DOCSLIB.ORG

City of Redding

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
City of Redding City of Redding . rights reserved.All 8 Holding Company 201 ©Black &©Black Veatch COOPERATIVELY PREPARED WITH Table of Contents i REU | POWERING A STRONG COMMUNITY Table of Contents Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions List .......................................................................................... 1 IRP Project Partners ............................................................................................................................................. 4 1.0 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Summary of the 20-Year Resource Plan ..................................................................................... 1-5 2.0 Purpose and Background ................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Overview of the Integrated Resource Planning Process ...................................................... 2-1 2.2 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 2-2 2.3 State Laws, Policy, and Regulations ............................................................................................. 2-2 2.4 Other Relevant State Legislation and Executive Orders ...................................................... 2-9 2.5 Federal Energy Legislation ............................................................................................................ 2-14 2.6 Public Stakeholder Process ............................................................................................................ 2-15 3.0 Existing Resources and System Description .............................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Generating Facilities ........................................................................................................................... 3-4 3.2 Renewable Energy Resources ......................................................................................................... 3-4 3.3 Contractual Purchases ....................................................................................................................... 3-6 3.4 Transmission Assets and Adequacy ............................................................................................. 3-8 3.5 Distribution Assets and Adequacy .............................................................................................. 3-12 3.6 Natural Gas Commodity, Transportation and Storage ....................................................... 3-16 3.7 Wholesale Energy Trading ............................................................................................................. 3-17 4.0 Energy and Demand Forecast ......................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Historical Energy Use and Peak Demand ................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Forecast Methodology and Assumptions ................................................................................... 4-3 4.3 Forecast Results.................................................................................................................................... 4-6 4.4 Comparison to CEC Forecast ........................................................................................................... 4-7 5.0 Customer Programs, Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Resources ................... 5-1 5.1 Energy Efficiency Program Background .................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Current Energy Efficiency Initiatives ........................................................................................... 5-2 5.3 Commercial Rebates ........................................................................................................................... 5-4 5.4 Additional Programs ........................................................................................................................... 5-4 5.5 Demand Response Programs .......................................................................................................... 5-6 5.6 Transportation Electrification ........................................................................................................ 5-8 6.0 The Need for Additional Resources and Resource Options ................................................. 6-1 6.1 Existing System Capacity Balance ................................................................................................. 6-1 6.2 Existing System Scenario Energy Requirements and Renewable Energy levels.......................................................................................................................................................... 6-3 6.3 Supply Side Resource Technology Costs and Characteristics ........................................... 6-8 6.4 Energy Efficiency ................................................................................................................................ 6-16 6.5 Energy Storage .................................................................................................................................... 6-17 Table of Contents 1-ii 7.0 Modeling Assumptions, Tools, and Methodology .................................................................... 7-1 7.1 Modeling Assumptions ...................................................................................................................... 7-1 7.2 Ascend Analytics Planning Suite – Tools for Modern Resource Planning .................... 7-4 8.0 Evaluation and Results ...................................................................................................................... 8-1 8.1 Economic Evaluation Framework ................................................................................................. 8-1 8.2 Scenario Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 8-2 8.3 Consolidated Results .......................................................................................................................... 8-5 8.4 Detailed Results of the Preferred Expansion Plan ................................................................. 8-8 8.5 Sensitivity Cases ................................................................................................................................. 8-17 8.6 Retail Rates and the Preferred Expansion Plan ..................................................................... 8-17 8.7 The preferred Plan in consideration of Future Conditions and risks........................... 8-19 8.8 The preferred Plan with consideration of Localized Air Pollutants and Disadvantaged Communities ........................................................................................................ 8-21 9.0 Conclusions and Recommended Expansion Plan .................................................................... 9-1 Appendix A. CEC Standardized Tables for the Adopted Resource Scenario ............................. A-1 Appendix B. Stakeholder Feedback Form Results ............................................................................. B-1 Appendix C. Intermittency Analysis ........................................................................................................ C-1 Attachment A: Solar Project Generation Data ......................................................................................... C-5 Attachment B: Stochastic Model Results ................................................................................................... C-7 Appendix D. Ascend Analytics Methodology ........................................................................................ D-1 Appendix E. RPS Compliance and Enforcement Document ............................................................ E-1 Appendix F. Energy Storage Compliance Plan ..................................................................................... F-1 LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1 Summary of Key IRP Filing Requirements and Location in IRP ....................................... 1-3 Table 1-2 Projects Considered in the IRP Expansion Plans (All Capacities are the Maximum Rated and Not Firm Capacities) ............................................................................... 1-6 Table 1-3 Projects in the Expansion Plan Scenarios Modeled (All Capacities are the Maximum Rated and Not Firm Capacities) ............................................................................... 1-7 Table 1-4 Heat Diagram of Scenario CPWC and RE Results .................................................................. 1-12 Table 1-5 Detailed CPWC Results for the Preferred Expansion Plan, Scenario H........................ 1-13 Table 1-6 Renewable Energy and REC Adequacy in the Preferred Expansion Plan, Scenario H ............................................................................................................................................. 1-14 Table 2-1 Estimated 2030 GHG Emissions by Sector (MMTCO2e) ....................................................... 2-5 Table 2-2 POU Share (in 1,000 MTCO2e) of 2030 GHG Emissions Projected by CARB ............... 2-5 Table 2-3 Summary of Key IRP Filing Requirements and Location in IRP ....................................... 2-8 Table
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PAP-732 Control of Release Water Temperatures in Reclamation's
    PAP-732 Control of Release Water Temperatures in Reclamation's Central Valley Project by Perry L. Johnson Presented in Japan by Darrell W. Webber November 1991 HYDRAULICS BRANCH OFFICIAL FILE COPY CONTROL OF RELEASE WATER TEMPERATURES IN RECLAMATION'S CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT by Darrell W. Webber Assistant Commissioner-Engineering and Research United States Bureau of Reclamation INTRODUCTION California's Central Valley Basin includes two major watersheds, the Sacramento River on the north and the San Joaquin River on the south (figure 1). The combined watersheds extend nearly 800 kilometers (500 miles) in a northwest-southeast direction and range from about 100 to 160 kilometers (60 to 100 miles) in width. The valley floor occupies about one-third of the basin; the other two thirds are mountainous. The Sacramento River and its tributaries flow southward, draining the northern part of the basin. The San Joaquin River and its tributaries flow northward, draining the central southern portion. These two river systems join at the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, flow into San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. The Central Valley Project, one of the United States major water developments, extends over much of the basin. Although developed primarily for irrigation, this multiple-purpose project also provides flood control, improves Sacramento River navigation, supplies domestic and industrial water, generates electric power, creates opportunities for recreation, controls salt water encroachment, and conserves fish and wildlife. The project annually delivers between 3.7 billion and 4.9 billion cubic meters (3 and 4 million acre-feet) of water for irrigation use on nearly 8 billion square meters (2 million acres) of land.
    [Show full text]
  • Carr Fire Incident Update
    CARR FIRE INCIDENT UPDATE Date: 8/4/2018 Time: 7:00 A.M. Info Line: Call 211 or visit www.211norcal.org @CAL_FIRE @CALFIRE Information Line: (530) 225-2510 Media Line: (530) 448-2466 @CALFIRESHU Incident Website: www.fire.ca.gov/current_incidents Email Updates (sign up): www.tinyurl.com/carrfire INCIDENT FACTS Incident Start Date: July 23, 2018 Incident Start Time: 1:15 p.m. Incident Type: Wildland Fire Cause: Mechanical Failure of a Vehicle Incident Location: Highway 299 and Carr Powerhouse Road CAL FIRE Unit: Shasta/Trinity Unified Command Agencies: CAL FIRE, National Park Service, Redding City Fire, US Forest Service Size: 141,825 acres Containment: 41% Expected Full Containment: Unknown Firefighter Injuries/Fatalities: 2 STRUCTURAL SUMMARY Structures Residential Structures Destroyed: 1,073 Commercial Structures Destroyed: 14 Other Destroyed: 492 Threatened: 1,358 Residential Structures Damaged: 190 Commercial Structures Damaged: 8 Other Damaged: 60 CURRENT SITUATION Situation Firefighters worked through the night to mitigate potential spot fires across control lines. Low humidity, winds, Summary: and an unstable atmosphere have increased fire activity. Red Flag Warning remains in effect until 9 p.m. Repopulation of residents in the areas affected by evacuations will continue as conditions permit. Evacuations: Shasta County: Community of French Gulch SR 299 west of Trinity Mountain Rd to the base of Buckhorn Summit Whiskey Creek Rd to include the boat launch/day use areas South along Swasey Dr from SR299 to Lower Springs Placer Road
    [Show full text]
  • Sacramento River Temperature Task Group
    Sacramento River Temperature Task Group Thursday, March 26, 2020 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm Conference Call Only: Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://meetings.ringcentral.com/j/5306224350 Or iPhone one-tap : US: +1(623)4049000,,5306224350# (US West) Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1(623)4049000 (US West) Meeting ID: 530 622 4350 International numbers available: https://meetings.ringcentral.com/teleconference Agenda 1. Introductions 2. Purpose and Objective 3. 2020 Meeting Logistics 4. Long Term Operations Implementation - Update 5. Hydrology Update 6. Operations Update and Forecasts a. Storage/Release Management Conditions b. Temperature Management 7. River Fish Monitoring: carcass surveys, redd counts, stranding and dewatering surveys and sampling at rotary screw traps 8. Fish Distribution/Forecasts: Estimated percentage of the population upstream of Red Bluff Diversion Dam for steelhead, winter-run and spring-run Chinook salmon, steelhead update and Livingston Stone Hatchery. 9. Seasonal Topics 10. Discussion 11. Review Action Items 12. Next Meeting Scheduling UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA DAILY CVP WATER SUPPLY REPORT MARCH 24, 2020 RUN DATE: March 25, 2020 RESERVOIR RELEASES IN CUBIC FEET/SECOND 15 YR RESERVOIR DAM WY 2019 WY 2020 MEDIAN TRINITY LEWISTON 318 303 303 SACRAMENTO KESWICK 10,188 4,569 3,798 FEATHER OROVILLE (SWP) 9,500 1,750 1,750 AMERICAN NIMBUS 4,887 1,516 1,516 STANISLAUS GOODWIN 4,504 206 428 SAN JOAQUIN FRIANT 2,987 0 286 STORAGE IN MAJOR RESERVOIRS IN THOUSANDS OF ACRE-FEET % OF 15 RESERVOIR CAPACITY 15 YR AVG WY 2019 WY 2020 YR AVG TRINITY 2,448 1,715 1,881 2,000 117 SHASTA 4,552 3,491 3,827 3,567 102 FOLSOM 977 602 681 466 77 NEW MELONES 2,420 1,562 2,025 1,892 121 FED.
    [Show full text]
  • Instream Flow Requirements in the Sacramento River Hydrologic Region Updated: November 2014
    Instream Flow Requirements in the Sacramento River Hydrologic Region Updated: November 2014 This briefing paper describes the existing instream flow requirements for the major rivers and streams in the Sacramento River hydrologic region. These requirements include provisions in State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) decisions, biological opinions, streamflow agreements, and other processes. New processes to develop different flow requirements should be aware of, and take into account, these existing flow requirements. Upper Sacramento River 1. 1960 MOA between Reclamation and DFG An April 5, 1960, Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between Reclamation and the DFG originally established flow objectives in the Sacramento River for the protection and preservation of fish and wildlife resources. The agreement provided for minimum releases into the natural channel of the Sacramento River at Keswick Dam for normal and critically dry years (Table 1, below). Since October 1981, Keswick Dam has operated based on a minimum release of 3,250 cfs for normal years from September 1 through the end of February, in accordance with the MOA. This release schedule was included in Order 90-05 (described below), which maintains a minimum release of 3,250 cfs at Keswick Dam and Red Bluff Diversion Dam (RBDD) from September through the end of February in all water years, except critically dry years. The 1960 MOA provides that releases from Keswick Dam (from September 1 through December 31) are made with minimum water level fluctuation or change to protect salmon to the extent compatible with other operations requirements. Releases from Shasta and Keswick Dams are gradually reduced in September and early October during the transition from meeting Delta export and water quality demands to operating the system for flood control and fishery concerns from October through December.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft San Luis Reservoir Expansion Appraisal Report
    San Luis Reservoir Expansion Draft Appraisal Report Central Valley Project, California Mid-Pacific Region U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation December 2013 Mid-Pacific Region - Planning Division U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation December 2013 Mid-Pacific Region - Planning Division 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. Cover Image: Aerial view, looking west, of B.F. Sisk Dam and San Luis Reservoir. Image courtesy of DWR. San Luis Reservoir Expansion Draft Appraisal Report Central Valley Project, California Mid-Pacific Region U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region - Planning Division San Luis Reservoir Expansion - Appraisal Report December 2013 Table of Contents 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Purpose of the Appraisal Study ........................................................................................ 4 2.2 Need for the Appraisal Study ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Trinity Dam Operating Criteria Trinity River Division Central Valley Project-California
    ·rRlNITY ~IVER BASIN us RESOURCE LIBRARY BR TRINITY COUNTY LIBRARY T7 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 1979 (c.l) Trinity Dam Operating Criteria Trinity River Division Central Valley Project-California TRINITY COUNTY JULY 1979 TRINITY RIVER BASIN RESOURC E LIBRARY TRINITY RIVER DIVISION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT CALIFORNIA Trinity Dam Operating Criteria Prepared for the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Task Force July 1979 United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region 1 ~ 7 5 122 R 1 W R 1 E 2 23° \ R 10 W ( T 38 N ----- ·-----]r------------r-CANADA ' I • I WA r NORTH ~ J SHINGTON ' \ ' DAKOTA ) ___ 1 • \.-.. ..-- .. J, ': M 0 N TAN A !___ - ----\ ' \ souTH : i ,----- - ~ ~~ ,o. 0 R EGON ( ,_---, : DAKOTA I : IOAHo 1 I __ __ \ \~' I W YOMING ·----- ~ -- -----, ___ , ,I \ ~ ~u I ~ 0 ; ------1 , NEBRASKA ', 1\ ~ I I ·--------'--, ~ I NEVA 1' 1: 0 ~1 : t------- -'.) I I J \_ DA UTAH COLORADO: ANSAS ' ~,J t -+- ---1--- .. - ', : : I K .\ ~ I . ---- .... ~ ' I 4!< l o ' ------·------ -- -~----- ', ~ -r' "::: rJ A ~ '!> ','\_r) i t---! OKLAHOMA\ -:- . I , , r/ / ;' ARIZONA I' NEW MEXICO. L ______ 1_ MALIN-ROUND MOUNTAIN 500 KV ~ . ' ,... 36 : , I l PACIFIC NW-PAC/FIC SW INTERTIE ---, ' ' ', I, ---~-E~~'-;:--·;;::<_-'r EX A_(S ---i- - ~ ~ - t \. .. _;··-....., ~ CLAIR ENGLE LAKE IN 0 EX M A P '._\_ ~.:.. (__j ~ ) I I / \ I - BUREAU OF RECLAMATION HASTAL~l WHISKEYTOWN-SHASTA( rr TRINITY [NAT . lj r COMPLETED OR AUTHORIZED WORKS 34 TRINITY DAM & POWERP~LANT~- ? ) RECrATION AREAS (~ ,- DAM AND RESERVOIR LEWISTON LAKE TRIINir/cARR 230 KV ? 0 I <=::? r ~-~~- _./ TUNNEL ~<";:1 r ~ -+ ---< - .r') d,):3_ -}N , ··- •J?:y,--.___ N CONDUIT - ~~ wcAv~~VIL' 7 __r~\.
    [Show full text]
  • 6Th 5-Year Review for Iron Mountain Mine Superfund Site, W/Appendices
    SEMS-RM DOCID # 100010569 SIXTH FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT FOR IRON MOUNTAIN MINE SUPERFUND SITE SHASTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY United States Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District FOR U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX Ap~poved by: /2. Date ( _ tJa,r-1-w, '] -z_,,1 II ¥ Da Barton Assistant Director, Superfund Division California Site Cleanup and Enforcement Branch U.S. EPA, Region 9 [This page is intentionally left blank.] Executive Summary This is the sixth Five-Year Review (FYR) for the Iron Mountain Mine (IMM) Superfund Site (Site), located near Redding, California. The purpose of this FYR is to review information to determine if the interim remedies are, and will continue to be, protective of human health and the environment. The Iron Mountain Mine was mined from the 1860’s through 1963 for copper, gold, pyrite, silver, and zinc. Operations included open pit mining, adits and stoping inside Iron Mountain, milling, ore transportation via railroad and tramway, a cyanide leaching plant, cementation plants, ore roasting areas, and a smelter. Exposure of the mine workings, waste rock piles, and the open pit mine to oxygen and water have produced acid mine drainage (AMD) management issues. Numerous historical fish kills in the Sacramento River were attributed to AMD from the Main Mine Area. The Site was added to the National Priorities List in September 1983. The interim remedies for the Site consist of a combination of source control, AMD collection and treatment, and water management components, including clean water diversions and coordinated releases of contaminated surface water from Spring Creek Debris Dam (SCDD) into dilution flows from Shasta Dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Shasta Dam Fish Passage Evaluation Fact Sheet
    Bureau of Reclamation National Marine Mid-Pacific Region Fisheries Service Shasta Dam Fish Passage Evaluation Fact Sheet Background The Sacramento River is home to Central Valley steelhead and four runs of Chinook salmon. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issued, on June 4, 2009, a Biological Opinion (BO) and Conference Opinion on the Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP). The BO concluded that, as proposed, CVP and SWP operations were likely to jeopardize the continued existence of four federally-listed anadromous fish species: Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon, California Central Valley steelhead, and Southern distinct population segment (DPS) of the North American green sturgeon. The BO set forth a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) that allows continued operation of the CVP and SWP in compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). For CVP operations, the RPA obligates the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) to evaluate the feasibility for the reintroduction of winter-run and spring-run Chinook salmon and steelhead upstream from Shasta, Folsom and New Melones dams. The Shasta Dam Fish Passage Evaluation is the first effort to be Coldwater habitat upstream of Shasta Lake launched. It features a Pilot Implementation Plan projected for completion in late 2014. Pilot Implementation Plan The Pilot Implementation Plan is a near-term experimental effort to determine the feasibility of reintroducing Chinook salmon to tributaries above Shasta Lake and transporting migrating juvenile fish to the Sacramento River below Keswick Dam. The Plan will evaluate possible approaches to capture, transport and release of fish at different life stages.
    [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]
  • Drought Brochure 2021 Update
    Drought In California January 2021 California Department of Water Resources | Natural Resources Agency | State of California Major Water Facilities Tule Lake Clear LLaakke Reservoir Trinity Reservoir Shasta Lake Whiskeytown Redding State Water Project Lake Antelope Federal Water Project Corning Canal Lake Tehama-ColuColussa Local Water Project Canal Frenchmmaan BlackBlack ButteButte LaLakke Lake Lake Lake Oroville Davis Stony GoGorgege Reservvoioir New BullBullaards East PaParrk Reservoivoir Bar Reservoir Lake Mennddoocincino Englebrightight Reservoivoir Indian Vaalleylley Reservoivoir Glenn-Colusa Canal Lake Sonoma Folsom Lake Lake Sacramento Auburn FolFolsom Sooututhh CCananaal Berryessa Putah S. CanaCanal Camanche Reservvoioir North Bay Aqueduct Mokelkeluummnne New Hogan Reservoir AqAquedueducuct New Meloelonnees LaLakke Contra Costa CCananal Stockton Los Vaqueros Reservoir Hetch Hetchyetchy Reservoir Don Pedro Lake San Francisco Lake McClure Lake Crowley Lake Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct Del Vaalllle South Bay Aqueduceduct Delta-Meendotandota Pachechecoo Conduit Canal Madera CaCanal Tinemaha Santa Clara CondConduiuit Millerton Lake Reservoir Hollister Condduuiit Pine Flat Reservoir San Luis Reeservvoioir Fresno San Luis Los Banos Reservoir Canal Lake Friant-Kern Kaweah Coalinga Canal Canal Haiwee Reservoir Lake Calif Success San Antonio Reservvoioir or Nacimientnto ni Isabella Reservoiir a Lake Los Angeles Cross Valley Aqueduct Canal California Aqueduct Twitchelwitchell Coastal Branch Reservoir Quail Lake Aq ued Pyramid LaLakke u ct Colorado
    [Show full text]
  • 50 CFR Ch. II (10–1–19 Edition)
    National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA, Commerce § 223.101 System as now or hereafter con- FIGURE 13 TO PART 223—SINGLE GRID HARD stituted, shall be treated for purposes TED ESCAPE OPENING of section 7 of the Act as a threatened FIGURE 14a TO PART 223—MAXIMUM ANGLE OF species, and the provisions of section DEFLECTOR BARS WITH STRAIGHT BARS 7(a)(2) of the Act shall apply. ATTACHED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE FRAME (c) For purposes of section 7 of the FIGURE 14b TO PART 223—MAXIMUM ANGLE OF Act, any consultation on a proposed DEFLECTOR BARS WITH BENT BARS AT- TACHED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE FRAME Federal action that may affect both an FIGURE 15 TO PART 223—WEEDLESS TED experimental and a nonexperimental BRACE BAR DESCRIPTION population of the same species should FIGURE 16 TO PART 223—ESCAPE OPENING AND consider that species’ experimental and FLAP DIMENSIONS FOR THE DOUBLE COVER nonexperimental populations to con- FLAP TED stitute a single listed species for the FIGURE 17 TO PART 223—BOONE WEDGE CUT purposes of conducting the analyses ESCAPE OPENING under section 7 of the Act. FIGURES 18a, 18b AND 18c TO PART 223—LARGE FRAME TED ESCAPE OPENING; MINIMUM PART 223—THREATENED MARINE DIMENSIONS USING ALL-BAR CUTS (TRI- AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES ANGULAR CUTS); LARGE FRAME TED ES- CAPE OPENING; MINIMUM DIMENSIONS USING ALL-BAR CUTS AND LEADING EDGE Subpart A—General Provisions CUT; LARGE FRAME TED ESCAPE OPENING; Sec. MINIMUM DIMENSIONS USING ALL-POINTS 223.101 Purpose and scope. SIDE CUTS (RECTANGULAR CUT) 223.102 Enumeration of threatened marine FIGURES 19a AND 19b TO PART 223—CHAUVIN and anadromous species.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Issues: Climate Zone: Subjects: Effects: Project Name
    IEA Hydropower Implementing Agreement Annex VIII - Hydropower Good Practices: Environmental Mitigation Measures and Benefits Case Study 05-08: Water Quality – Shasta Dam, U.S. Key Issues: 5- Water Quality 1-Biological Diversity Climate Zone: Cs: Temperate Subjects: - River Temperature Modification - Salmon Habitat Restoration - Hydropower Production Optimization Effects: - Improved habitat for salmon spawning and juvenile rearing - Additional Hydropower Generation - Role Model for other dams and power plants Project Name: Shasta Dam Temperature Control Device Country: Shasta County, California, United States of America Implementing Party & Period - Project: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1938-1945 (original construction)& 1995-1996 (modified) - Good Practice: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1996 - Present Key Words: Temperature Control Device, Hydropower Optimization, Endangered Species, Water Quality, Habitat Restoration, Selective Withdrawal, and Reservoir Stratification Abstract: This Good Practice illustrates a successful case study of habitat restoration and hydropower optimization. During the period of late 1980s to the mid-1990s, the Bureau of Reclamation spilled cold water through Shasta Dam’s low-level river outlets to provide proper water temperatures for salmon downstream, instead of passing water through the hydro turbines. A Temperature Control Device (TCD), with a unique selective withdrawal system that routes water through Shasta Powerhouse, has provided the answer to maintaining the required water temperature for fish and at the same time, generating clean inexpensive electricity. An aerial view of the TCD, Shasta Dam and power plant is shown in Figure 1. 1. Outline of the Project The Central Valley Project (CVP) in California, USA, developed, constructed and managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the Nation’s major water resources developments and one of the largest water storage and conveyance systems in the world.
    [Show full text]