DOCSLIB.ORG

Optimal Operation of a Multiple Reservoir System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

UC Berkeley Technical Completion Reports Title Optimal Operation of a Multiple Reservoir System Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9nk76212 Authors Marino, Miguel A Loaiciga, Hugo A Publication Date 1983-09-01 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California / I /I r, / OPTIMAL OPERATION OF A MULTIPLE RESERVOIR SYSTEM by Miguel A. Marino Principal Investigator and Hugo A. Loaiciga Research Assistant Land, Air and Water Resources University of California, VI .TEr~R'::SO - r. ~S-- C~\ I f"R P ;,(, ... f ••.5 .I) "..~, Office of the Director CALIFORNIA WATER RESOURCES CENTER University of California DaVis, California 95616 - The research leading to this report was supported in part by the United States Department of the Interior, under the Annual Cooperative Program of Public Law 95-467, Project No. A-088-CAL, and by the University of California Water Resources Center, Project UCAL-WRC-W-617. Cont'ent.s of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views and poliCies of the Office of Water Policy, U.S. Department of the Interior, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute their endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. TECHNICAL COMPLETION REPORT September 1983 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES v LIST OF TABLES vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xii ABSTRACT xiii 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. TERMINOLOGY 6 2.1 Control or Decision Variable 6 2.2 State Variable 6 2.3 Constraints 6 2.4 Feasible Region 6 2.5 Objective Function 7 2.6 Convex Set 7 2.7 Optimization Model 7 2.8 Global and Local Optima 7 2.9 Initial Policy 8 2.10 Optimal Policy 8 ·2.11 Multiple Optimal Solutions 8 3. REVIEW OF RESERVOIR OPERATION MODELS 9 3.1 Deterministic Models 9 3.2 Stochastic Models 16 3.3 Discussion 21 4. REVIEW OF SOLUTION PROCEDURES 25 4.1 Formulation of the Problem 25 4.2 Discrete Dynamic Programming 28 -ii- 4.3 State Increment Dynamic Programming 31 4.4 Dynamic Programming Successive Approximations 33 4.5 Differential Dynamic Programming 37 4.6 Linear Quadratic Gaussian Method 40 4.7 Nonlinear Programming 45 4.8 Progressive Optimality Algorithm 46 4.9 Convergence Proofs of the POA for Bounded States and Decisions 55 5. OPTIMAL OPERATION POLICIES FOR THE NCVP 59 5.1 Description of the NCVP System 59 Data Relevant to the Constraints of the System 75 Benefits Accruing from the Operation of the System 98 5.2 Streamflow Forecasting Technique 99 5.3 Optimization Model for the NCVP 109 Simiplified Linear Model 126 Simplified Quadratic Model 1 131 Simplified Quadratic Model 2 133 5.4 Selection of Initial Operation Policy 138 6. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 141 6.1 Initial Policies 141 6.2 Optimal Operation Policies 160 7. SYSTEM-DEPENDENT FEATURES: AND EXTENSION OF THE 'OPTIMIZATION MODEL 193 7.1 Modeling Regulating Reservoirs 193 7.2 Simiplified Linear Model 208 -iii- 7.3 Simplified Quadratic Modell 213 7.4 Simplified Quadratic Model 2 217 7.5 Nonlinearity in the Energy Rate Equation 220 7.6 Nonlinearities in the Constraints 223 7.7 A Full Model of Minimum Dimensionality 228 7.8 Application of General Nonlinear Model 241 Energy Generation Rates 242 Spillage Discharge Equations 247 Initial Policies 259 Solution Algorithm 259 Discussion of Results 268 8. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 286 REFERENCES 290 -iv- LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 4.1 Schematic representation of a trial trajectory f.~~O)}, the corridor boundaries {!~O) ± a}, and a substitute trial , f (1), traJectory t!t j. Fig. 4.2 Standard progressive optimality algorithm (paA) flow diagram. Fig. 4.3 Standard paA (To achieve state !~3): (L) ~1 and ~;l) yield (2) (1'1') (2) d (1) i e Ld (2) (",) (2) d (1) Le l d ~2 j !2 an!4 y~e !3 ; ~~1!3 an!S Yle 3 ~~2) (iv) ~1 and ~;2) yield ~;3); and (v) !i ) and !~2) yield ~j3)). (1) Fig. 4.4 Modified paA s (To achieve state !i ): (i) 3f1 and ~3 yield (2) (2) C') (2) and xC!) l eLd (2) and yield ~2 ; 11 ~2 -4 Y1e ?5.3 ; (iii) !1 !3 (3 (1) (3) x ). C) (3) and yield x(3). (v) and yield -2 ' ~v ~2 !S -3 ' !1 ~3 x(4). (4 (1) x(4). (4) (vi) x ) and yield and (vii) !1 and -2 ' -2 E6 -3 ' !3 s yield !i )). This scheme should be used when significant improvements (e.g., 10% improvement in the objective function with respect to the previous iteration) arise from the two- stage problem involving periods 1 and 2). Fig. 5.1 Schematic representation of Central Valley Project. Fig. 5.2 Shasta flood control diagram. Fig. 5.3 Folsom flood control diagram. Fig, 5.4 New Melones flood control diagram. Fig. 5.5 Tullock flood control diagram. Fig. 5.6 Schematic representation of NCVP diversions, losses, releases, and spills. Fig. 5.7 Trinity power plant (at Clair Engle Lake) gross generation curve. -v- Fig. 5.8 Judge Francis Carr power plant gross generation curve. Fig. 5.9 Spring Creek power plant gross generation curve. Fig. 5.10 Shasta power plant gross generation curve. Fig. 5.11 Folsom power plant gross generation curve. Fig. 5.12 New Melones power plant gross generation curve. Fig. 5.13 Tullock power plant gross generation curve. Fig. 5.14 Relation between t and vectors !t' ~t' and !t' Fig. 5.15 NCVP monthly optimization flow chart. Fig. 6.1 Typical energy vs. release curve (developed by using Folsom reservoir data). Fig. 6.2 Total annual energy vs , total annual inflow for the NCVP. Fig. 6.3 Operation of Shasta reservoir (water year 1979-80). Fig. 6.4 Operation of Folsom reservoir (water year 1979-80). Fig. 7.1 Elevation vs. storage (Clair Engle reservoir). Fig. 7.2 Operation of Shasta reservoir (water year 1979-80). Fig. 7.3 Operation of Folsom reservoir (water year 1979-80). Fig. A.1 Spillway rating curve (New Melones Dam). -vi- LIST OF TABLES Table 5.1 Basic NCVP Data. Table 5.2 Capacities of Tunnels and Penstocks. Table 5.3. Flood Control Provisions for Trinity Dam at Clair Engle Reservoir. Table 5.4 NCVP Flow Requirements. Table 5.5 Reservoir Capacity Allocations. Table 5.6 Maximum Reservoir Storages. Table 5.7 Minimum Reservoir Storages. Table 5.8 Maximum Reservoir Releases, Excluding Spills, that are Limited to Penstock Capacity. Table 5.9 Minimum Reservoir Releases. Table 5.10 Reservoir Net Rate Losses. Table 5.11 Transition and Noise Covariance Matrices for NCVP Monthly Inflows. Table 5.12 Actual and Forecast Monthly Inflows for Year with Below- Average Inflows, October 1975 - September 1976. Table 5.13 Actual and Forecast Monthly Inflows for Year with Average Inflows, October 1974 - September 1975. Table 5.14 Actual and Forecast Monthly Inflows for Year with Above- Average Inflows, October 1979 - September 1980. Table 5.15 Versions of the Optimization Model. Table 6.1 Initial Storage Policy, 1974-75 (Policy I). Table 6.2 Initial Release Policy, 1974-75 (Policy I) . Table 6.3 Initial Storage Policy, 1974-75 (Policy II) . -vii- Table 6.4 Initial Release Policy, 1974-75 (Policy II). Table 6.5 Initial Storage Policy, 1979-80 (Policy I) . Table 6.6 Initial Release Policy, 1979-80 (Policy I). Table 6.7 Initial Storage Policy, 1979-80 (Policy II) . Table 6.8 Initial Release POlicy, 1979-80 (Policy II) . Table 6.9 Initial Storage Policy, 1975-76 (Policy I). Table 6.10 Initial Release Policy, 1975-76 (Policy I) . Table 6.11 Initial Storage Policy, 1975-76 (Policy II) . Table 6.12 Initial Release Policy, 1975-76 (Policy II) . Table 6.13 Initial Storage Policy, 1973-74 (Policy I). Table 6.14 Initial Release Policy, 1973-74 (Policy I). Table 6.15 Number of Iterations to Attain Convergence and CPU Time Requirements. Table 6.16 Optimal State Trajectory Corresponding to Initial Policy I, 1974-75. Table 6.17 Optimal Energy Production, Release Policy, and Delta Releases Corresponding to Initial Policy I, 1974-75. Table 6.18 Optimal State Trajectory Corresponding to Initial Policy II, 1974-75. Table 6.19 Optimal Energy Production, Release Policy, and Delta Releases Corresponding to Initial Policy II, 1974-75. Table 6.20 Optimal State Trajectory Corresponding to Initial Policy I, 1979-80. Table 6.21 Optimal Energy Production, Release Policy, and Delta Releases Corresponding to Initial Policy I, 1979-80. Table 6.22 Optimal State Trajectory Corresponding to Initial Policy II, 1979-80. -viii- Table 6.23 Optimal Energy Production, Release Policy, and Delta Releases Corresponding to Initial Policy II, 1979-80. Table 6.24 Optimal State Trajectory Corresponding to Initial Policies I and II, 1975-76. Table 6.25 Optimal Energy Production, Release Policy, and Delta Releases Corresponding to Initial Policies I and II, 1975-76. Table 6.26 Optimal State Trajectory, 1973-74. Table 6.27 Optimal Energy Production, Release Policy, and Delta Releases, 1973-74. Table 6.28 Actual and Maximized Energy Production for Water Year 1979-80. Table 7.1 Initial Storage Policy, 1979-80 (Policy I). Table 7.2 Initial Release Policy, 1979-80 (Policy I). Table 7.3 Initial Storage Policy, 1979-80 (Policy II). Table 7.4 Initial Release Policy, 1979-80 (Policy II). Table 7.5 Optimal State Trajectory, 1979-80 (Policy I). Table 7.6 Optimal Release Policy, 1979-80 (Policy I). Table 7.7 Optimal Energy Production, Penstock Release, and Delta Releases Corresponding to Initial Policy I, 1979-80. Table 7.8 Optimal State Trajectory, 1979-80 (Policy II). Table 7.9 Optimal Release Policy, 1979-80 (Policy II). Table 7.10 Optimal Energy Production, Penstock Release, and Delta Releases Corresponding to Initial Policy II, 1979-80.
Recommended publications
  • Tri-Dam Project

    Tri-Dam Project

    AGENDA MATERIALS TRI-DAM PROJECT TRI-DAM POWER AUTHORITY \\IJ IJ\\ BOARD MEETING March 19, 2020 REGULAR BOARD MEETING AGENDA TRI-DAM PROJECT of THE OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT and THE SOUTH SAN JOAQUIN IRRIGATION DISTRICT MARCH 19, 2020 8:00A.M. CALL TO ORDER: Oakdale Irrigation District 1205 East F Street Oakdale, CA 95361 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: John Holbrook, Bob Holmes, Dave Kamper, Ralph Roos, Mike Weststeyn Gail Altieri, Brad DeBoer, Herman Doornenbal, Tom Orvis, Linda Santos PUBLIC COMMENT: The Joint Board of Directors encourages publi c participation at Board meetings. Matters affecting the operation of the Tri-Dam Project and under the jurisdiction of the Joint Districts and not posted on the Agenda may be addressed by the publi c, and limited to 5 minutes per person. California law prohibits the Board from taking action on any matter that is not on the posted Agenda unless the Board determines that it is a situation specified in Government Code Subsection 54954.2. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 1-2 l. Approve the regular board meeting minutes of February 20, 2020. 2. Approve February 2020 financial statements and statement of obligations. a. Investment p01tfolio and reserve fund status. ACTION CALENDAR ITEMS 3- 11 3. Discussion and possible action to approve annual fee for use of Federal Lands for operations of the Tri-Dam Project 4. Discussion and possible action to authorize the General Manager to sign the Professional Services Agreement with Gannett Fleming, Inc. for the preparation of the dam breach analysis and updated inundation mapping for Beardsley, Donnells, Tulloch and Goodwin Projects, including a budget adjustment for Account #59690.
  • Executive Summary

    Executive Summary

    Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration Date: January 9, 2019 Case No.: 2016-006868ENV Project Title: SFPUC Reliable Power Project Project Location: Portions of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Rights of Way in Stanislaus, Mariposa, and Tuolumne Counties Zoning: Various Project Sponsor San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Antonia Sivyer (415) 554-2474 Lead Agency: San Francisco Planning Department Staff Contact: Timothy Johnston – (415) 575-9035 [email protected] PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) proposes to implement the Reliable Power Project (proposed project) for maintaining the reliability of the SFPUC’s electrical transmission system between the Holm and Kirkwood Powerhouses and the Warnerville Substation. The project includes implementation of a long-term vegetation management program that would address the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s reliability standard (FAC-003) and other regulatory requirements that seek to minimize the risk of power outages and fires from vegetation contact with transmission lines on or near the right of way for electrical transmission lines1. In addition to implementation of the vegetation management program, the proposed project would include repairs and replacements for culverts associated with transmission line access roads and construction of a sand storage shed to stockpile sand for winter road treatments needed for access during winter months. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would occur within existing SFPUC facility and right of way boundaries in Stanislaus County, Mariposa County, and Tuolumne County, and would not require the acquisition of new property. Project implementation involving vegetation management would be ongoing. Construction activities and duration for culvert repair and/or replacement would vary along the transmission corridor, but would be short-term in nature, generally requiring a few of days to a couple of weeks to complete.
  • PAP-732 Control of Release Water Temperatures in Reclamation's

    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.
  • Carr Fire Incident Update

    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
  • Sacramento River Temperature Task Group

    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.
  • Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Draft

    Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Draft

    Chapter 11 Geology and Soils This chapter describes the affected environment for geology and soils, as well as potential environmental consequences and associated mitigation measures, as they pertain to implementing the alternatives. This chapter presents information on the primary study area (area of project features, the Temperance Flat Reservoir Area, and Millerton Lake below RM 274). It also discusses the extended study area (San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to the Merced River, the San Joaquin River from the Merced River to the Delta, the Delta, and the CVP and SWP water service areas). Affected Environment This section describes the affected environment related to geology, geologic hazards, erosion and sedimentation, geomorphology, mineral resources, soils, and salts. Where appropriate, geology and soils characteristics are described in a regional context, including geologic provinces, physiographic regions, or other large-scale areas, with some area-specific geologic maps and descriptions of specific soil associations. Geology This section describes the geology of the primary and extended study areas. Primary Study Area A description of the surficial geologic units encountered in the primary study area is presented in Table 11-1. Geologic maps of the primary study area and the area of project features are presented in Figure 11-1 and Figure 11-2, respectively. Draft – August 2014 – 11-1 Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Environmental Impact Statement Table 11-1. Description of Surficial Geologic Units of the Primary Study Area Geologic Map of Millerton Lake Quadrangle, West-Central Sierra Nevada, California1 Formation Surficial Deposits General Features Abbreviation Plutonic rocks characterized by undeformed blocky hornblende prisms as long as 1 cm and by biotite books as Tonalite of Blue Canyon much as 5 mm across.
  • Chronology of Major Litigation Involving the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project

    Chronology of Major Litigation Involving the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project

    Chronology of Major Litigation Involving the Topic: Litigation Central Valley Project and the State Water Project CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR LITIGATION INVOLVING THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT AND THE STATE WATER PROJECT I. Central Valley Project 1950 United States v. Gerlach Live Stock Co., 339 U.S. 725 (1950) Riparians on San Joaquin River downstream of Friant Dam sued for damages for impairment of their rights to periodic inundation of their “uncontrolled grasslands.” Under reclamation law, the United States had to recognize prior vested rights and compensate for their impairment. 1958 Ivanhoe Irrig. Dist. v. McCracken, 357 U.S. 275 (1958) Congress did not intend that Section 8 of the Reclamation Act, which generally makes state water law applicable to reclamation projects, would make the 160-acre limitation in Section 5 inapplicable to the CVP. If needed for a project, Reclamation could acquire water rights by the payment of compensation, either through condemnation, or if already taken, through actions by the owners in the courts. 1960 Ivanhoe Irrig. Dist. v. All Parties, 53 Cal.2d 692 (1960) State law conferred legal capacity upon irrigation districts to enter into contracts with federal government for CVP water. Districts could execute the contracts even though they contained the 160-acre limitation under federal law. 1963 Dugan v. Rank, 372 U.S. 609 (1963) Parties claiming water rights along the San Joaquin River downstream of Friant Dam sued the United States and Bureau of Reclamation officials, seeking to enjoin storage or diversion of water at the dam. The Court held that the courts had no jurisdiction over the United States because it had not consented to suit and the McCarran Amendment did not apply.
  • Instream Flow Requirements in the Sacramento River Hydrologic Region Updated: November 2014

    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.
  • Draft San Luis Reservoir Expansion Appraisal Report

    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 ..........................................................................................
  • Trinity Dam Operating Criteria Trinity River Division Central Valley Project-California

    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~\.
  • Cvp Overview

    Cvp Overview

    Central Valley Project Overview Eric A. Stene Bureau of Reclamation Table Of Contents The Central Valley Project ......................................................2 About the Author .............................................................15 Bibliography ................................................................16 Archival and Manuscript Collections .......................................16 Government Documents .................................................16 Books ................................................................17 Articles...............................................................17 Interviews.............................................................17 Dissertations...........................................................17 Other ................................................................17 Index ......................................................................18 1 The Central Valley Project Throughout his political life, Thomas Jefferson contended the United States was an agriculturally based society. Agriculture may be king, but compared to the queen, Mother Nature, it is a weak monarch. Nature consistently proves to mankind who really controls the realm. The Central Valley of California is a magnificent example of this. The Sacramento River watershed receives two-thirds to three-quarters of northern California's precipitation though it only has one-third to one-quarter of the land. The San Joaquin River watershed occupies two- thirds to three-quarter of northern California's land,
  • Appendix a Water Project Facilities and Operations January 2017

    Appendix a Water Project Facilities and Operations January 2017

    Appendix A Water Project Facilities and Operations January 2017 Water Project Facilities and Operations Final TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A.1 WATER PROJECT FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS ...................................................... A-1 A.1.1 Temporary, Operable, and Non-physical Barriers ...................................... A-1 A.1.2 Clifton Court Forebay Gates ....................................................................... A-3 A.1.3 SWP and CVP Exports ................................................................................ A-3 A.1.4 OMR Flow................................................................................................... A-4 A.1.5 Vernalis Inflow:Export Ratio ...................................................................... A-4 A.1.6 San Joaquin River Inflow ............................................................................ A-4 A.2 REFERENCES .................................................................................................... A-5 LIST OF TABLES Table A.1-1. Number of Days During the Fall When the DCC Has Been Closed ............... A-2 A-i Water Project Facilities and Operations Final A.1 WATER PROJECT FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS The State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP) include upstream reservoirs (Shasta and Keswick dams on the Sacramento River, Oroville Dam on the Feather River, Folsom and Nimbus dams on the American River, New Melones Dam on the Stanislaus River), several water conveyance canals, water export and fish salvage facilities located