DOCSLIB.ORG

Dams Within Jurisdiction of the State of California Listed Alphabetically by Name

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dams Within Jurisdiction of the State of California Listed Alphabetically by Name DAMS WITHIN JURISDICTION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA LISTED ALPHABETICALLY BY DAM NAME SEPTEMBER 2020 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES DIVISION OF SAFETY OF DAMS PHOTO USED WITH PERMISSION FROM THE EL DORADO IRRIGATION DISTRICT Data Definitions – Page i Dam Number Unique identification number used for inventorying dams in California based on the jurisdictional status of a dam. This number is assigned and used by the Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD). National Inventory of Dams Identification Number (National ID No.) Unique identification number used for inventorying dams in the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers’ National Inventory of Dams (NID) database. DSOD is responsible for assigning this number for dams in California. Dam Name The dam name as given by the owner, which may not be unique and may differ from the name of the lake. Owner Name The entity or person with legal responsibility for the dam. Owner Type Owners are organized into the following categories: • Associations (Home Owners Associations, etc.) • City, city agency, or city district • County, county agency, or county district • Individual owner/Private citizen (Owner Name not provided) • Park, sanitation, utility, or water district • Private company, corporation, LLC, or partnership • Private trusts and estates • State Agency • Water agency or authority Dam Height Vertical distance from the downstream toe of the dam to the dam crest (measured in feet). Crest Length Distance measured along the dam crest from one abutment to the other (measured in feet). Reservoir Capacity Maximum amount of water that the dam can impound (measured in acre-feet). Dam Type A four letter code describing and categorizing the principal material, style, or construction method of the dam: • CORA Constant Radius Arch • MULA Multiple Arch • CRIB Crib Wall • RECT Reinforced Concrete Tank • ERRK Earth and Rock • ROCK Rock Fill • ERTH Earthen Embankment • SLBT Slab and Buttress • FLBT Flashboard and Buttress • VARA Variable Radius Arch • GRAV Gravity • INFL Inflatable • HYDF Hydraulic Fill • RCC Roller Compacted Concrete Certified Status The certified status of a dam is one of three statuses: Status Description Jurisdictional sized dams that may safely impound water to the elevation specified on the Certified Certificate of Approval. Jurisdictional sized dams without water impounding capabilities under reasonable Certified/Inop foreseeable conditions, taking into account the size of the drainage area. Jurisdictional sized dams that operate without a Certificate of Approval. Generally, these Not Certified dams are in the process of becoming certified, altered to less than jurisdictional size, or being removed. Data Definitions – Page ii Downstream Hazard The downstream hazard is based solely on potential downstream impacts to life and property should the dam fail when operating with a full reservoir. This hazard is not related to the condition of the dam or its appurtenant structures. The definitions for downstream hazard are borrowed from the Federal Guidelines for Inundation Mapping of Flood Risks Associated with Dam Incidents and Failures (FEMA P-946, July 2013). FEMA categorizes the downstream hazard potential into three categories in increasing severity: Low, Significant, and High. DSOD adds a fourth category of “Extremely High.” Downstream Hazard Potential Downstream Impacts to Life and Property Potential Classification No probable loss of human life and low economic and environmental losses. Low Losses are expected to be principally limited to the owner’s property. No probable loss of human life but can cause economic loss, environmental Significant damage, impacts to critical facilities, or other significant impacts. High Expected to cause loss of at least one human life. Expected to cause considerable loss of human life or would result in an Extremely High inundation area with a population of 1,000 or more. Condition Assessment California DSOD uses NID’s condition rating definitions, with additional criteria, as a guideline in assigning condition assessments. National Inventory of Dams California DSOD Rating Definitions Additional Criteria No existing or potential dam safety deficiencies are recognized. Acceptable performance is expected under all loading conditions (static, Satisfactory None hydrologic, seismic) in accordance with the applicable regulatory criteria or tolerable risk guidelines • Dam has a long-standing deficiency that is No existing dam safety deficiencies are not being addressed in a timely manner recognized for normal loading conditions. Rare • Dam is not certified and its safety is under Fair or extreme hydrologic and/or seismic events evaluation may result in a dam safety deficiency. Risk • Dam is restricted and operation of the may be in the range to take further action reservoir at the lower level does not mitigate the deficiency A dam safety deficiency is recognized for loading conditions that may realistically occur. Remedial action is necessary. A poor rating Dam has multiple deficiencies or a significant Poor may also be used when uncertainties exist as deficiency that requires extensive remedial to critical analysis parameters that identify a work potential dam safety deficiency. Further investigations and studies are necessary A dam safety deficiency is recognized that Unsatisfactory requires immediate or emergency remedial None action for problem resolution The dam has not been inspected, is not under Not Rated State jurisdiction, or has been inspected but, None for whatever reason, has not been rated Reservoir Restrictions DSOD may direct or order an owner to operate the reservoir to a specified water surface elevation level that is lower than the maximum storage level. In addition, owners may self-impose a restriction as a result of an owner-initiated study that identifies a dam safety issue. Reservoir restrictions are typically imposed for deficiencies of the dam, spillway, low-level outlet, or other appurtenances with respect to dam safety. Jurisdictional Dams Listed Alphabetically by Dam Name Page 1 of 104 Dam Dam Reservoir Certified Condition Dam Name Owner Name County Number Height Capacity Status Assessment National Crest Dam Downstream Reservoir Year Latitude Longitude Owner Type ID No. Length Type Hazard Restrictions Built 95-4 #1 Forebay Pacific Gas and Electric Company 19 69 Certified Satisfactory Madera CA00338 37.16 -119.49 Private company, corporation, LLC, partnership 1,572 ERTH Low No 1896 95-12 #2 Reservoir Pacific Gas and Electric Company 30 168 Certified Satisfactory Madera CA00342 37.24 -119.52 Private company, corporation, LLC, partnership 113 CORA High No 1912 95-6 #3 Forebay Pacific Gas and Electric Company 39 20 Certified Fair Madera CA00339 37.25 -119.53 Private company, corporation, LLC, partnership 450 ERTH Low Yes 1906 Count: 3 Jurisdictional Dams Listed Alphabetically by Dam Name Page 2 of 104 Dam Dam Reservoir Certified Condition Dam Name Owner Name County Number Height Capacity Status Assessment National Crest Dam Downstream Reservoir Year Latitude Longitude Owner Type ID No. Length Type Hazard Restrictions Built 1049-0 10 MG Walteria City of Torrance 40 31 Certified Satisfactory Los Angeles CA00881 33.79 -118.34 City, city agency, or city district 1,022 RECT High No 1953 1049-2 18 MG Walteria City of Torrance 31 58 Certified Satisfactory Los Angeles CA01193 33.79 -118.34 City, city agency, or city district 1,287 RECT High No 1987 Count: 2 Jurisdictional Dams Listed Alphabetically by Dam Name Page 3 of 104 Dam Dam Reservoir Certified Condition Dam Name Owner Name County Number Height Capacity Status Assessment National Crest Dam Downstream Reservoir Year Latitude Longitude Owner Type ID No. Length Type Hazard Restrictions Built 1087-0 30 MG Central Reservoir City of Brea 30 92 Certified Satisfactory Orange CA01113 33.93 -117.91 City, city agency, or city district 1,596 ERTH High No 1924 Count: 1 Jurisdictional Dams Listed Alphabetically by Dam Name Page 4 of 104 Dam Dam Reservoir Certified Condition Dam Name Owner Name County Number Height Capacity Status Assessment National Crest Dam Downstream Reservoir Year Latitude Longitude Owner Type ID No. Length Type Hazard Restrictions Built 1836-0 4-S Ranch Reclamation Reservoir Olivenhain Municipal Water District 22 410 Certified Satisfactory San Diego CA01446 33.01 -117.11 Park, sanitation, utility, or water district 1,270 ERTH High No 2000 Count: 1 Jurisdictional Dams Listed Alphabetically by Dam Name Page 5 of 104 Dam Dam Reservoir Certified Condition Dam Name Owner Name County Number Height Capacity Status Assessment National Crest Dam Downstream Reservoir Year Latitude Longitude Owner Type ID No. Length Type Hazard Restrictions Built 1110-2 A and C Private Entity 13 800 Certified Satisfactory Modoc CA00915 41.78 -120.80 Individual owner 1,200 ERTH Low No 1923 346-0 A. L. Chaffin Estate of George R. Chaffin 65 450 Certified Satisfactory Butte CA00552 39.60 -121.59 Private trusts and estates 475 ERTH Low No 1957 3462-2 Abrams Private Entity 37 110 Certified Satisfactory El Dorado CA01065 38.85 -120.98 Individual owner 285 ERTH Low No 1950 1011-0 Adobe Creek Lake County Watershed Protection District 36 695 Certified Satisfactory Lake CA00827 38.94 -122.89 Park, sanitation, utility, or water district 1,280 ERTH High No 1962 2463-0 Aeree Pilot Hill Estates Homeowner Association 35 90 Certified Satisfactory El Dorado CA01048 38.84 -121.03 Associations 905 ERTH Significant No 1951 104-38 Agnew Lake Southern California Edison 30 810 Certified Satisfactory Mono CA00454 37.76
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Web-Book Catalog 2021-05-10
    Lehigh Gap Nature Center Library Book Catalog Title Year Author(s) Publisher Keywords Keywords Catalog No. National Geographic, Washington, 100 best pictures. 2001 National Geogrpahic. Photographs. 779 DC Miller, Jeffrey C., and Daniel H. 100 butterflies and moths : portraits from Belknap Press of Harvard University Butterflies - Costa 2007 Janzen, and Winifred Moths - Costa Rica 595.789097286 th tropical forests of Costa Rica Press, Cambridge, MA rica Hallwachs. Miller, Jeffery C., and Daniel H. 100 caterpillars : portraits from the Belknap Press of Harvard University Caterpillars - Costa 2006 Janzen, and Winifred 595.781 tropical forests of Costa Rica Press, Cambridge, MA Rica Hallwachs 100 plants to feed the bees : provide a 2016 Lee-Mader, Eric, et al. Storey Publishing, North Adams, MA Bees. Pollination 635.9676 healthy habitat to help pollinators thrive Klots, Alexander B., and Elsie 1001 answers to questions about insects 1961 Grosset & Dunlap, New York, NY Insects 595.7 B. Klots Cruickshank, Allan D., and Dodd, Mead, and Company, New 1001 questions answered about birds 1958 Birds 598 Helen Cruickshank York, NY Currie, Philip J. and Eva B. 101 Questions About Dinosaurs 1996 Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, NY Reptiles Dinosaurs 567.91 Koppelhus Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, N. 101 Questions About the Seashore 1997 Barlowe, Sy Seashore 577.51 Y. Gardening to attract 101 ways to help birds 2006 Erickson, Laura. Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, PA Birds - Conservation. 639.978 birds. Sharpe, Grant, and Wenonah University of Wisconsin Press, 101 wildflowers of Arcadia National Park 1963 581.769909741 Sharpe Madison, WI 1300 real and fanciful animals : from Animals, Mythical in 1998 Merian, Matthaus Dover Publications, Mineola, NY Animals in art 769.432 seventeenth-century engravings.
    [Show full text]
  • COURT of CLAIMS of THE
    REPORTS OF Cases Argued and Determined IN THE COURT of CLAIMS OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS VOLUME 39 Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion for: Fiscal Year 1987 - July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 1988 (Printed by authority of the State of Illinois) (65655--300-7/88) PREFACE The opinions of the Court of Claims reported herein are published by authority of the provisions of Section 18 of the Court of Claims Act, Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 37, par. 439.1 et seq. The Court of Claims has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the following matters: (a) all claims against the State of Illinois founded upon any law of the State, or upon an regulation thereunder by an executive or administrative ofgcer or agency, other than claims arising under the Workers’ Compensation Act or the Workers’ Occupational Diseases Act, or claims for certain expenses in civil litigation, (b) all claims against the State founded upon any contract entered into with the State, (c) all claims against the State for time unjustly served in prisons of this State where the persons imprisoned shall receive a pardon from the Governor stating that such pardon is issued on the grounds of innocence of the crime for which they were imprisoned, (d) all claims against the State in cases sounding in tort, (e) all claims for recoupment made by the State against any Claimant, (f) certain claims to compel replacement of a lost or destroyed State warrant, (g) certain claims based on torts by escaped inmates of State institutions, (h) certain representation and indemnification cases, (i) all claims pursuant to the Law Enforcement Officers, Civil Defense Workers, Civil Air Patrol Members, Paramedics and Firemen Compensation Act, (j) all claims pursuant to the Illinois National Guardsman’s and Naval Militiaman’s Compensation Act, and (k) all claims pursuant to the Crime Victims Compensation Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining's Toxic Legacy
    Mining’s Toxic Legacy An Initiative to Address Mining Toxins in the Sierra Nevada Acknowledgements _____________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Sierra Fund would like to thank Dr. Carrie Monohan, contributing author of this report, and Kyle Leach, lead technical advisor. Thanks as well to Dr. William M. Murphy, Dr. Dave Brown, and Professor Becky Damazo, RN, of California State University, Chico for their research into the human and environmental impacts of mining toxins, and to the graduate students who assisted them: Lowren C. McAmis and Melinda Montano, Gina Grayson, James Guichard, and Yvette Irons. Thanks to Malaika Bishop and Roberto Garcia for their hard work to engage community partners in this effort, and Terry Lowe and Anna Reynolds Trabucco for their editorial expertise. For production of this report we recognize Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin of The Sierra Fund for conceiving of and coordinating the overall Initiative and writing substantial portions of the document, Kerry Morse for editing, and Emily Rivenes for design and formatting. Many others were vital to the development of the report, especially the members of our Gold Ribbon Panel and our Government Science and Policy Advisors. We also thank the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment and The Abandoned Mine Alliance who provided funding to pay for a portion of the expenses in printing this report. Special thanks to Rebecca Solnit, whose article “Winged Mercury and
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Results of Charitable Solicitation Campaigns Conducted by Commercial Fundraisers in Calendar Year 2016
    SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF CHARITABLE SOLICITATION CAMPAIGNS CONDUCTED BY COMMERCIAL FUNDRAISERS IN CALENDAR YEAR 2016 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General State of California SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF CHARITABLE SOLICITATION BY COMMERCIAL FUNDRAISERS FOR YEAR ENDING 2016 (Government Code § 12599) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES SUMMARY 1 - 5 TABLE SUBJECT/TITLE 1 ALPHABETICAL LISTING BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION 2 LISTING BY PERCENT TO CHARITY IN DESCENDING ORDER 3 THRIFT STORE OPERATIONS – GOODS PURCHASED FROM CHARITY 4 THRIFT STORE OPERATIONS – MANAGEMENT FEE/COMMISSION 5 VEHICLE DONATIONS – ALPHABETICAL BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION 6 COMMERCIAL COVENTURERS – ALPHABETICAL BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION California Department of Justice November 2017 SUMMARY Every year Californians provide generous support to a wide array of charities, either directly or through commercial fundraisers that charities hire to solicit donations on their behalf. The term “commercial fundraiser” refers generally to a person or corporation that contracts with a charity, for compensation, to solicit funds. The commercial fundraiser charges either a flat fee or a percentage of the donations collected. By law, commercial fundraisers are required to register with the Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts and file a Notice of Intent before soliciting donations in California. For each solicitation campaign conducted, commercial fundraisers are then required to file annual financial disclosure reports that set forth total revenue and expenses incurred. This Summary Report is prepared from self-reported information contained in the annual financial disclosure reports filed by commercial fundraisers for 2016 and includes statistics for donations of both cash and used personal property (such as clothing and vehicles) for the benefit of charity. Only information from complete financial reports received before October 20, 2017 is included.
    [Show full text]
  • North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records: Finding Aid
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf2f59n5kg No online items North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records: Finding Aid Processed by The Huntington Library staff; supplementary encoding and revision supplied by Xiuzhi Zhou and Diann Benti. The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens Manuscripts Department 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2129 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org © 2000 The Huntington Library. All rights reserved. North Bloomfield Gravel Mining mssHM 51035-51130 1 Co. Records: Finding Aid Overview of the Collection Title: North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records Dates (inclusive): 1890-1891 Collection Number: mssHM 51035-51130 Creator: North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company. Extent: 96 pieces in 1 box Repository: The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens. Manuscripts Department 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2129 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org Abstract: This collection consists primarily of letters from the secretary to the president of the North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company of Nevada County, California, in 1890-1891 related to the company and hydraulic mining. Language: English. Access Open to qualified researchers by prior application through the Reader Services Department. For more information, contact Reader Services. Publication Rights The Huntington Library does not require that researchers request permission to quote from or publish images of this material, nor does it charge fees for such activities. The responsibility for identifying the copyright holder, if there is one, and obtaining necessary permissions rests with the researcher. Preferred Citation [Identification of item]. North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co.
    [Show full text]
  • March 21–25, 2016
    FORTY-SEVENTH LUNAR AND PLANETARY SCIENCE CONFERENCE PROGRAM OF TECHNICAL SESSIONS MARCH 21–25, 2016 The Woodlands Waterway Marriott Hotel and Convention Center The Woodlands, Texas INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT Universities Space Research Association Lunar and Planetary Institute National Aeronautics and Space Administration CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS Stephen Mackwell, Lunar and Planetary Institute Eileen Stansbery, NASA Johnson Space Center PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIRS David Draper, NASA Johnson Space Center Walter Kiefer, Lunar and Planetary Institute PROGRAM COMMITTEE P. Doug Archer, NASA Johnson Space Center Nicolas LeCorvec, Lunar and Planetary Institute Katherine Bermingham, University of Maryland Yo Matsubara, Smithsonian Institute Janice Bishop, SETI and NASA Ames Research Center Francis McCubbin, NASA Johnson Space Center Jeremy Boyce, University of California, Los Angeles Andrew Needham, Carnegie Institution of Washington Lisa Danielson, NASA Johnson Space Center Lan-Anh Nguyen, NASA Johnson Space Center Deepak Dhingra, University of Idaho Paul Niles, NASA Johnson Space Center Stephen Elardo, Carnegie Institution of Washington Dorothy Oehler, NASA Johnson Space Center Marc Fries, NASA Johnson Space Center D. Alex Patthoff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Cyrena Goodrich, Lunar and Planetary Institute Elizabeth Rampe, Aerodyne Industries, Jacobs JETS at John Gruener, NASA Johnson Space Center NASA Johnson Space Center Justin Hagerty, U.S. Geological Survey Carol Raymond, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Lindsay Hays, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Paul Schenk,
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Mitigation Plan
    Flood Mitigation Plan (June 2008) CITY OF NOVATO FLOOD MITIGATION PLAN CITY OF NOVATO FLOOD MITIGATION PLAN ........................................................ 2 SECTION I - PLANNING PROCESS ......................................................................... 17 Part 1 - Process Organization .................................................................................................................................... 17 Planning Process Documentation ............................................................................................................................. 17 Jurisdictional Participation ........................................................................................................................................ 17 Process Description ................................................................................................................................................... 18 Part 2 - Public Outreach ............................................................................................................................................. 22 Flood Mitigation Planning Committee .................................................................................................................... 22 Public Participation Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 48 Results and Recommendations from Community & Stakeholders ........................................................................ 48
    [Show full text]
  • (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California
    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration TABLE OF CONTENTS Forward p. 3 Introduction p. 5 Methods p. 7 Determining Historical Distribution and Current Status; Information Presented in the Report; Table Headings and Terms Defined; Mapping Methods Contra Costa County p. 13 Marsh Creek Watershed; Mt. Diablo Creek Watershed; Walnut Creek Watershed; Rodeo Creek Watershed; Refugio Creek Watershed; Pinole Creek Watershed; Garrity Creek Watershed; San Pablo Creek Watershed; Wildcat Creek Watershed; Cerrito Creek Watershed Contra Costa County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 39 Alameda County p. 45 Codornices Creek Watershed; Strawberry Creek Watershed; Temescal Creek Watershed; Glen Echo Creek Watershed; Sausal Creek Watershed; Peralta Creek Watershed; Lion Creek Watershed; Arroyo Viejo Watershed; San Leandro Creek Watershed; San Lorenzo Creek Watershed; Alameda Creek Watershed; Laguna Creek (Arroyo de la Laguna) Watershed Alameda County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 91 Santa Clara County p. 97 Coyote Creek Watershed; Guadalupe River Watershed; San Tomas Aquino Creek/Saratoga Creek Watershed; Calabazas Creek Watershed; Stevens Creek Watershed; Permanente Creek Watershed; Adobe Creek Watershed; Matadero Creek/Barron Creek Watershed Santa Clara County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    Mining’s Toxic Legacy An Initiative to Address Mining Toxins in the Sierra Nevada Executive Summary Published March 2008 by The Sierra Fund The Sierra Fund’s Initiative to address legacy mining pollution has been made possible by the support of: The California Endowment The Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund and True North Foundation Executive Summary ________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Is human health, water quality or the environment at risk from historic mining toxins? The Gold Rush changed California demographics as indigenous people were dislocated and mining towns appeared and disappeared across the Sierra Nevada Mountains. A less recognized consequence of the California Gold Rush was the massive environmental destruction that took place, which still plagues the Sierra today. Working with partners from state, federal, and tribal governments as well as from the academic, health, and environmental communities, The Sierra Fund’s report “Mining’s Toxic Legacy” is the first comprehen- sive evaluation of what happened during the Gold Rush, including: the cultural, health, and environmental impacts of this era; the obstacles that lie in the way of addressing these impacts; and a strategic plan for taking action on the longest neglected environmental problem in the Golden State of California. The California Gold Rush clawed out of the foothills of the Sierra Nevada considerable gold—93 tons or 2.7 million troy ounces in the peak year of 1853 alone... In the course of doing so, everything in the region and much downstream was ravaged. Wildlife was decimated. Trees were cut down to burn for domestic and industrial purposes and to build the huge mining infrastructure that was firmly in place by the 1870s.
    [Show full text]
  • The Very Forward CASTOR Calorimeter of the CMS Experiment
    EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN) CERN-EP-2020-180 2021/02/11 CMS-PRF-18-002 The very forward CASTOR calorimeter of the CMS experiment The CMS Collaboration* Abstract The physics motivation, detector design, triggers, calibration, alignment, simulation, and overall performance of the very forward CASTOR calorimeter of the CMS exper- iment are reviewed. The CASTOR Cherenkov sampling calorimeter is located very close to the LHC beam line, at a radial distance of about 1 cm from the beam pipe, and at 14.4 m from the CMS interaction point, covering the pseudorapidity range of −6.6 < h < −5.2. It was designed to withstand high ambient radiation and strong magnetic fields. The performance of the detector in measurements of forward energy density, jets, and processes characterized by rapidity gaps, is reviewed using data collected in proton and nuclear collisions at the LHC. ”Published in the Journal of Instrumentation as doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/02/P02010.” arXiv:2011.01185v2 [physics.ins-det] 10 Feb 2021 © 2021 CERN for the benefit of the CMS Collaboration. CC-BY-4.0 license *See Appendix A for the list of collaboration members Contents 1 Contents 1 Introduction . .1 2 Physics motivation . .3 2.1 Forward physics in proton-proton collisions . .3 2.2 Ultrahigh-energy cosmic ray air showers . .5 2.3 Proton-nucleus and nucleus-nucleus collisions . .5 3 Detector design . .6 4 Triggers and operation . .9 5 Event reconstruction and calibration . 12 5.1 Noise and baseline . 13 5.2 Gain correction factors . 15 5.3 Channel-by-channel intercalibration .
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon and Steelhead in Your Creek: Restoration and Management of Anadromous Fish in Bay Area Watersheds
    Salmon and Steelhead in Your Creek: Restoration and Management of Anadromous Fish in Bay Area Watersheds Presentation Summaries (in order of appearance) Gary Stern, National Marine Fisheries Service Steelhead as Threatened Species: The Status of the Central Coast Evolutionarily Significant Unit Under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), a "species" is defined to include "any distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature." To assist NMFS apply this definition of "species to Pacific salmon stocks, an interim policy established the use of "evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) of the biological species. A population must satisfy two criteria to be considered an ESU: (1) it must be reproductively isolated from other conspecific population units; and (2) it must represent an important component in the evolutionary legacy of the biological species. The listing of steelhead as "threatened" in the California Central Coast resulted from a petition filed in February 1994. In response to the petition, NMFS conducted a West Coast-wide status review to identify all steelhead ESU’s in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and California. There were two tiers to the review: (1) regional expertise was used to determine the status of all streams with regard to steelhead; and (2) a biological review team was assembled to review the regional team's data. Evidence used in this process included data on precipitation, annual hydrographs, monthly peak flows, water temperatures, native freshwater fauna, major vegetation types, ocean upwelling, and smolt and adult out-migration (i.e., size, age and time of migration). Steelhead within San Francisco Bay tributaries are included in the Central California Coast ESU.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment for Partial Funding for the Sears Point Restoration Project
    Environmental Assessment For Partial Funding for the Sears Point Restoration Project September 2014 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Need 1.2 Public Participation 1.3 Organization of this EA 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION 2.1 Alternatives Considered 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1 Protected and Special-Status Species 3.1.1 Special Status Wildlife 3.1.2 Special Status Fish 3.2.3 Special Status Plants 3.2 Climate 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 4.1.1 Special Status Wildlife 4.1.2 Special Status Fish 4.1.3 Special Status Plants 4.2.1 Climate 5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING 6.0 CUMULATIVE AND INDIRECT IMPACTS 6.1 Baseline Conditions for Cumulative Impacts Analysis 6.2 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions 6.3 Resources Discussed and Geographic Study Areas 6.4 Approach to Cumulative Impact Analysis 7.0 AGENCY CONSULTATIONS 2 I. Executive Summary Ducks Unlimited requested funding through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Community-based Restoration Program (CRP) for restoration of a 960 acre site that is part of Sears Point Wetlands and Watershed Restoration Project . The Sonoma Land Trust (SLT), a non-profit organization, purchased the 2,327-acre properties collectively known as Sears Point in 2004 and 2005, and is the recipient of a number of grants for its restoration. In April of 2012, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the STL and the California Department of Fish and Game published a final Sears Point Wetland and Watershed Restoration Project Environmental Impact Report (SPWWRP) / Environmental Impact Statement that assess the environmental impacts of restoration of Sears Point (State Clearinghouse #2007102037).
    [Show full text]