DOCSLIB.ORG

4.2 Delta Hydrology and Water Quality (PDF)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
4.2 Delta Hydrology and Water Quality (PDF) 4.2 Delta Hydrology and Water Quality 4.2 Delta Hydrology and Water Quality This section describes the existing surface water hydrology, supply, management, and water quality conditions of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (the Delta), as well as the existing conditions within the Sacramento River downstream of Lake Shasta. The section also discusses the regulatory setting, including water rights and water service contracts, and provides an analysis of potential water supply, water quality, and water level impacts resulting from implementation of the project alternatives. 4.2.1 Affected Environment Regulatory Setting Federal Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into “waters of the United States.” The act specifies a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to sharply reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. Section 303(d) requires states, territories, and authorized tribes to develop a list of water-quality limited segments of rivers and other water bodies under their jurisdiction. These waters on the list do not meet water quality standards, even after point sources of pollution have installed the minimum required levels of pollution control technology. The law requires that these jurisdictions establish priority rankings for waters on the list and develop action plans, called Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL), to improve water quality. Delta waterways are included in the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (CVRWQCB) list of 303(d) impaired waterways for the following constituents: chlorpyrifos, DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane), diazinon, exotic species, group A pesticides, mercury, unknown toxicity, organic enrichment/low dissolved oxygen (Stockton Ship Canal), and electrical conductivity(water export area). Of these constituents, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved TMDLs for the following: organic enrichment/low dissolved oxygen. TMDLs for other constituents remain under planning or development. Section 401 requires every applicant for a federal permit or license for any activity that may result in a discharge to a water body to obtain a water quality certification that the proposed activity will comply with applicable water quality standards. Section 402 regulates point- and nonpoint-source discharges to surface waters through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) oversees the NPDES program, which is administered by the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). The NPDES program provides for both general permits (those that cover a number of similar or related activities) and individual permits. Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion Project 4.2-1 February 2009 Draft EIS/EIR Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion Project Section 404 of the Clean Water Act establishes a program to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the U.S., including some wetlands. Activities in waters of the U.S. that are regulated under this program include fills for development, water resource projects (e.g., dams and levees), infrastructure development (e.g., highways and airports), and conversion of wetlands to uplands for farming and forestry. Under Section 404(b)(1) of the Act, the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) must be identified from among those alternatives considered in detail in the EIS/EIR. If a federal agency is a partner in the implementation of a project, then the Proposed Action/Project must be recognized as the LEDPA. A 404(b)(1) evaluation will be included with the Final EIS/EIR pursuant to the Act to provide required information on the potential effects of the proposed action/project regarding water quality and rationale in support of identifying the LEDPA. This Draft EIS/EIR will be reviewed by concerned public and stakeholders with the opportunity to provide comments on the alternatives and documentation before making determinations of the Proposed Action/Project, LEDPA, environmentally preferred alternative, and environmentally superior alternative in the Final EIS/EIR. Construction of the proposed project, including construction of the proposed intake facilities, pipelines, expanded reservoir, appurtenant facilities, and other associated facilities, would be subject to regulation under Sections 401, 402, and/or 404 of the Clean Water Act. Rivers and Harbors Act The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regulates the construction of any structure or work within navigable waters under Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. The USACE regulates the construction of wharves, breakwaters, and jetties; bank protection and stabilization projects; permanent mooring structures, vessels, and marinas; intake and outfall pipes; canals; boat ramps; aids to navigation; and other modifications affecting the course, location, condition, and capacity of navigable waters. The USACE jurisdiction under the Rivers and Harbors Act is limited to “navigable waters,” or waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark that may be used for interstate or foreign commerce. The USACE must consider the following criteria when evaluating projects within navigable waters: (1) the public and private need for the project; (2) reasonable alternative locations and methods; and (3) the beneficial and detrimental effects on the public and private uses to which the area is suited. The Rivers and Harbors Act would be applicable to the new Delta Intake and Pump Station. Central Valley Project Improvement Act The Central Valley Project Improvement Act (1992) amended the previous authorizations of the Central Valley Project (CVP) to include fish and wildlife protection, restoration, and mitigation as project purposes having equal priority with irrigation and domestic uses, and fish and wildlife enhancement as a project purpose equal in priority to power generation. It is described in Section 2.3.1. The CVP Improvement Act is relevant to all aspects of the project alternatives that would result in diversion of CVP water from the Delta, or use of CVP water to enhance fish and wildlife. Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion Project 4.2-2 February 2009 Draft EIS/EIR 4.2 Delta Hydrology and Water Quality Safe Drinking Water Act The Safe Drinking Water Act was established to protect the quality of waters actually or potentially designated for drinking use, whether from aboveground or underground sources. Contaminants of concern in a domestic water supply are those that either pose a health threat or in some way alter the aesthetic acceptability of the water. Primary and secondary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) are established for numerous constituents of concern including turbidity, total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride (Cl), fluoride, nitrate, priority pollutant metals and organic compounds, selenium, bromate, trihalomethane and haloacetic acid precursors, radioactive compounds, and gross radioactivity. All domestic water suppliers must follow the requirements established by this Act and its associated amendments. Surface Water Treatment Rule The Federal Surface Water Treatment Rule is implemented by the California Surface Water Treatment Rule, which satisfies three specific requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act by: (1) establishing criteria for determining when filtration is required for surface waters; (2) defining minimum levels of disinfection for surface waters; and (3) addressing Cryptosporidium spp., Giardia lamblia, Legionella spp., E. Coli, viruses, turbidity, and heterotrophic plate count by setting a treatment technique. A treatment technique is set in lieu of an MCL for a contaminant when it is not technologically or economically feasible to measure that contaminant. The Surface Water Treatment Rule applies to all drinking water supply activities in California; its implementation is overseen by the California Department of Health Services (DHS). Stage 1 and Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and Long-Term 1 and Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule The Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule established maximum residual disinfectant level goals and maximum residual disinfectant levels for chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide. It also establishes MCL goals and MCLs for trihalomethanes, five haloacetic acids, chlorite, and bromate. The primary purpose of the Long-Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule is to improve microbial control, especially for Cryptosporidium. Water systems that use surface water and conventional filtration treatment are required to remove specified percentages of organic materials, measured as total organic carbon (TOC), which may react with disinfectants to form disinfection byproducts (DBPs). Removal is to be achieved through a treatment technique (e.g., enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening), unless the system meets alternative criteria. The U.S. EPA adopted the Stage 2 Microbial and Disinfection Byproducts Rules in January 2006. The Rules include both the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. These rules include revised and new requirements, such as water systems having to meet DBP MCLs at each monitoring site in the distribution system, rather than averaging multiple sites. The rules also contain
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NOTICE of PREPARATION Waterfix EIR for WSC Amendments
    July 13, 2018 NOTICE OF PREPARATION Environmental Impact Report For the Proposed SWP Water Supply Contract Amendments for Water Management and California WaterFix July 13, 2018 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Department of Water Resources (DWR) will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed State Water Project Water Supply Contract Amendments for Water Management and California WaterFix (proposed project). As more fully discussed below, this proposed project includes amending certain provisions of the State Water Resources Development System (SWRDS) Water Supply Contracts (Contracts). SWRDS (defined in Water Code Section 12931), or more commonly referred to as the State Water Project (SWP), was enacted into law in the Burns-Porter Act, passed by the Legislature in 1959 and approved by the voters in 1960. DWR constructed and currently operates and maintains the SWP, a system of storage and conveyance facilities that 1 provide water to 29 State Water Contractors known as the Public Water Agencies (PWAs). These PWAs include local water agencies and districts legislatively enabled to serve irrigation, municipal and industrial water supply customers or retail water supply 1 The State Water Project Public Water Agencies include Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7), Alameda County Water District, Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency, Castaic Lake Water Agency, City of Yuba City, Coachella Valley Water District, County
    [Show full text]
  • Simulation of Flows and Water Quality in the California Aqueduct Using DSM2
    Simulation of Flows and Water Quality in the California Aqueduct Using DSM2 Siqing Liu, Bob Suits DWR, Bay Delta Office, Modeling Support Branch 2011 CWEMF Annual Meeting, February 28 –March 2 1 Topics • Project objectives • Aqueduct System modeled • Assumptions / issues with modeling • Model results –Flows / Storage, EC, Bromide 2 Objectives Simulate Aqueduct hydraulics and water quality • 1990 – 2010 period • DSM2 Aqueduct version calibrated by CH2Mhill Achieve 1st step in enabling forecasting Physical System Canals simulated • South Bay Aqueduct (42 miles) • California Aqueduct (444 miles) • East Branch to Silverwood Lake • West Branch to Pyramid Lake (40 miles) • Delta‐Mendota Canal (117 miles) 4 Physical System, cont Pumping Plants Banks Pumping Plant Buena Vista (Check 30) Jones Pumping Plant Teerink (Check 35) South Bay Chrisman (Check 36) O’Neill Pumping-Generating Edmonston (Check 40) Gianelli Pumping-Generating Alamo (Check 42) Dos Amigos (Check 13) Oso (West Branch) Las Perillas (Costal branch) Pearblossom (Check 58) 5 Physical System, cont Check structures and gates • Pools separated by check structures throughout the aqueduct system (SWP: 66, DMC: 21 ) • Gates at check structures regulate flow rates and water surface elevation 6 Physical System, cont Turnout and diversion structures • Water delivered to agricultural and municipal contractors through diversion structures • Over 270 diversion structures on SWP • Over 200 turnouts on DMC 7 Physical System, cont Reservoirs / Lakes Represented as complete mixing of water body •
    [Show full text]
  • Power and Energy Technical Report, DEIS
    Draft Power and Energy Technical Report Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, California Prepared by: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation June 2013 Contents Contents Chapter 1 Affected Environment ....................................................................................... 1-1 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 1-1 Shasta Lake and Vicinity ................................................................................................. 1-7 Upper Sacramento River (Shasta Dam to Red Bluff) ...................................................... 1-9 Lower Sacramento River and Delta ............................................................................... 1-10 CVP/SWP Service Areas ............................................................................................... 1-12 Chapter 2 Modeling Results ................................................................................................ 2-1 Chapter 3 Bibliography ....................................................................................................... 3-1 Tables Table 1-1. Central Valley Project Power Plants, Capacities, and Historical Annual Generation ................................................................................................................. 1-5 Table 1-2. Major State Water Project Facilities, Capacities, and Historical Power Generation
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation
    Draft Feasibility Report Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Prepared by: United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation January 2014 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Executive Summary The Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage This Draft Feasibility Report documents the Investigation (Investigation) is a joint feasibility of alternative plans, including a range feasibility study by the U.S. Department of of operations and physical features, for the the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation potential Temperance Flat River Mile 274 (Reclamation), in cooperation with the Reservoir. California Department of Water Resources Key Findings to Date: (DWR). The purpose of the Investigation is • All alternative plans would provide benefits to determine the potential type and extent of for water supply reliability, enhancement of Federal, State of California (State), and the San Joaquin River ecosystem, and other resources. regional interest in a potential project to • All alternative plans are technically feasible, expand water storage capacity in the upper constructible, and can be operated and San Joaquin River watershed for improving maintained. water supply reliability and flexibility of the • Environmental analyses to date suggest that water management system for agricultural, all alternative plans would be urban, and environmental uses; and environmentally feasible.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX B Alternatives Development
    APPENDIX B Alternatives Development Introduction In 2001, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region (Reclamation), California Department of Water Resources (DWR), and Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) began appraisal-level studies of the potential to expand Los Vaquero Reservoir to address regional water supply reliability and water quality needs. Expansion of Los Vaqueros was one of five potential surface water storage projects identified by the CALFED Bay-Delta Program (CALFED) as warranting further study. The appraisal-level studies indicated that expanding the reservoir by as much as 400,000 acre-feet was technically feasible and could provide water quality and water supply reliability to Bay Area water agencies in the region and also provide potential benefits to fisheries sensitive to water management operations in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta). Reclamation was directed by the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2003 to conduct a feasibility-level investigation of the potential expansion of Los Vaqueros Reservoir. This appendix contains a description of the comprehensive alternatives development process initiated after voters in the CCWD service area approved an advisory measure in 2004 to continue investigating the potential for expansion of Los Vaqueros Reservoir. The alternatives development process was based partly on the Project Concept Report (CCWD, 2002) and the Final Draft Planning Report (CCWD, 2004). The process resulted in the development of four action alternatives which are evaluated this Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR). The No Project/No Action Alternative is also discussed. The alternatives development process consisted of the following three steps: • Initial concepts • Initial plans • Alternatives development and refinement This appendix also includes a summary of the evaluation of alternative sites for project components including intakes, pipelines, and conveyance facilities that are included in the action alternatives.
    [Show full text]
  • C1: Anderson Dam Seismic Retrofit*
    C1: Anderson Dam Seismic Retrofit* About This Project Anderson Reservoir is currently limited to about 52% of its capacity due to seismic concerns, costing Santa Clara County valuable drinking water resources. This project covers earthquake retrofitting of Anderson Dam to improve reliability and safety, and returns the reservoir to its original storage capacity. Anderson Dam creates the county’s largest surface water reservoir—Anderson Reservoir— which stores local rainfall runoff and imported water from the Central Valley Project. The reservoir is an important water source for treatment plants and the recharge of the groundwater basin. Besides restoring drinking water supplies, the upgrade also supports compliance with environmental regulations. The District’s regular reservoir releases ensure that downstream habitat has healthy flows and temperatures to sustain wildlife. A breach of Anderson Dam at full capacity could have catastrophic consequences, including inundation of surrounding land more than 30 miles northwest to San Francisco Bay, and more than 40 miles southeast to Monterey Bay. In December 2016, the board was informed by the district that findings from the geotechnical and geologic investigations performed during the project’s design phase led to the conclusion that a more extensive dam retrofit than had originally been envisioned would have to be performed. Further, the Board was informed that the more extensive retrofit work would double the previous project’s estimated cost. The district presented the Board with a water supply cost-benefit analysis that showed the benefits of the more extensive retrofit project significantly outweighed the cost of not proceeding with the retrofit, which would require the district to purchase additional imported water every year to make up for the loss of long-term storage at Anderson Reservoir.
    [Show full text]
  • Sites Reservoir Project Public Draft EIR/EIS
    6. Surface Water Resources 6.1 Introduction This chapter describes Existing Conditions (the environmental setting) and Sites Reservoir Project (Project)-related changes to surface water resources in the Extended, Secondary, and Primary study areas. Detailed descriptions and maps of these three study areas are provided in Chapter 1 Introduction, and summarized descriptions are included in this chapter. Surface water resources generally include reservoirs, rivers, and diversions. Permits and authorizations for surface water resources are presented in Chapter 4 Environmental Compliance and Permit Summary. The regulatory setting for surface water resources is presented in Appendix 4A Environmental Compliance. This chapter also includes a description of the surface water supply facilities operations and resulting surface water resources characteristics of California’s major water systems that are relevant to the Project: the Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal project that is operated and maintained by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the State Water Project (SWP), operated and maintained by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), and associated tributary rivers and streams. A schematic showing the layout of these two water systems, with the relative location of the Project, is shown in Figures 6-1A, 6-1B, and 6-1C. A comparison of these characteristics has been made between the Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition, and the four action alternatives (Alternatives A, B, C, and D). Unless noted, all numbers shown related to storages, flows, exports, and deliveries in this chapter are generated from the CALSIM II computer simulation model. Appendix 6A Modeling of Alternatives, Appendix 6B Water Resources System Modeling, and Appendix 6C Upper Sacramento River Daily River Flow and Operations Modeling describe the assumptions and the analytical framework used in the surface water modeling analyses.
    [Show full text]
  • The Potential Distribution and Abundance of Zebra Mussels in California
    The Potential Distribution and Abundance of Zebra Mussels in California by Andrew N. Cohen and Anna Weinstein San Francisco Estuary Institute 1325 South 46th Street Richmond CA 94704 This report was funded by a grant from the CALFED Category III Steering Committee administered by the California Urban Water Agencies February 1998 Acknowledgments We wish to thank the many people who assisted us with this study, including: Eric Wilson, Cheryl Henley, and Ivy Fiebelman of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, for allowing us to draw on their time and technical expertise, and for providing much of the water quality data used in the analysis and mapping the results; Jeff Janik, Dan Peterson, and Heather Peterson of the California Department of Water Resources, Dr. Ladd Johnson of Laval University, Charles O’Neill of New York Sea Grant, Susan Nichols of the Great Lakes Science Center / U.S. Geological Survey, Barbara Doll of North Carolina Sea Grant, Diana Padilla of the State University of New York at Stony Brook, and Linda Drees of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, for providing data, useful advice and thoughtful reviews; David Strayer of the Institute for Ecosystem Studies and Dr. James T. Carlton of Williams College/Mystic Seaport, for answering our many questions about zebra mussels; Douglas Ball of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Patty Arneson of the Tahoe Research Group, David Crocker of the Metropolitan Water Agency, Rod Jung of the East Bay Municipal Utility District, Cindy Wong of the City and County
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Sources of Dissolved Organic Carbon in Agriculturally Dominated Rivers Using Radiocarbon Age Dating: Sacramento–San Joaquin River Basin, California
    Biogeochemistry DOI 10.1007/s10533-009-9391-z Identifying sources of dissolved organic carbon in agriculturally dominated rivers using radiocarbon age dating: Sacramento–San Joaquin River Basin, California James O. Sickman • Carol L. DiGiorgio • M. Lee Davisson • Delores M. Lucero • Brian Bergamaschi Received: 11 February 2009 / Accepted: 23 October 2009 Ó The Author(s) 2009. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract We used radiocarbon measurements of The age of bulk DOC transiting the rivers of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) to resolve sources of California’s Central Valley is the oldest reported for riverine carbon within agriculturally dominated land- large rivers and suggests wide-spread loss of soil scapes in California. During 2003 and 2004, average organic matter caused by agriculture and urbaniza- D14C for DOC was -254% in agricultural drains in tion. Using DAX 8 adsorbent, we isolated and the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, -218% in the measured 14C concentrations in hydrophobic acid San Joaquin River, -175% in the California State fractions (HPOA); river samples showed evidence of Water Project and -152% in the Sacramento River. bomb-pulse carbon with average D14C of 91 and 76% for the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers, respectively, with older HPOA, -204%, observed in agricultural drains. An operationally defined non- Electronic supplementary material HPOA fraction of DOC was observed in the San The online version of 14 this article (doi:10.1007/s10533-009-9391-z) contains Joaquin River with seasonally computed D C values supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. of between -275 and -687%; the source of this aged material was hypothesized to be physically J.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda and Corresponding Materials
    Clean Water • Healthy Environment • Flood Protection October 17, 2019 MEETING NOTICE WATER STORAGE EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE Board Members of the Water Storage Exploratory Committee Director Gary Kremen, Committee Chair Director Richard P. Santos Director John L. Varela Staff Support of the Water Storage Exploratory Committee Norma J. Camacho, Chief Executive Officer Nina Hawk, Chief Operating Officer, Water Utility Rick Callender, Chief of External Affairs Stanly Yamamoto, District Counsel Brian Hopper, Senior Assistant District Counsel Anthony Fulcher, Senior Assistant District Counsel Garth Hall, Deputy Operating Officer, Water Supply Division Tim Bramer, Interim Deputy Operating Officer, Water Utility Capital Division Christopher Hakes, Deputy Operating Officer, Dam Safety & Capital Delivery Division Rechelle Blank, Temporary Assistant Officer, Dam Safety and Capital Delivery Division Jerry De La Piedra, Assistant Officer, Water Supply Division Deputy’s Office Cindy Kao, Imported Water Manager, Imported Water Unit Ryan McCarter, Pacheco Project Manager, Pacheco Project Delivery Unit Charlene Sun, Treasury and Debt Manager Medi Sinaki, Senior Engineer – Water Quality Metra Richert, Unit Manager, Water Supply Planning & Conservation Unit A regular meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) Water Storage Exploratory Committee is to be held on Friday, October 25, 2019, at 9:30 a.m. in the Headquarters Building Boardroom located at the Santa Clara Valley Water District, 5700 Almaden Expressway, San Jose, California. Refreshments
    [Show full text]
  • South Bay Aqueduct (SBA) Reliability Initiatives • Semitropic Groundwater Banking Program Updates
    DIRECTORS 43885 SOUTH GRIMMER BOULEVARD • FREMONT, CALIFORNIA 94538 MANAGEMENT (510) 668-4200 • FAX (510) 770-1793 • www.acwd.org ROBERT SHAVER AZIZ AKBARI General Manager JAMES G. GUNTHER KURT ARENDS Operations and Maintenance JUDY C. HUANG LAURA J. HIDAS PAUL SETHY Water Resources JOHN H. WEED ED STEVENSON Engineering and Technology Services JONATHAN WUNDERLICH Finance NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ACWD BOARD OF DIRECTORS Date: January 28, 2021 Time: 4:00 P.M. Location: MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY NOT ATTEND THIS MEETING IN PERSON. DUE TO THE COVID-19 AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNOR NEWSOM’S EXECUTIVE ORDER N-25-20 WHICH SUSPENDS PORTIONS OF THE BROWN ACT, THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED WEBINAR OR TELECONFERENCE ONLY. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING VIA WEBINAR https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84465589120, OR BY CALLING ANY OF THE FOLLOWING PHONE NUMBERS: 1-669-900-9128 OR 1-346-248-7799 OR 1-301-715-8592 FOLLOWED BY 844 6558 9120. Please Take Notice that the Alameda County Water District Board of Directors hereby calls a special meeting on January 28, 2021 at 4:00 P.M., via Webinar/Teleconference, at which time the Board will convene for the following purposes: 1. Roll Call 2. Salute to the Flag 3. Public Comments on Matters on this Notice of Special Meeting 4. Water Resources Planning Workshop 5. General Manager’s Report 6. Director’s Comments and/or Agenda Item Requests 7. Adjournment This Notice of Date, Time and Location of this special meeting of the Alameda County Water District Board of Directors is given this 25th day of January 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C: Complete BARR Drought Mitigation Measure Profiles
    BARR Drought Contingency Plan Appendix C: Complete BARR Drought Mitigation Measure Profiles Drought Mitigation Measure 1: Transfer-Bethany Pipeline Drought Mitigation Measure 2: Zone 7-EBMUD Intertie Drought Mitigation Measure 3a: ACWD-SFPUC Intertie and Local Supply Drought Mitigation Measure 3b: ACWD-SFPUC Intertie and IPR Drought Mitigation Measure 4: West Side SFPUC-SCVWD Intertie Drought Mitigation Measure 5: SFPUC-Zone 7 Intertie Drought Mitigation Measure 6: MMWD-EBMUD Intertie Drought Mitigation Measure 7: Los Vaqueros Expansion Drought Mitigation Measure 8: Walnut Creek Water Treatment Plant Pretreatment Facility Drought Mitigation Measure 9: Regional Desalination Plant Drought Mitigation Measure 10: Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center Expansion Drought Mitigation Measure 11: Mid-Peninsula Potable Reuse Exploratory Plan Drought Mitigation Measure 12: Joint Tri-Valley Potable Reuse Feasibility Study Drought Mitigation Measure 13: Regional Advanced Metering Infrastructure Feasibility Assessment Drought Mitigation Measure 14: Del Valle Reservoir Water Supply Storage Expansion Project Drought Mitigation Measure 15: Regional Exchange Demonstration Project C-1 BARR DCP-Final 12.19.17.docx This page left intentionally blank DROUGHT MITIGATION MEASURE 1 Transfer-Bethany Pipeline CONTRA COSTA COUNTY The Transfer-Bethany Pipeline would connect CCWD’s Los Vaqueros (LV) Reservoir system and other conveyance facilities to the Bethany Reservoir, providing a mechanism to move water to the South Bay Aqueduct (SBA). The pipeline would begin just east of the LV Reservoir By enabling transfers to the SBA, this project would Transfer Facility—the system hub that regulates flows broaden the water sources stored in LV Reservoir into and out of the reservoir and into the Contra Costa and delivered to partner agencies.
    [Show full text]