DOCSLIB.ORG

Surface Recharge System Operations Manual 1 | P a G E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Surface Recharge System Operations Manual 1 | P a G E ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT SURFACE RECHARGE SYSTEM OPERATIONS MANUAL 2nd Edition April 12, 2021 DIRECTORS OFFICERS DENIS R. BILODEAU, P.E. President JORDAN BRANDMAN STEPHEN R. SHELDON CATHY GREEN First Vice President NELIDA MENDOZA CATHY GREEN DINA L. NGUYEN, ESQ. KELLY E. ROWE, C.E.G., C.H. Second Vice President STEPHEN R. SHELDON TRI TA TRI TA BRUCE WHITAKER General Manager ROGER C. YOH, P.E. MICHAEL R. MARKUS, P.E., D.WRE Acknowledgements Executive Editors Michael R. Markus, P.E., D.WRE, BCEE, F.ASCE ............................... General Manager Mehul Patel, P.E. .......................................................... Executive Director of Operations Core Editorial Staff John Bonsangue ...................................... Director of Recharge and Wetland Operations Don Houlihan (Chief Editor) .......................................... Recharge Operations Supervisor Bill Dunivin.........................Consultant – former OCWD Executive Director of Operations John Vandenbergh .................... Consultant – former OCWD Recharge System Operator Administrative Support Esmer Uribe ...................................................... Senior Administrative Support Specialist Photography Cameron McBeth (Aerial) .......................................................... Environmental Specialist Justin McKeever (Ground Photos) ................... Distribution and Injection Well Supervisor Contributing Field Editors Julio Langarica ...................................................................... Recharge System Operator Matt Buis ........ Assistant Recharge System Operator/Senior Heavy Equipment Operator Jeff Boudreau ........................................................ Assistant Recharge System Operator Special Thanks The Core Editorial Staff would like to thank the Executive Editors for sharing their vision, patience and extremely helpful technical review comments. Additionally, the Core Editorial Staff would like to recognize all OCWD Recharge Staff. Their continuous support is the reason for the Districts successful recharge program. Lastly, the Core Editorial Staff would like to thank the Board of Directors whose guidance and decisions make OCWD an industry leader. Cover photo: Fifteen-foot Imperial Flume measuring diverted flow at the Imperial Headgates into the Upper Off-River System. Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 2. OVERVIEW OF OCWD FOREBAY RECHARGE SYSTEM ................................................. 2 3. RIVER RECHARGE SYSTEM OPERATION ....................................................................... 5 A. Imperial Rubber Dam ................................................................................................... 5 a. Trash Rack .............................................................................................................. 7 b. Imperial Diversion ................................................................................................... 8 c. Imperial Bypass ....................................................................................................... 8 B. Upper SAR (between Imperial Dam and 5 Coves Dam) ............................................. 9 a. Upper SAR Temporary Diversion 1: Four Pipes/Gates SAR to Weir Pond 4 ..........10 b. Upper SAR Temporary Diversion 2: Four Pipes/Gates SAR to Upper Off-River .....11 C. Five Coves Site ............................................................................................................12 a. Rubber Dam ...........................................................................................................12 b. Trash Rack .............................................................................................................13 c. Diversion ................................................................................................................14 d. Bypass ...................................................................................................................14 D. Lower SAR (between Five Coves Dam and Chapman Ave) ......................................15 a. Carbon Diversion Channel .....................................................................................15 b. Lower SAR Temporary Diversion 1: Two pipes/gates to Upper Five Coves Basin ..16 c. Lower SAR Temporary Diversion 2: Two pipes/gates SAR to Lincoln Basin ..........16 d. Ball Road Gaging Station .......................................................................................17 e. Ball Road to Chapman Ave. ...................................................................................18 4. UPPER OFF-RIVER SYSTEM (Imperial Flume to Carbon Diversion) .............................19 a. Imperial Flume .........................................................................................................19 b. Weir Ponds 1, 2 and 3 .............................................................................................20 c. Weir Pond 4 .............................................................................................................23 d. Passive System .......................................................................................................29 5. WARNER SYSTEM .........................................................................................................30 a. Foster-Huckleberry Basin ........................................................................................31 b. Conrock Basin .........................................................................................................31 c. Warner and Little Warner Basins .............................................................................32 d. Warner Bypass Pipeline...........................................................................................33 e. Warner Outflow Channel..........................................................................................33 6. UPPER RECHARGE SYSTEM ........................................................................................36 a. Miraloma Transfer Box ............................................................................................36 b. Phase I Pipeline .......................................................................................................38 c. Mini Anaheim Lake ..................................................................................................38 d. Imported Water Connection OC-28 Anaheim Tubs ..................................................40 e. Atwood Channel ......................................................................................................41 f. Anaheim Lake ..........................................................................................................42 g. Phase II Pipeline ......................................................................................................44 h. Carbon Creek ..........................................................................................................45 i. Kraemer Basin .........................................................................................................46 j. Miller Basin ..............................................................................................................50 k. La Jolla Basin ..........................................................................................................53 l. Placentia Basin ........................................................................................................55 m. Raymond Basin .......................................................................................................56 7. LOWER OFF-RIVER SYSTEM ........................................................................................58 a. Upper Five Coves Basin ..........................................................................................59 b. Lower Five Coves Basin ..........................................................................................60 c. Lincoln Basin ...........................................................................................................61 d. Burris Basin .............................................................................................................64 e. Riverview Basin .......................................................................................................67 f. Fletcher Basin ..........................................................................................................69 g. Santiago Basins .......................................................................................................71 h. Lower Santiago Creek .............................................................................................73 8. GROUND WATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM RECHARGE SYSTEM ........................74 a. The GWRS Pipeline .................................................................................................74 b. The GWRS Basins ...................................................................................................74 c. La Palma Basin .......................................................................................................75 d. Miraloma Basin ........................................................................................................77 e. Kraemer Basin .........................................................................................................79 f. Miller Basin ..............................................................................................................79
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority June 19, 2020
    SANTA ANA RIVER WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION MODEL UPDATE SUMMARY REPORT Part 1 of 3: Text PREPARED FOR: Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority June 19, 2020 GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. Ground Water Resources Development P.O. Box 220, Claremont, CA 91711 | P: 909.451.6650 | F: 909.451.6638 | www.gssiwater.com Santa Ana River Waste Load Allocation Model Update - Summary Report 19-Jun-20 THIS REPORT IS RENDERED TO THE SANTA ANA WATERSHED PROJECT AUTHORITY AND BASIN MONITORING PROGRAM TASK FORCE AS OF THE DATE HEREOF, SOLELY FOR THEIR BENEFIT IN CONNECTION WITH ITS STATED PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE RELIED ON BY ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY OR BY THEM IN ANY OTHER CONTEXT. AS DATA IS UPDATED FROM TIME TO TIME, ANY RELIANCE ON THIS REPORT AT A FUTURE DATE SHOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT UPDATED DATA. THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN CHECKED FOR COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, AND CONSISTENCY BY THE FOLLOWING PROFESSIONALS: ___________________________________ Lauren Wicks, PG Project Geohydrologist PG No. 9531 ___________________________________ Johnson Yeh, Ph.D., PG, CHG Principal CHG No. 422 ___________________________________ Dennis E. Williams, Ph.D., PG, CHG President CHG No. 139 Copyright © 2020 GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. GEOSCIENCE retains its copyrights, and the client for which this document was produced may not use such products of consulting services for purposes unrelated to the subject matter of this project. No portion of this report may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, mechanical, electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise EXCEPT for purposes of the project for which this document was produced.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 5.8 Hydrology, Drainage, and Water Quality
    Section 5.8 Hydrology, Drainage, and Water Quality SECTION 5.8 HYDROLOGY, DRAINAGE, AND WATER QUALITY This section describes the existing hydrological and water quality conditions within the City of Buena Park. The potential impacts that could result from implementation of the proposed General Plan Update are analyzed, and where significant impacts are identified, mitigation measures are recommended to avoid or reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. This section includes information contained in the Hydrology Impact and Water Quality Assessment prepared by RBF Consulting (February 2010) (Appendix F). 5.8.1 EXISTING SETTING GROUNDWATER The City relies on two major water supply sources, which include imported water from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) and local groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). The groundwater basin receives water via the Santa Ana River. Each year OCWD sets a basin production percentage (BPP) for the agencies that pump from the basin. The BPP is the ratio of water produced from the groundwater to all water produced by the agency. The BPP provides a limit on how much each agency can pump from the Orange County Groundwater Basin without paying a penalty. According to the City of Buena Park 2005 Water Master Plan Study Final Report (Water Master Plan) (February 2007), the City’s basin pumping percentage is 66 percent and is anticipated to increase to the historical value of 75 percent. However, water supply conditions have changed over recent years and according to the City’s Public Works Department, the current BPP is 62 percent and the BPP is not anticipated to rise above the current rate for a number of years.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.7 Hydrology and Water Quality
    BEACH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis 5.7 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) evaluates the potential impacts to hydrology and water quality conditions from implementation of the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (Proposed Project). Hydrology deals with the distribution and circulation of water, both on land and underground. Water quality deals with the quality of surface and groundwater. Surface water is on the surface of the land and includes lakes, rivers, streams, and creeks. Groundwater is below the surface of the earth. The analysis in this section is based partly upon the Infrastructure Technical Report for Hydrology, Sewer, Water, & Water Quality for the Proposed Project completed by Fuscoe Engineering in September 2017. A complete copy of this report is included as Appendix G to this DEIR. Some additional information on groundwater was obtained from the Orange County Water District (OCWD) Groundwater Management Plan 2015 Update. 5.7.1 Environmental Setting 5.7.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Clean Water Act Under the Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1977, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seeks to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. The statute employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. The CWA authorizes the EPA to implement water quality regulations. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program under Section 402(p) of the CWA controls water pollution by regulating storm water discharges into the waters of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • San Diego Creek Newport Bay Santiago Creek Santa Ana Riv Er
    Coyote Creek Santa Ana River Santiago Creek San Diego Creek Newport Bay THE OC PLAN Integrated Regional Water Management for the North and Central Orange County Watershed Management Areas March 2018 The OC Plan Contacts County of Orange Orange County Watersheds Orange County Department of Public Works 2301 N. Glassell Street Orange, California 92865 www.ocwatersheds.com Orange County Water District 18700 Ward Street Fountain Valley, California 92708 (714) 378-8248 www.ocwd.com Orange County Sanitation District 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 (714) 962-2411 www.ocsd.com March 2018 The OC PLAN for IRWM in North and Central Orange County TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................. TOC-1 LIST OF ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................................... AC-1 1 REGIONAL PLANNING, OUTREACH, GOVERNANCE AND COORDINATION........................................ 1-1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 History of Integrated Regional Water Management Planning in the North and Central Orange County Watershed Management Areas ...................................................................................... 1-5 1.3 IRWM Plan Development and Governance .................................................................................. 1-7
    [Show full text]
  • The-OC-Plan-2018.Pdf
    Admin Draft July 2017 THE OC PLAN Integrated Regional Water Management for the North and Central Orange County Watershed Management Areas March 2018 The OC Plan Contacts County of Orange Orange County Watersheds Orange County Department of Public Works 2301 N. Glassell Street Orange, California 92865 www.ocwatersheds.com Orange County Water District 18700 Ward Street Fountain Valley, California 92708 (714) 378-8248 www.ocwd.com Orange County Sanitation District 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 (714) 962-2411 www.ocsd.com March 2018 The OC PLAN for IRWM in North and Central Orange County TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................. TOC-1 LIST OF ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................................... AC-1 1 REGIONAL PLANNING, OUTREACH, GOVERNANCE AND COORDINATION........................................ 1-1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 History of Integrated Regional Water Management Planning in the North and Central Orange County Watershed Management Areas ...................................................................................... 1-5 1.3 IRWM Plan Development and Governance .................................................................................. 1-7 1.3.1 IRWM Plan Development................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Canyon Dam Sewer Pipeline Project
    INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Carbon Canyon Dam Sewer Pipeline Project LEAD AGENCY: Orange County Sanitation District 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92728-8127 Contact: Mr. Jim Herberg 714/593-7310 CONSULTANT: RBF Consulting 3536 Concours, Suite 220 Ontario, CA 91764 Contact: Mr. Kevin Thomas 909/941-5204 September 22, 2004 JN 10-101519.001 Carbon Canyon Dam Sewer Pipeline Project Initial Study/Environmental Checklist TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 1 1.1 Statutory Authority and Requirements ................................ ................................ ......... 1 1.2 Agency Consulta tion and Public Review Process ................................ ........................ 1 1.3 Related Environmental Documentation ................................ ................................ ........ 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................ ................................ .......................... 4 2.1 Project Location ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 4 2.2 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 2.3 Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 4 2.4 Project Characteristics................................ ................................ ...............................
    [Show full text]
  • 4.7 Hydrology and Drainage
    Cypress General Plan EIR 4.7 HYDROLOGY AND DRAINAGE This Section describes the current conditions related to hydrology and drainage in the City of Cypress. Additionally, this Section provides an assessment of hydrologic and drainage impacts that could result from implementation of the proposed General Plan Update, and identifies appropriate mitigation measures. 4.7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING WATER RESOURCES Water resources are diminishing throughout Southern California with increased development. As the native water supply decreases, the region’s dependence on imported water grows. This section describes the quantity and quality of surface and ground water resources within Cypress. SURFACE WATER No naturally occurring permanent surface water features exist within Cypress. The Los Alamitos Race Track and Cypress Golf Course in southwestern Cypress, do however, contain a number of manmade lakes. In addition, six storm drain channels intermittently carry water: Moody Creek, Coyote Creek, 2A, Carbon Creek, Stanton Creek and Bolsa Chica Creek. GROUND WATER The Southern California Water Company (SCWC) is responsible for water distribution in Cypress. Approximately 75 percent of Cypress’ water use is obtained from the ground water basin managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). The remaining 25 percent of water is imported through the Municipal Water District of Orange County. Created by the State legislature in 1933, OCWD is responsible for maintaining the quantity and quality of ground water underlying Cypress and much of northern Orange County. The OCWD prevents local water companies from overdrafting the basin’s water supply. Each jurisdiction is allowed to extract only 75 percent of their water needs from ground water.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater: Resource and Risk Management
    Chapter Findings and Recommendations Summary The purpose of this Chapter is to 1) describe the mission, facilities, and operations of Flood Control Management agencies in the Santa Ana River Watershed; 2) identify past, current, and emerging key watershed priorities; 3) evaluate how key priorities have been, and potentially can be, addressed by Flood Control Districts/Divisions (FCDs) using a range of strategies; and 4) recommend the strategies and projects most likely to be effective to ensure watershed sustainability over a range of timescales. Finally, this OWOW 2.0 Plan (Plan) updates and revises the 2010 Plan. Priority Issues Water supply is challenged by increased demand due to population growth in the watershed; reductions in imported water supplies; reduced groundwater recharge from expansion of urbanization and impervious surfaces placed over viable recharge areas; losses to the ocean due to concrete channelization and lost recharge in the channels themselves, seawater intrusion due to decreased groundwater recharge in coastal areas, and uncertain, but expected, long-term reductions in average annual precipitation due to climate change. High priority water quality problems include maintaining the salt balance in the watershed (see Chapter 5.5 Beneficial Use Assurance), reducing anthropogenic pollutants in surface water runoff to optimize beneficial uses, preventing pollutants from contaminating groundwater; and cleanup and management of existing contaminated groundwater sites (Chapter 5.5 Beneficial Use Assurance). 1 | Flood Risk Management / Stormwater Management Watershed management efforts of past decades were driven largely by individual entity priorities or programs. However, more comprehensive and integrated projects driven by a multi-stakeholder project paradigm can more effectively and more efficiently address watershed needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Part IV-D – Dam Failure Table of Contents
    Rancho Santiago Community College District Part IV-D – Dam Failure Table of Contents A. THE CALIFORNIA DAM FAILURE THREAT ................................................................... 3 OVERVIEW OF DAM .......................................................................................................... 3 PROFILING DAM FAILURE HAZARDS .................................................................................. 4 ASSESSMENT OF LOCAL VULNERABILITY AND POTENTIAL LOSSES ..................................... 4 TYPES OF DAMS .............................................................................................................. 5 CURRENT CALIFORNIA DAM FAILURE HAZARD MITIGATION EFFORTS ................................. 7 OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENHANCED DAM FAILURE HAZARD MITIGATION ................................. 9 RESULTS OF A DAM FAILURE ............................................................................................ 9 B. THE ORANGE COUNTY DAM FAILURE THREAT ........................................................ 10 Figure 1: Orange County Dams .....................................................................................................................11 Figure 2: Orange County Prado Dam Map ...................................................................................................14 DAM FAILURE FLOODING ................................................................................................ 15 ORANGE COUNTY HISTORICAL FAILURE FLOODING ........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Los Angeles
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles What’s the Dam Problem? Hazardous Dams, Flood Risk, and Dimensions of Vulnerability in California A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Master of Urban and Regional Planning by Britta McOmber 2018 © Copyright by Britta McOmber 2018 ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS What’s the Dam Problem? Hazardous Dams, Flood Risk, and Dimensions of Vulnerability in California by Britta McOmber Master of Urban and Regional Planning University of California, Los Angeles, 2018 Professor Susanna B. Hecht, Chair In the state of California, dams are aging, underfinanced, and in many cases ill-maintained. The Oroville Dam Spillway Failure in February 2017 demonstrates that even dams with satisfactory condition ratings can be at risk of failing from a combination of climatic, political, economic, and structural factors. It is therefore necessary to look beyond the condition assessment of a dam and instead consider the hazard potential status. California has 833 High Hazard Potential (HHP) dams – which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers defines as dams that would cause significant loss of life, property destruction, or environmental damage in the case of failure or misoperation (2016). Expanding on previous literature on the sociodemographic determinants of flood-risk in cases of sea-level rise, climate change, high precipitation, and storm events, this project analyzes variables of social vulnerability within HHP dam inundation boundaries. I rely on a series of ii geostatistical analyses, two-tail independent samples statistical tests, and multiple linear regressions to answer the overarching research question – Who is most vulnerable to dam- induced floods in California? The data underpinning this research comes from the National Inventory of Dams, statewide dam inundation boundary maps, and the 2012 -2016 American Community Survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Orange County Regional Water and Wastewater Hazard Mitigation Plan
    FINAL Orange County Regional Water and Wastewater Hazard Mitigation Plan Prepared by: MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY 18700 Ward Street Fountain Valley, California 92708 Contact: Kelly Hubbard WEROC Programs Manager 714.593.5010 MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL 5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500 Santa Ana, California 92707 Contact: Ms. Kristen Bogue 949.855.5747 GPA CONSULTING 2642 Michelle Drive, Suite 110 Tustin, California 92780 Contact: Ms. Starla Barker, AICP 310.792.2690 August 2019 JN 161720 This document is designed for double-sided printing to conserve natural resources. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of the Plan and Authority ....................................................................................... 1-3 1.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Participation........................................................................................... 1-5 1.2.1 Overview of Water and Wastewater Systems in Orange County .............................. 1-5 1.2.2 Participating Jurisdictions .......................................................................................... 1-6 1.3 What is New/What Has Changed from the 2012 Plan ......................................................... 1-8 1.4 Plan Organization ................................................................................................................ 1-9 Section 2.0 Planning Process Documentation .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]