and movie footage of facilities. 
188 
The BPA has an extensive collection of historic photographs; however, only a small 
percentage of them are catalogued. Management of this photo collection should be 
improved. The addition of a computerized data base for cataloguing purposes to improve 
access to the collection should be a priority. 
3. Promoting a better understanding of the facilities by the public. The BP A has a 
I tradition of concern about its public image; it was an issue when considering the 
landscaping and architectural designs of its substation buildings, as well as with the 
placement of some of the earliest transmission lines. The public drives past substations 
every day; transmission lines following highway rights-of-way are such a common sight 
that they are barely noticed. Yet most people in the community have little understanding 
of the technological and historical implications of these structures. To learn about the 
BP A, one has to travel to Bonneville Dam, a structure that was not built or owned by the 
agency but shares with the BP A a strong association. Developing public information 
centers or sponsoring open houses at facilities that are in constant use is difficult, but not 
impossible. The BPA could consider opening some of their larger, manned substations 
like the J. D. Ross Substation for tours once a year, or develop public information kiosks 
or signboards at some of the other properties. 
4. Encourage a fuller understanding of Section 106 within the engineering and 
facilities management sectors of the agency. Documents reviewed suggest that BPA is 
aware of the problems associated with integrating the review process into early stages of 
planning and engineering, and that some measures have been taken to broaden awareness 
189 
of the NHPA within the agency. These measures need to be expanded to include inter-
agency seminars on a yearly basis and more frequent coverage of the BPA's role as 
stewards of our collective cultural heritage in the agency's monthly bulletin. There are 
still many people within the agency who have trouble seeing the historical and 
architectural value of substations and transmission towers, and will therefore be less 
• likely to be willing participants in important mitigation measures involving these 
property types . 
• 
190 
SUMMARY 
When this study began,.it was intended as a means to understand a charming little 
concrete building out on Highway 99W in Eugene, Oregon. It was clear that the building 
had something to do with the transmission of electricity, as it was nestled among giant 
electrical transmission towers. It was also clear that it had something to do with 
"Columbia River Power," that it belonged to the "Bonneville Power Administration," and 
that it was a "substation," because that is what the letters spelled on the front of the 
building. The questions posed at the beginning of the study included, what was the 
• function of a substation? How long has it been here? Who designed the building? 
Is this the only substation owned by the Bonneville Power Administration? What 
was the connection between this building and Columbia River power? What was the 
connection between this building and Bonneville Dam? 
A quick call to the Bonneville Power Administration (BP A) and a tour of the 
• building answered some of those initial questions. The primary function of a substation 
such as the one at Eugene was to step down voltages from incoming, high-voltage 
transmission lines so electricity could be distributed throughout the city at lower voltages 
more appropriate for domestic and commercial circuits. The substation had been there 
since 1939 and the building, which was known as a control house, was designed by a 
team of BPA  draftsmen and constructed in 1940. Originally, the electricity coursing 
191 
through the lines at the Eugene substation had been generated by the Corps of Engineers' 
Bonneville Dam on the Columbia River. The electricity traveled to Eugene through a 
series of high-voltage transmission lines built and maintained by the BPA . This study 
enlarged considerably when it became clear that this charming concrete building in 
Eugene was now part of a 15,000-circuit-mile system of transmission lines, including 
hundreds of substations. An initial literature review helped put the Eugene substation into 
a narrower context, that of the BPA 's original network of transmission lines designed in 
1935 and constructed between 1939 and 1945. Known as the "master grid," it was 
essentially a closed loop connecting Oregon's Bonneville Dam and Washington's Grand 
Coulee Dam with the highly populated areas of Portland and Seattle. Other major lines 
reached south to Eugene, Oregon and east to Spokane, Washington. The master grid 
included fifty-five substations and nearly 3,000 circuit miles of transmission lines. 
Sources consulted during the research process illuminated the extraordinary 
significance of the master grid system. Originally funded by New Deal appropriations, 
the grid quickly became a means for supplying cheap power to Pacific Northwest 
aluminum plants built by the government as the United States prepared to enter World 
War II. For a region that was heavily dependant on a timber and agricultural economy, 
and where only thirty percent of its farms were electrified by 1937, the influx of heavy 
industry brought dramatic changes. Not only did it substantially increase the quality of 
rural life, it literally transformed the regional economic base. Pacific Northwest plants, 
powered by electricity brought to market over the master grid, supplied one-third of the 
192 
aluminum used by the national defense program during World War II. In addition, the 
master grid supplied the plant at Hanford, Washington that produced the plutonium for 
the first atomic bomb. 
It has been established then, that the Eugene substation did not exist in a vacuum. 
It was part of a system represented by varying property types. The Identification chapter 
I of the study sought to find common threads and patterns for the property types along the 
master grid. Two major property types were identified: the electrical substation and the 
transmission line. Substations are comprised of several components, therefore, four 
subtypes were defined within that property type: control houses, untanking towers, oil 
houses, and switchyards. The Eugene control house turned out to be one of sixteen 
I concrete control houses on the master grid. Another five control houses were built of 
wood-frame construction, while two more were built with brick over steel frames. The 
master grid included six concrete untanking towers, eight oil houses (two of brick, six of 
concrete), and fifty-five switchyards, or, installations of outdoor electrical equipment 
present at every substation. Transmission lines on the master grid were originally 
supported by five primary designs of steel towers and two primary designs of wood 
structures. Descriptions within the Identification chapter detail the physical 
characteristics of all these property types and subtypes. 
The Evaluation chapter presented three frameworks within which master grid 
properties could be evaluated. The master grid could be nominated as a discontiguous 
district, as part of a multiple property submission, or individually. For the multiple 
193 
property and individual options, integrity thresholds were presented using specific 
examples from master grid properties. The substations were found to be eligible under 
Criteria A and C, and the transmission lines under Criterion A. Since the master grid was 
clearly designed, built, and operated as a system, it was ultimately recommended that the 
master grid properties be evaluated as a discontinguous district in order to preserve the 
interrelationships between the property types. Consequently, all the electrical substations 
and all the transmission lines built by the BP A between 1939 and 1945 were found to be 
eligible for the National Register under Criteria A and C. Properties within the district 
will be determined contributing or non-contributing based on their level of integrity. 
Finally, questions were posed regarding the physical preservation of these types 
of resources. How threatened are the buildings at each of the master grid substations? 
What are the chances the master grid transmission-line corridors could be moved, making 
it impossible to interpret the original configuration of the grid? As is the case with many 
industrial or engineering resources, most of the properties on the master grid are still in 
use for the specific functions for which they were built. This continuity of use is a 
• contributing factor in their preservation; as long as the properties can function as needed, 
they will remain. However, continuity of use, and the routine maintenance and repair 
inherent in that use, is also the one factor that poses the greatest threat to the integrity of 
the master grid properties, particularly the substations. The integrity of the transmission 
lines is less threatened, as the original master grid routes are integrally woven into the 
transmission networks of other private and public systems in the region; an arrangement 
194 
that started as the Northwest Power Pool in 1942. The routes will remain because they 
work. 
Because the master grid properties are owned by a federal agency, they are 
subject to Section 106 review. In addition, the BP A has in place an in-house preservation 
management plan to integrate the preservation of their historic resources into the early 
I stages of project planning. They also have a small cultural resources staff. However, 
owner agencies will continue to pose the biggest thre t to their own resources until they 
start seeing historic preservation as a planning priority instead of a compliance issue. The 
utilitarian nature of electrical substations and transmission lines makes it hard for some 
people to see them as historic resources that should be considered in the planning process 
I much as one would consider a 100-year-old Victorian-era mansion. Recommendations 
were made in the Treatment chapter for mitigation measures and preservation strategies. 
The importance of looking at the master grid properties as a system as opposed to 
individually cannot be underestimated. Within the system, the properties along the grid 
are highly interpretable. Transmission lines represent physical connections between the 
substations and Bonneville and Grand Coulee Dams; and between substations 
themselves. Clearly identifiable routes, and the location of the substations along them, 
tell a story about heavy industry, wartime plants, rural electrification, and a region rising 
out of the depths of the Depression. They tell a story about public power that started on 
the Colorado River with Hoover Dam, made its way to the Tennessee Valley, then west 
to the Columbia. They represent the determination of Franklin D. Roosevelt to 
195 
"encourage the wider use of that servant of the American people - electric power." '35The 
essence of the master grid lies in the threads of common purpose, integral functions, and 
thoughtful design that join its properties together. It is the hope of this author that this 
study will provide a means for understanding these properties as components in the larger 
picture of a unique regional history . 
• 
• 
135 Rosenman, quoted in Norwood, 26. 
196 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
Published Sources 
Balancing Historic Preservation Needs with the Operation ofH ighly Technical or 
Scientific Facilities (Washington, D.C.: Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation, 1991 ). 
Bonneville Power Administration. Annual Report oft he Bonneville Power 
Administration, 1938-1946. 
Craig, Lois A. The Federal Presence. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1984. 
I 
Creager, William P. and Joel D. Justin. Hydroelectric Handbook. New York: John Wiley 
and Sons, Inc., 1950. 
Dierdorff, John. How Edison's Lamp Helped Light the West. Portland: Pacific Power and 
Light Company, 1971. 
Goodwin, Doris Keams. No Ordinary Time. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994. 
Hay, Duncan. Hydroelectric Development in the United States, 1880-1940. Washington, 
D.C.: Edison Electric Institute, 1991. 
Hobday, Victor C. Sparks at the Grassroots. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee 
Press, 1969. 
Holbrook, Stewart H. The Columbia. New York: Rinehart, 1956. 
197 
Hughes, Thomas P. Networks ofP ower. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 
1983. 
Hunt, Inez and Wanetta W. Draper. Lightning in His Hand: The Life Story ofN ikola 
Tesla. Hawthorne, CA: Omni Publications, 1964. 
Kleinsorge, Paul L. The Boulder Canyon Project. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 
1941 . 
Lewitt, Richard. The New Deal and the West. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 
1984. 
Martin, Roscoe C., ed. TVA: The First Twenty Years. Knoxville: The University of 
Tennessee Press, 1956. 
Norwood, Gus. Columbia River Power for the People: A History ofP olicies oft he 
Bonneville Power Administration. Portland: Bonneville Power Administration, 
1980. 
O'Neill, John J. Prodigal Genius: The Life ofN ikola Tesla. New York: Ives Washburn, 
Inc., 1944. 
Pitzer, Paul C. Grand Coulee: Harnessing a Dream. Pullman: Washington State 
University Press, 1994 . 
• 
Reisner, Marc. Cadillac Desert. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc., 1993. 
Steinberg, William B. And Walter B. Ford. Electricity and Electronics: Basic. Chicago: 
American Technical Society, 1961. 
Tennessee Valley Authority. Annual Report oft he Tennessee Valley Authority. 
Washington, D.C.: USGPO, 1936. 
198 
Tennessee Valley Authority. Tennessee Valley Authority, 1933-193 7. Washington, D.C.: 
USGPO, 1937. 
Tollefson, Gene. BPA  and the Struggle for Power at Cost. Portland: Bonneville Power 
Administration, 1987. 
Willingham, William F. Water Power in the Wilderness: The History ofB onneville Lock 
and Dam. Portland: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, 1987. 
Unpublished Sources 
Beckham, Stephen Dow and Donald C. Jackson. "National Register of Historic Places 
Inventory Nomination Form: Bonneville Dam Historic District." Oregon State 
Historic Preservation Office, Salem, Oregon, n.d. 
Bonneville Power Administration. "Building Data: Control Houses." Bonneville Power 
Administration, Portland, Oregon, July 1990. 
Bonneville Power Administration. "BP A Definitions." Bonneville Power Administration, 
Portland, Oregon, 1975. 
Bonneville Power Administration. "Location of Substations, Radio Stations, Hydromets." 
Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon, 1989. 
Glaser, Leah S. "Historic American Engineering Record, Eastern Mining Area 
Transmission Line (The 115kV System), HAER No. AZ-6-B, Gila County, 
Arizona." Salt River Project, Phoenix, Arizona, June 1996. 
Hall, Michael. "Irrigation Development in Oregon's Upper Deschutes River Basin, 1871-
1957: A Historic Context Statement." Deschutes County Community 
Development Department, Bend, Oregon, August 1994. 
199 
Holstine, Craig. "Historic American Engineering Record, Bonneville Power 
Administration South Bank Substation, HAER No. OR-4, Multnomah County, 
Oregon." Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon, September 1987 . 
----. "National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form: Bonneville 
Power Administration Master Grid." Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, 
Salem, Oregon, 1987. 
Schaffer, Dr. Daniel. "National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form: 
Norris Dam." Tennessee State Historic Preservation Office, Knoxville, 
Tennessee, 19 81. 
Periodicals 
"ALCOAs New Northwest Plant to Use Bonneville Energy." Electrical West 84 (January 
1940): 64. 
"Bonneville Activities: New Administrator Named." Electrical West 83 (September 
1939): 64. 
"Bonneville Administration Active on Many Fronts." Electrical West 83 (August 1939): 
64. 
"Bonneville and Grand Coulee Transmission Line Complete." Electrical West 85 
(September 1940): 74. 
"Bonneville Begins to Build New Alcoa Power Substation." Electrical West 84 (June 
1940): 182. 
"Bonneville Bids Awarded To Contractors." Electrical West 83 (December 1939): 56. 
"Bonneville Contracts Awarded." Electrical West 81 (November 1938): 58. 
200 
"Bonneville Lines and Substations Disclosed." Electrical West 81 (December 1938): 53. 
"Bonneville to Survey Northwest Industry." Electrical West 83 (December 1939): 56. 
"Bonneville-Vancouver Line Work About Ready." Electrical West 81 (August 1938): 60. 
"Cascade Locks First Customer of Bonneville Project." Electrical West 83 (August 
1939): 64. 
"Engineer Urges Development." Electrical West 83 (September 1939): 64. 
Heston, Walter C. "Kilowatt-Hours Pooled for War." Electrical West 92 (March 1944): 
51. 
"KW. Year Rates Set For Bonneville; Linework Begun." Electrical West 81 (July 1938): 
44. 
"Master Power Plan for Northwest Announced." Electrical West 82 (February 1939): 62. 
"Plans for Bonneville Lines, Stations Revised." Electrical West 82 (January 1939): 52. 
"Portland G-E Signs First Major Contract for Bonneville Power." Electrical West 84 
• (January 1940): 64 . 
"Promote Industry with Bonneville Power, Says FPC.= Electrical West 81 (November 
1938): 58. 
Worth, Donald G. "J. D. Ross Substation Is Northwest's Largest." Electrical West 89 
(August 1942): 41. 
"1940 Bonneville Appropriation Totals $13,400,000." Electrical West 83 (July 1939): 54. 
201 
Newspapers 
"Bonneville Lines Over Roads Okeh." Salem Statesman. 26 August 1939. 
"Bonneville Line Speedup Talked." Oregon Journal, 20 October 1939. 
"Cities Eye Deals for Dam Power." The Oregonian, 27 October 1939. 
"Dam Line Buys Halt." The Oregonian, 28 October 1939. 
"Pepco Builds New Lines, Substations." Oregon Journal, 1 October 1939. 
"P.G.E. Awaits Dam Power." The Oregonian, 6, October 1939. 
"Puget Sound Power Lines To Start Soon." Portland, Oregon Sunday Welcome, 30 
August 1939. 
"Transmission and Generator Program Progresses." The Oregonian, 14 September 1939. 
"Wallace Comments on REA." REA News, 29 August 1939 . 
• "2,000 Working on Bonneville Power Lines." Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 24 October 1939 
"$400,000 Due Landowners." Tacoma News-Tribune, 29 August 1939. 
202 
Archival Collections 
Bonneville Power Administration Library. Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, 
Oregon. 
Bonneville Power Administration Photograph Collection. Bonneville Power 
Administration, Portland, Oregon. 
Oregon State Historic Preservation Office Property Files. Salem, Oregon.