DOCSLIB.ORG

Iv. Environmental Impact Analysis I. Public Utilities 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Iv. Environmental Impact Analysis I. Public Utilities 1 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS I. PUBLIC UTILITIES 1. WATER ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Regional Water Supply Water is currently supplied to the Project Site by the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP). The LADWP is responsible for ensuring that water demands within the City are met and that State and Federal water quality standards are achieved. For the fiscal year of 2003-2004, City water supplies were derived from the following sources: (1) the Los Angeles Aqueduct, approximately 33 percent; (2) groundwater, approximately 14 percent; (3) purchases from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD), approximately 53 percent; and (4) recycled water, less than 1%.1 The amount of water obtained from these sources varies from year to year, and is primarily dependent on weather conditions and demand. In addition, reclamation of wastewater is utilized for certain irrigation purposes. Water storage is essential for the LADWP to supply water during high demand conditions and provide for firefighting and emergencies. The City water system has 104 tanks and reservoirs ranging in size from ten thousand to 60 billion gallons with a total capacity of 109 billion gallons.2 The LADWP has instituted significant water conservation measures in addition to State level regulations including: • City Ordinance 165,004 – Reduces water consumption by requiring new buildings to install water conservation fixtures, such as ultra low-flush toilets, urinals, taps, and showerheads, and plumbing fixtures that reduce water loss from leakage in order to obtain building permits in the City of Los Angeles. In addition, there are provisions requiring xeriscaping – the use of low- maintenance, drought-resistant plants. • City Ordinance 166,080 – Provides for the implementation of a citywide phased water conservation program to respond to dry weather periods based on the LADWP’s evaluation of the projected supply and demand of city water supplies. The phased conservation program provides for mandatory water conservation measures at the user level and customer use curtailment of normal water usage. • The LADWP is also continuing to implement its water recycling project. Section 10910-10915 of the State Water Code requires lead agencies to request a water availability assessment from the local water purveyor for any project generating over 500 residential units, 1 City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Urban Water Management Plan, Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Annual Update. 2 City of Los Angeles, LA CEQA Thresholds Guide, May 1998. Wilshire Center Project IV.I. Public Utilities Draft Environmental Impact Report Page IV.I-1 City of Los Angeles May 2006 commercial businesses over 500,000 square feet of space and employing over 1,000 people, industrial businesses over 250,000 square feet of space and employing over 1,000 people, or for any project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to or greater than the amount required by a 500 dwelling unit project. Local Water Infrastructure The Proposed Project is located within the LADWP’s Central Water Service Area and is adequately served by existing water mains.3 Potable water infrastructure in the project vicinity consists of 30-inch cement-lined water mains within the Wilshire Boulevard and Vermont Avenue right-of-ways and 8-inch mains within the Shatto Place right-of-way. Figure IV.I-1, Existing Water Infrastructure, on page IV.I-3, depicts the location of existing local water lines serving the Project Site and immediately surrounding area. Currently, the Project Site consists of approximately 54,000 sf of commercial/retail uses. Based on approximately 42,000 square feet of leased floor area that was occupied at the time the NOP was published, the Project Site is currently estimated to consume approximately 20,045 gallons per day (gpd) or 22 acre-feet per year (AF/Y) of water (see Table IV. I-1, Estimated Water Demand by Proposed Project, on page IV.I-6). There are no current deficiencies in the water service system in the vicinity of the Proposed Project.4 The existing firewater service system for the Project Site utilizes the same water lines as the domestic water system, with the fire hydrants connecting directly to the main water lines. See Section IV.J.2, Fire Protection, for a complete discussion of existing fire flow requirements. 3 Written Correspondence with Charles C. Holloway, Supervisor of Environmental Assessment, City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, 1-17-06. 4 Ibid. Wilshire Center Project IV.I. Public Utilities Draft Environmental Impact Report Page IV.I-2 City of Los Angeles May 2006 Figure IV.I-1 Existing Water Infrastructure Wilshire Center Project IV.I. Public Utilities Draft Environmental Impact Report Page IV.I-3 City of Los Angeles May 2006 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Thresholds of Significance In accordance with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact would occur if: (a) A project would require or result in the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause a significant environmental effect; or (b) If there were insufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or new or expanded entitlements were needed. Furthermore, as set forth in the City of Los Angeles L.A. CEQA Thresholds Guide, the determination of significance shall be made on a case-by-case basis, considering the following factors: (a) The total estimated water demand for the project; (b) Whether sufficient capacity exists in the water infrastructure that would serve the project, taking into account the anticipated conditions at project buildout; (c) The amount by which the project would cause the projected growth in population, housing or employment for the Community Plan area to be exceeded in the year of the project completion; and (d) The degree to which scheduled water infrastructure improvements or project design features would reduce or offset service impacts. As the LADWP does not maintain any standard unit water demand factors for specific land uses, water consumption was estimated based on wastewater generation rates established by the City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation.5 In order to present a conservative analysis, water consumption is assumed to be 120 percent of the wastewater generated for a given land use. Project Impacts Construction As discussed above, the project area is currently served by adequate potable water infrastructure. The project’s water consumption (quantity, size and type of the needed infrastructure) is determined by the Applicant’s Engineering consultants based on the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety and applicable building code requirements. The on-site (sprinkler system and private fire hydrants) and off- site (public fire hydrants) fire flow demands are determined based on the Los Angeles City Fire 5 City of Los Angeles, LA CEQA Thresholds Guide, May 1998, p.K.1-4 and K.2-20. Wilshire Center Project IV.I. Public Utilities Draft Environmental Impact Report Page IV.I-4 City of Los Angeles May 2006 Department and applicable building code requirements.6 Specific fire flow tests are typically conducted during the civil engineering review phase of the Project, after Project approval. Once a determination of the project’s domestic and fire demands has been made, LADWP will assess the need for additional facilities. If the estimated water requirements for the Proposed Project can be served by existing water mains in the adjacent streets, water service will be provided routinely in accordance with the DWP’s rules and regulations. If the estimated water requirements are greater than the available capacity of the existing distribution facilities, special arrangements must be made with the Department to enlarge the flow capacity or pressure in supply line(s). In this case, supply main enlargement may cause short-term and temporary impacts on the environment during construction. Also, new service connections may occasionally result in interruptions in water services for existing customers. However, LADWP has stated that it does not expect disruptions in water service to occur due to its practice of wet-tapping existing lines.7 Therefore, temporary and short-term disruptions in local water service during the construction period would be less than significant. Operation The proposed development is a “Project” as defined in Section 10912 (a) of the State Water Code, and is thus subject to the provisions for determining water availability as outlined in Section 10910-10915 of the State Water Code. The Proposed Project includes the development of approximately 464 residential units and 41,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space. While the Proposed Project does not exceed the threshold of 500 dwelling units, the combined effect of 464 dwelling units plus 41,000 square feet of commercial uses and associated parking and outdoor landscape areas may generate an equivalent amount of water use as compared to a 500 dwelling unit project. Therefore, a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was requested from the Department of Water and Power (DWP) to determine the DWP’s ability to meet the water demands of this project. Based on the anticipated water demands calculated for the Proposed Project, the DWP has determined that the projected water demand of the Proposed Project is within the 20-year water demand growth projected in the City of Los Angeles’ Year 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (Water Plan) (both the Water Plan and the WSA are hereby incorporated by this reference).8 As shown in Table IV.I-1 on page IV.I-6, the Proposed Project is estimated to generate a demand of 96 acre-feet of water per year. This estimate takes into account a net reduction of 22 acre-feet per year that is currently generated by the exiting land uses on the Project Site and approximately 118 acre-feet per year for the proposed uses.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Figure 6-3. California's Water Infrastructure Network
    DA 17 DA 67 DA 68 DA 22 DA 29 DA 39 DA 40 DA 41 DA 46 N. FORK N. & M. TUOLOMNE YUBA RIVER FORKS CHERRY CREEK, RIVER Figure 6-3. California's Water Infrastructure ELEANOR CREEK AMERICAN M & S FORK RIVER YUBA RIVER New Bullards Hetch Hetchy Res Bar Reservoir GREENHORN O'Shaughnessy Dam Network Configuration for CALVIN (1 of 2) SR- S. FORK NBB CREEK & BEAR DA 32 SR- D17 AMERICAN RIVER HHR DA 42 DA 43 DA 44 RIVER STANISLAUS SR- LL- C27 RIVER & 45 Camp Far West Reservoir DRAFT Folsom Englebright C31 Lake DA 25 DA 27 Canyon Tunnel FEATHER Lake 7 SR- CALAVERAS New RIVER SR-EL CFW SR-8 RIVER Melones Lower Cherry Creek MERCED MOKELUMNE Reservoir SR-10 Aqueduct ACCRETION CAMP C44 RIVER FAR WEST TO DEER CREEK C28 FRENCH DRY RIVER CREEK WHEATLAND GAGE FRESNO New Hogan Lake Oroville DA 70 D67 SAN COSUMNES Lake RIVER SR- 0 SR-6 C308 SR- JOAQUIN Accretion: NHL C29 RIVER 81 CHOWCHILLA American River RIVER New Don Lake McClure Folsom to Fair D9 DRY Pardee Pedro SR- New Exchequer RIVER Oaks Reservoir 20 CREEK Reservoir Dam SR- Hensley Lake DA 14 Tulloch Reservoir SR- C33 Lake Natoma PR Hidden Dam Nimbus Dam TR Millerton Lake SR-52 Friant Dam C23 KELLY RIDGE Accretion: Eastside Eastman Lake Bypass Accretion: Accretion: Buchanan Dam C24 Yuba Urban DA 59 Camanche Melones to D16 Upper Merced D64 SR- C37 Reservoir C40 2 SR-18 Goodwin River 53 D62 SR- La Grange Dam 2 CR Goodwin Reservoir D66 Folsom South Canal Mokelumne River Aqueduct Accretion: 2 D64 depletion: Upper C17 D65 Losses D85 C39 Goodwin to 3 Merced River 3 3a D63 DEPLETION mouth C31 2 C25 C31 D37
    [Show full text]
  • Water Supply and Demand in California
    Water Supply and Demand in California By Stephanie Anagnoson College of the Canyons 2018 Version 1 By StephaniePhoto By Jan Anagi Brumat noson College of the Canyons 2018 Version 1.2 Photo by Nathan Roser on Unsplash 1 | W a t e r S u p p l y Attributions Castaic Lake Water Agency College of the Canyons College of the Canyons - Water Systems Technology College of the Canyons - Open Educational Resources This textbook is licensed under CC BY 4.0 2 | Water Supply Table of Contents Introduction to Water Supply 4 Part One: Water All Around Us 5 Section 1.1 Water Cycle 6 Section 1.2 Water Management Concepts 10 Section 1.3 Water Rights 16 Section 1.4 Stakeholder Concepts 20 Part Two: Supply-Side Management 24 Section 2.1 Los Angeles Aqueduct 26 Section 2.2 Central Valley Project 30 Section 2.3 Colorado River Aqueduct 34 Section 2.4 State Water Project 38 Section 2.5 Alternative Water Supplies 42 Part Three: Demand-Side Management 50 Section 3.1 Regulations 51 Section 3.2 Water Loss 56 Section 3.3 Water Rates 59 Section 3.4 Indoor Water Use 62 Section 3.5 Outdoor Water Use 67 Section 3.6 CII Water Use 73 Section 3.7 Social Marketing Campaigns 78 3 | Water Supply Introduction to Water Supply You’re about to understand water demand and water supply more deeply. This understanding is going to change how you look at your water bill, grass in your yard and around town, and all those canals you see while driving around in California.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.12 Hydrology and Water Quality
    3.12 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This section describes the drainage features, stormwater quality, flooding hazards, and flood-protection improvements within the City’s Planning Area. Regulatory agencies governing stormwater quality and flooding hazards are also discussed. The City’s Planning Area is comprised of the City’s boundaries and adopted Sphere of Influence (SOI). The County’s Planning Area consists of unincorporated land within the One Valley One Vision (OVOV) Planning Area boundaries that is outside the City’s boundaries and adopted SOI. Together the City and County Planning Areas comprise the OVOV Planning Area. With implementation of the proposed General Plan goals, objectives, and policies potential impacts on hydrology and water quality would be less than significant. EXISTING CONDITIONS Surface Water Drainage Patterns within City’s Planning Area Surface water drainage patterns are dependent on topography, the amount and location of impervious surfaces, and the type of flood control that is located in an area. The size, or magnitude, of a flood is described by a term called a “recurrence interval.” By studying a long period of flow record for a stream, hydrologists estimate the size of a flood that would have a likelihood of occurring during various intervals. For example, a five-year flood event would occur, on the average, once every five years (and would have a 20 percent chance of occurring in any one year). Although a 100-year flood event is expected to happen only once in a century, there is a 1 percent chance that a flood of that size could happen during any year.
    [Show full text]
  • History: Before the Poppy Reserve
    History: Before the Poppy Reserve The Kitanemuk, members of the Shoshonean Linguistic Group lived in the area between Fairmont and Antelope Buttes: “one of the largest and most significant archaeological sites in the Antelope Valley” • Source: http://www.avim.parks.ca.gov/people/ph_kitanemuk.s html The Kitanemuk, like other groups on the mountain margins of the Mojave Desert, lived in permanent winter villages of 50 to 80 people or more. These people dispersed into smaller mobile gathering groups during the late spring, summer, and fall months. The smaller groups made use of temporary camps for relatively short times, visiting different "environmental niches" as the important food-producing plants in them became ready to harvest. The Kitanemuk spoke a language that appears to have been a dialect of Serrano, which was spoken by groups located as far distant as modern Yucca Valley and Twenty- nine Palms, east of the San Bernardino Mountains. Historic Farming and Ranching Families: Godde Munz (east of the Reserve) Russell's (Ruined stone house near rock quarry – photo on next page) View looking north from North Poppy Loop trail – arrow shows rock quarry and approximate location of stone ruins of the Russell’s house. Quarry • “Tufa Mill” • Mined “tuff” • Used to build the Owens Valley or Los Angeles Aqueduct Los Angeles (Owens Valley) Aqueduct • The Los Angeles Aqueduct system comprising the Los Angeles Aqueduct (Owens Valley aqueduct) and the Second Los Angeles Aqueduct, is a water conveyance system operated by the LA Department of Water and Power. • Designed by engineer and LADWP director, William Mulholland, the system delivers water from the Owens River in the Eastern Sierra Nevada Mountains to Los Angeles, California.
    [Show full text]
  • Loc Anggtres
    -oF tr .|, t{ g,% g;? Loc AngGtres .::r,/i::). :,:.-,:, i:;.,...:..,. t,:. :ta:t : :.::r,: :'i ;.: :: :,.. ..,::al :,..1r,t:::,:.,:,:),,,::::. 1., ::.a..-'r.:...':.. .::t ...: ..., :. ji ::. ::::,,, :., 'Y4,,'.' ;i :a ;t:tl:tL.;::it),, : t,, :t : :,.. ii:::L/l*t:::;:l:t ,,:.:,::4,;..:)t ltat1a:: ..''.r.;r.,. :... "aa:::.):.;..t.:..:,,:':. : :'.:.. : :..: .. .:.. ..:it.;:- ' -',.;t:tt :: ; \a:.:la ::a.: a;::. :: :::),;::.: 1:., .::|ttLl:t:.:, ;a.r.:r)... - )a;t:t::i::.,.. 1)'i'?'ilt: ',.uriiti#i.]trEj* MAPS in greater detail are illustrated on these pages: PAGE 16 PAGE t4 L0$ ilnuilnr 0mns till$r luusilu$l $yttum I'A OJ AV E PAGE 6 Los Angeles-Owens River Aqueduct Castaic Hydroelectric Fairmont Resetvoir '.?;lil"anatN-Z Reservoir \y SAUGU S Los ,ll: ''r,. i,.' AN G ELES Semi-arid Los Angeles receives water from three Paralleling the Aqueduct is a portion of major aqueduct systems: The Los Angeles Owens the 846 mile long (1350 kilometers) , 800,000 volt River Aqueducts, the Colorado Aqueduct and the direct current Pacific Intertie transmission system which California Aqueduct (State Water Project) . Owned by brings energy from hydroelectric generating stations on the City and extending 340 miles (540 kilometers) the Columbia River to the Los Angeles area. northerly {rom Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Owens In describing the many features of historical and River Aqueduct System taps the vast eastern slope scenic interest on the Eastern slopes of the Sierra snow fields of California's Sierra Nevada and their Nevada and the Los Angeles Owens River Aqueduct derivative streams and lakes to provide power and 80 System, it is the DWP's goal to create an understanding percent of the water for the West's largest city.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a - Special Designation Overlays - Angeles National Forest
    Appendix A - Special Designation Overlays - Angeles National Forest Monument Existing National Monuments Saint Francis Dam Disaster Places: Santa Clara Canyon 353 Acres Located within San Francisquito Canyon, the Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial and Monument was designated on March 12, 2019 by the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act, Sec. 1111, which also authorized the establishment of a future Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial. This legislation was signed exactly 91 years after the 200-foot high Saint Francis Dam broke, sweeping away over 400 victims and scouring the floodplain for 52 miles until it emptied into the Pacific Ocean. The purpose of the Monument is to conserve and enhance for the benefit and enjoyment of the public the cultural, archaeological, historical, watershed, educational, and recreational resources and values of the Monument. The Memorial would be the first national memorial managed by the Forest Service and is intended to honor the victims and memorialize the history of the Saint Francis Dam Disaster. San Francisquito Canyon is known for its significant historical associations and values, not only from a Tribal and Native American historical context, but because of the important use of this area during the Spanish, Mexican, and Early American periods. The first anthropologic and ethnographic recording of Native American communities identified the Tataviam as occupying the San Francisquito Canyon. While early physical evidence of their occupation of the area is scarce, early ethnographic and mission records, along with some archaeological evidence indicates their presence and use of the area ranges from 3,500 to 7,500 years ago, and likely even earlier.
    [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]
  • Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial and Monument Angeles National Forest Land Management Plan - Part 2
    Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial and Monument Angeles National Forest Land Management Plan - Part 2 Administrative Change adding to Appendix A Special Designation Overlays – Monument Established Saint Francis Dam Disaster 353 Acres Places: Santa Clara Canyon National Memorial and Monument Located within San Francisquito Canyon, the Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial and Monument was designated on March 12, 2019 by the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act, Sec. 1111. This Act also authorized the establishment of a future Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial. This legislation was signed exactly 91 years after the 200-feet high Saint Francis Dam broke, sweeping away over 400 victims and scouring the floodplain for 52 miles until it emptied into the Pacific Ocean. The purpose of the Monument is to conserve and enhance the cultural, archaeological, historical, watershed, educational, and recreational resources and values of the Monument for the benefit and enjoyment of the public. The Memorial would be the first National Memorial managed by the U.S Department of Agriculture Forest Service and is intended to honor the victims and memorialize the history of the Dam Disaster. Figure 1.Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial and Monument 1 San Francisquito Canyon is known for its significant historical associations and values, not only from a Tribal and Native American historical context, but also because of the important use of this area during the Spanish, Mexican, and Early American periods. The first anthropologic and ethnographic recording of Native American communities identified the Tataviam as occupying the San Francisquito Canyon. While early physical evidence of their occupation of the area is scarce, early ethnographic and mission records, along with some archaeological evidence indicates their presence and use of the area ranges from 3,500 to 7,500 years ago, and likely even earlier.
    [Show full text]
  • “There It Is – Take It”: William Mulholland Deals Water to Los
    “There It Is – Take It”: William Mulholland Deals Water To Los Angeles Celeste Goodwin Senior Division Individual Exhibit Process Paper: 497 Student-Composed Words: 487 Upon learning of this year’s topic, Leadership and Legacy, I immediately wanted to pick a topic that’s legacy is relevant to America today. I also wanted to select a topic that has history local to Los Angeles so I could have access to primary documents. While researching many California leaders I found William Mulholland. Mulholland’s pride and joy, the Los Angeles Aqueduct, is directly related to the drought that California is currently experiencing, which impacts everyone in the state including myself. This was the perfect topic because Mulholland was an amazing leader, has relevance to today’s drought, and has a controversial legacy that had potential for deep research and multiple points of view. As I researched, I found that Mulholland was not an entirely ethical leader, and this fact intrigued me and encouraged me to focus my project on Mulholland’s legacy, both beneficial and detrimental, for Los Angeles. I found many primary and secondary sources for my exhibit. Some of the best primary sources were from Mulholland’s granddaughter’s novel “William Mulholland and The Rise of Los Angeles”. The biography’s “works cited” section led me to resources from the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and many historical Southern California archives. Additionally, the UCLA Library has an archive specifically for the LA Aqueduct, which provided excellent primary sources. After competing last year in the exhibit category, I knew I wanted to compete in it again.
    [Show full text]
  • Ilcparnntnt of ~Blic Ork.S LOS ANGELES Conceming the Lindo
    ... ". .. ' EARL WARREN OCfYU"Otl OP' CAI.lPOIIMIA A. D. EDMONSTON. STAT& IEHCliNUJI FRANK D. DURtCI:IE CMIIII' 0~ DL¥1110.. 01111~'" STATE OF CALIFORNIA }lr. Ed Fletcher -2- January 19, 195.3 ilcparnntnt of ~blic ork.s LOS ANGELES Conceming the Lindo. Vista .Hcsa wells, we have written to Paul Bcermann to ascertain the source ot his information. If this source is a AOO .. Caa RD'\.Y TO January 19, 195.3 State Agency, we cnn naturally secure the data at the source. DIVISION OfF WATER RIUOURCES eoa CAUFO.. NlA aTAT& a1.0a. LOS ANGELU 12 Again I wish to thank you for your interest and cooperation in fur- nishing this Division with your information. I am aorey we do not have 8Ufficient ~istorical data or sufficient time to make further exploratory tests to ascer- tain the exact source of the water supply for your deep wells. Please keep me advised it you decide to make a combined pump test on all of your \otells. Mr. Ed Fletcher 103J 9th Avenue Very Truly yours 1 San Diego, Cal 1 tomia A. D. EDMOi STON, STA'lE EllGThreEI.. Dear Ed: Your letter or January 19, 195.3, enclosing in!otw!tion on your wells in El. Cajon Valley, has been received. The information which yo\' furnished supple- ments that 'Which we have already obtained. It is unfortunate that more data concerning water levels, mineral quality of water, and exact quantities of \1>.-ater pumped from e!!ch well. were not kept. Such information, 1! available from the beginning on each of your wells, might have provided valur:.ble clews as to the origin or the well waters arxl the dependability of the supply.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethical Issues from the St.Francis Dam Fail
    PDHonline Course R135W (2 PDH) Ethical Issues from the St.Francis Dam Fail Instructor: J.Paul Guyer, P.E., R.A., Fellow ASCE, Fellow AEI 2012 PDH Online | PDH Center 5272 Meadow Estates Drive Fairfax, VA 22030-6658 Phone & Fax: 703-988-0088 www.PDHonline.org www.PDHcenter.com An Approved Continuing Education Provider www.PDHonline.org www.PDHonline.com INTRODUCTION ETHICAL ISSUES Here is what we will talk about today…. FROM •Introduction •What happened THE ST. FRANCIS DAM •The historical context •The human factors FAILURE •Ethical issues •Lessons learned Paul Guyer, P.E., R.A. [email protected] © Paul Guyer 2012 2 © Paul Guyer 2012 1 INTRODUCTION WHAT HAPPENED J. Paul Guyer, P.E., R.A. At 11:56 PM on March 12, 1928, the concrete arch St. Francis Dam was a key element of the Los Angeles (California) Aqueduct. It was Paul Guyer is a registered Mechanical Engineer, Civil Engineer, Fire designed and constructed by the City of Los Angeles Department of Protection Engineer and Architect with 35 years experience in design Water and Power (LADWP) to create a reservoir to store water of infrastructure. For 17 years he was in engineering positions with brought via the Aqueduct from the Owens Valley in east central the State of California. For 10 years of this period he was engaged in California to serve the burgeoning city of Los Angeles. It was a the design of facilities for the California State Water Project, including concrete gravity arch dam located about 40 miles northwest of Los Oroville Dam . …. the highest dam in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Resolution No. 013 071
    Los Angeles, California, October 4,2012 MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF WATER AND POWER COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES HELD IN ROOM 1555-H OCTOBER 4, 2012 2:09 P.M. Meeting called to order by President Thomas S. Sayles and roll called: Present - Commissioners: President Sayles Richard Moss Christina E. Noonan Jonathan Parfrey Absent- Eric Holoman A quorum present. IN ATTENDANCE were the following: Ronald O. Nichols, General Manager Aram H. Benyamin, Senior Assistant General Manager - Power System, Power System Shanise Black, Deputy City Attorney II, City Attorney's Office Richard M. Brown, General Counsel, Water and Power, City Attorney's Office Randolph R. Krager, Electrical Engineer, Power System Philip Leiber, ChiefFinancial Officer, Financial Services Organization James B. McDaniel, Senior Assistant General Manager - Water System, Water System Shannon C. Pascual, Director ofHuman Resources, General Manager's Office Susana Reyes, Manager of Workers' Compensation and Employee Health and Benefits Mark J. Sedlacek, Director ofEnvironmental Affairs, Intergovernmental Affairs Michael S. Webster, Power Engineering Manager, Power System Gary E. Wong, Assistant General Manager - Systems Support Division ITEM NO.1 - Opening remarks were made by the Commission President on agenda and other items relating to Department operations. ITEM NO. 11- Resolution recommending Board Recognition ofthe Workers' Compensation Group, Human Resources Division for its outstanding efforts before and during the State audit. Submitted by Director ofHuman Resources. RESOLUTION NO. 013 071 WHEREAS, Senate Bill 899, enacted into law in 2004, brought material changes to the audit program ofthe State ofCalifornia's Division ofWorkers' Compensation (DWC). The perfonnance ofthe Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) Workers Compensation (WC) as a self-insured administered program is rated every five years for action in specific areas of benefit provision.
    [Show full text]