DOCSLIB.ORG

Technical Feasibility and Life Cycle Cost Assessment of a Photovoltaic Array on Trinity Dam, Trinity County, Ca

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Technical Feasibility and Life Cycle Cost Assessment of a Photovoltaic Array on Trinity Dam, Trinity County, Ca TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY AND LIFE CYCLE COST ASSESSMENT OF A PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY ON TRINITY DAM, TRINITY COUNTY, CA By Caleb Aaron Patrick A Project Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment for the Requirements for the Degree Masters of Science in Environmental Systems: Energy, Technology and Policy Committee Membership Dr. Arne Jacobson, Committee Chair Dr. Steven Hackett, Committee Member Dr. Peter Alstone, Committee Member Dr. Margaret Lang, Program Graduate Coordinator May 2018 ABSTRACT TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY AND LIFE CYCLE COST ASSESSMENT OF A PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY ON TRINITY DAM, TRINITY COUNTY, CA Caleb Patrick Public lands owned by the Bureau of Land Management are increasingly being used for photovoltaic (PV) system development. Although numerous policies support PV deployment on public lands, those managed by the Bureau of Reclamation have not been considered for PV development. Hydro-electric embankment dams, both publicly and privately owned, may have the potential to be development sites for distributed PV systems. A technical feasibility report was conducted for a case study of a PV installation on Trinity Dam, Trinity County, CA, and found embankment dams could potentially be feasible development sites. A mounting analysis found that a concrete slab reinforced with rebar could be used to mount a PV array on Trinity Dam. A nominal 1 MW-dc PV system was designed and used to determine lifetime system production and to conduct the economic analysis. The hypothetical system at the Trinity Dam site is estimated to have a lifetime energy production of approximately 30 GWh and would displace about 8,000 metric tons of CO2-equivalent. Non-profit and private ownership scenarios were considered to estimate the economic feasibility of a 1MW-dc distributed PV system on Trinity Dam. System costs and benefits were calculated and analyzed for a 25-year investment. A life cycle cost assessment found that a non-profit system connected behind the meter for on-site consumption would have a levelized cost of energy of $0.056/kWh, ii a discounted payback period of 8.7 years, and an internal rate of return of 9%. A privately owned system would produce a levelized cost of energy of $0.04/kWh, a discounted payback period of 4.9 years, and an internal rate of return of 16%. Based on the LCCA for a 1 MW-dc system on Trinity Dam, it is recommended that a non-profit or private investment could be economically beneficial if the system was installed behind the meter to serve on-site loads under the PG&E E-19 rate tariff. In a front of the meter PPA contract scenario, a non-profit investment would have a DPB of more than 25 years and a private investment would have a DPB of 16.2 years. Therefore, an investment in a front of the meter system for Trinity Dam is not recommended unless a higher PPA rate can be negotiated with the utility. iii ACKNOWLEGEMENTS I would like to first acknowledge my committee chairperson, Dr. Arne Jacobson, for all his assistance and advice throughout this research journey. I would like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr. Steven Hackett and Dr. Peter Alstone for their interest, assistance and support. I would also like to thank Michael Griffin, Structure Design and Engineering, LLC, for a detailed analysis of the mounting feasibility for photovoltaics on Trinity Dam; Zack Zoller for coaching me through photovoltaic system design and application; Don Bader, BOR; Larry Ball, BOR; Russel Knight, WAPA; Wilson Head, WAPA; Barry Mortimeyer, BOR; Paul Hauser, General Mgr, TPUD; Andy Lethbridge, TPUD; Jim Bowman and Israel Patterson, BOR; Brian Lipps, Dsire.org; Dennis Sullivan, Manager Competitive Solicitations, PG&E; Jeffrey Tang, Suntech; and my family and friends that have supported me along the way. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 2 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Photovoltaics ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 PV Grid Interconnection ...................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Earth and Rock-fill Hydro-electric Embankment Dams in CA ......................................... 13 2.4 PV on Embankment Dams ................................................................................................. 14 2.5 PV Development on Federal Lands ................................................................................... 17 2.6 Financing PV Development on Federal Embankment Dams ............................................ 20 2.7 PV Ownership Structure .................................................................................................... 26 2.8 Balancing PV Variability ................................................................................................... 27 3 METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 28 3.1 Technical Feasibility .......................................................................................................... 28 3.2 Economic Feasibility ......................................................................................................... 30 4 TRINITY DAM CASE STUDY ............................................................................................ 31 4.1 Trinity Dam Regional Context ........................................................................................... 31 4.2 Technical Feasibility .......................................................................................................... 34 4.2.1 Potential for locally distributed PV ........................................................................ 34 4.2.2 Potential for distributed PV .................................................................................... 36 4.2.3 Ownership structure ............................................................................................... 38 4.2.4 Site analysis ........................................................................................................... 41 4.2.5 Solar resource ......................................................................................................... 44 4.2.6 Mounting recommendation .................................................................................... 49 4.2.7 System design ........................................................................................................ 54 4.3 Economic Feasibility ......................................................................................................... 57 4.3.1 Trinity Dam system ownership structure ............................................................... 58 4.3.2 Life cycle cost assessment ..................................................................................... 59 4.4 Summary of Results ........................................................................................................... 72 4.4.1 Technical report ..................................................................................................... 72 v 4.4.2 Economic report ..................................................................................................... 73 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................. 74 Works Cited ................................................................................................................................... 77 APPENDIX A: Civil Engineering Calculations ............................................................................ 87 APPENDIX B: LCCA Computation Formulas ............................................................................. 97 APPENDIX C: PVWattsTM Production Estimate, 1MW-dc Nominal System Production Estimate, Trinity Dam, Trinity County, CA .................................................................................................. 99 APPENDIX D: 1 MW System Design Specifications ................................................................. 100 APPENDIX E: Module Cost, Structural BOS Cost, PII Cost, and Land Lease Cost Sensitivity Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 104 APPENDIX F: List of Potentially Qualified Embankment Dams in California .......................... 107 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Current Incentives for Distributed PV (Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency, 2018) ................................................................................... 22 Table 2: PVWattsTM Location Comparison ...................................................................... 47 Table 3: Lifetime Production Estimates for 1 MW-dc PV Array Using PVWattsTM Data ........................................................................................................................................... 48 Table 4: Trinity Dam System Component Costs .............................................................. 61 Table 5: PVWattsTM Production Estimate ...................................................................... 99 Table 6: E-19 Rate Module Cost, Structural BOS Cost, PII Cost, and Land Lease Cost Sensitivity Analysis .......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Federal Register/Vol. 71, No. 238/Tuesday, December 12, 2006/Notices
    Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 12, 2006 / Notices 74515 service called eSubscription that allows f. Location: On the San Joaquin River, 119,940 acre-feet at an elevation of you to keep track of all formal issuances near North Fork, California. The project about 3,330 feet above mean sea level; and submittals in specific dockets. This affects 2,036 cres of Federal land one power tunnel about 7.5 miles long, can reduce the amount of time you administered by the Sierra National to convey water from Mammoth Pool spend researching proceedings by Forest. Reservoir to Mammoth Pool automatically providing you with g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Powerhouse; two small diversions on notification of these filings, document Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). Rock Creek and Ross Creek; and one 230 summaries and direct links to the h. Applicant Contact: Russ W. kV transmission line about 6.7 miles documents. To register for this service, Krieger, Vice President Power long that connects the Mammoth Pool go to http://www.ferc.gov/ Production, Southern California Edison Powerhouse to the non-project Big esubscribenow.htm. Company, 300 N. Lone Hill Ave., San Creek No. 3 Switchyard. Type of Public meetings or site visits will be Dimas, CA 91773. Phone: 909–394– Application: New—Major Modified posted on the Commission’s calendar 8667. License located at http://www.ferc.gov/ i. FERC Contact: Jim Fargo at (202) m. A copy of the application is EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along 502–6095, or e-mail: available for review at the Commission with other related information.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Valley Project Overview July 2013 Central Valley of California
    Central Valley Project Overview July 2013 Central Valley of California TRINITY DAM FOLSOM DAM LV SL Hydrologic Constraints • Majority of water supply in the north • Most of the precipitation is in the winter/spring • Majority of demand in the south • Most of that demand is in the summer Geographic Constraints Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta Avg Annual Inflow in MAF (Billion Cu Meters) (5.3) 4.3 (1.7) 1.4 (1.1) 0.9 21.2 (26.2) Sacramento Delta Precip Eastside Streams San Joaquin California Water Projects • State Water Project • Central Valley Project • Local Water Projects Trinity CVP Shasta Major Storage Folsom Facilities New Melones Friant San Luis Trinity CVP Shasta Conveyance Folsom Facilities New Melones Friant San Luis CVP Features Summary • 18 Dams and Reservoirs • 500 Miles (800 Kilometers) of Canals • 11 Powerplants • 10 Pumping Plants • 20 Percent of State’s Developed Water Supply (about 7 million acre-feet, 8.6 billion cu meters) • 30 Percent of the State’s Agricultural Supply (about 3 mil acres of farm land, 1.2 mil hectares) • 13 Percent of State’s M&I Supply (about 2 million people served) CVP Authorized Purposes • Flood Control • River Regulation (Navigation) • Fish and Wildlife Needs • Municipal & Agricultural Water Supplies • Power Generation • Recreation TRINITY CVP - SWP FEATURES LEWISTON SHASTA SPRING CREEK POWERPLANT CARR POWERPLANT TINITY RIVER WHISKEYTOWN OROVILLE (SWP) TO SAN FRANCISCO BAY DELTA FOLSOM BANKS PP (SWP) JONES PP NEW MELONES O’NEILL TO SAN FELIPE SAN LUIS FRIANT TRINITY CVP - SWP FEATURES LEWISTON SHASTA
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment 1 Credentials of Trlia Board of Senior Consultants
    ATTACHMENT 1 CREDENTIALS OF TRLIA BOARD OF SENIOR CONSULTANTS FAIZ I. MAKDISI, PH.D., P.E. PRINCIPAL ENGINEER EDUCATION SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE Ph.D., Geotechnical Dr. Makdisi’s 28-year career has combined applied research and Engineering, University of professional practice in geotechnical and foundation/earthquake California, Berkeley, 1976 engineering for commercial, residential, industrial, and critical M.Sc., Geotechnical structures. Recently he has focused on geotechnical studies and safety Engineering, University of evaluations of earth and rockfill dams, embankments, and landfills. His California, Berkeley, 1971 work includes feasibility evaluations and preliminary design studies; field investigation design and planning; borrow area material studies; in B. Eng., Civil, American situ and laboratory testing; and evaluation and interpretation of static University of Beirut: and dynamic material properties of dams and their foundations. Studies Lebanon, 1970 also included stability evaluations of embankment slopes, seepage analyses, and static and dynamic stress analyses to evaluate stability REGISTRATION during earthquakes. Professional Civil Engineer, He has performed studies to determine earthquake-induced permanent CA No. C29432, 1978 deformations in slopes and embankments, and developed and published Civil Engineer, Institute of widely used simplified procedures for estimating dynamic response and Civil Engineers, Lebanon, permanent deformations in earth and rockfill dams and embankments. 1970 He is a lead participant in earthquake ground motion studies and development of seismic design criteria for key facilities such as dams AFFILIATIONS and nuclear power plants. He was principal investigator of the “Stability American Society of Civil of Slopes, Embankments and Rockfalls” chapter of the Seismic Retrofit Engineers Manual for the Federal Highway Project being prepared for the National Earthquake Engineering Center for Earthquake Engineering Research.
    [Show full text]
  • System Reoperation Study
    System Reoperation Study Phase III Report: Assessment of Reoperation Strategies California Department of Water Resources August 2017 System Reoperation Study Phase III Report This page is intentionally left blank. August 2017 | 2 Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................................1 -1 1.1 Study Authorization ....................................................................................................................................................................................1 -1 1.2 Study Area ..................................................................................................................................................................................................1 -2 1.3 Planning Principles .....................................................................................................................................................................................1 -4 1.4 Related Studies and Programs...................................................................................................................................................................1 -4 1.5 Uncertainties in Future Conditions ............................................................................................................................................................. 1-6 1.5.1 Climate Change ..........................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Terr–14 Mule Deer
    TERR–14 MULE DEER 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2001 and 2002, the literature review, a camera feasibility study, the Mammoth Pool migration study (observation study, boat survey, and remote camera study), and a hunter access study were completed. A map of known mule deer summer and winter ranges, migration corridors, and holding areas was created based on the literature review. The camera feasibility study was conducted in the fall of 2001 to test the remote camera system for the spring 2002 remote camera study. The cameras were successful at capturing photographs of 82 animals, including photographs of six deer, during this testing period. The Mammoth Pool migration study consisted of an observation study, boat survey, and remote camera study. The study focused on documenting key migration routes across the reservoir and relative use, identifying potential migration barriers, and documenting any deer mortality in the reservoir. The observation study consisted of two observers positioned with binoculars at two observation points on Mammoth Pool at dusk and dawn in order to observe migrating deer. There were no observations of deer using the dam road. Two observations of deer were made out of a total of 51 observation periods. One observation consisted of a single deer that swam from the Windy Point Boat Launch area to the Mammoth Pool Boat Launch area. The other observation was of one group of five adult deer approaching the reservoir near the observation point by the Mammoth Pool Boat Launch, but turning back up the hill. There was no sign of difficulty in the deer swimming or exiting the reservoir and no obvious disturbance to the deer that turned back.
    [Show full text]
  • REPORT 1St Session HOUSE of REPRESENTATIVES 105–9 "!
    105TH CONGRESS REPORT 1st Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 105±9 "! DESIGNATION OF TRINITY LAKE, CALIFORNIA MARCH 10, 1997.ÐReferred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H.R. 63] [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 63) to designate the reservoir created by Trinity Dam in the Central Valley project, California, as ``Trinity Lake'', having consid- ered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. PURPOSE OF THE BILL The purpose of H.R. 63 is to designate the reservoir created by Trinity Dam in the Central Valley Project, California, as ``Trinity Lake''. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION H.R. 63 would designate the reservoir created by Trinity Dam in the Central Valley Project, California, as ``Trinity Lake.'' Under the provisions of P.L. 88±662, the reservoir is currently designated as ``Clair Engle Lake,'' and therefore requires legislation in order for the name to be changed. Trinity Dam and the reservoir on the Trinity River regulate a drainage area of over 728 square miles. Trinity Dam, completed in 1962, is an earthfill structure 538 feet high with a crest length of 2,450 feet. The reservoir has a maximum storage capacity of 2.448 million acre-feet of water. Releases from the reservoir are used to generate power at Trinity, Lewiston, Spring Creek, Judge Francis Carr, and Keswick powerplants, and for consumptive use in the Central Valley Project.
    [Show full text]
  • STUDY of INCREASING CONVEY CAPACITY of MERCED RIVER at the CONFLUENCE with SAN JOAQUIN RIVER a Project Presented to the Faculty
    STUDY OF INCREASING CONVEY CAPACITY OF MERCED RIVER AT THE CONFLUENCE WITH SAN JOAQUIN RIVER A Project Presented to the faculty of the Department of Civil Engineering California State University, Sacramento Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Civil Engineering (Water Resources Engineering) by Hani Nour SUMMER 2017 © 2017 Hani Nour ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii STUDY OF INCREASING CONVEY CAPACITY OF MERCED RIVER AT THE CONFLUENCE WITH SAN JOAQUIN RIVER A Project by Hani Nour Approved by: __________________________________, Committee Chair Dr. Saad Merayyan __________________________________, Second Reader Dr. Cristina Poindexter, P.E. ___________________________ Date iii Student: Hani Nour I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for the project. _________________________, Department Chair ______________ Dr. Benjamin Fell, P.E. Date Department of Civil Engineering iv Abstract of STUDY OF INCREASING CONVEY CAPACITY OF MERCED RIVER AT THE CONFLUNENCE WITH SAN JOAQUIN RIVER by Hani Nour Flooding in California’s Central Valley is very common and expected to occur every year anywhere throughout the region. The climate and geography of the Central Valley, together, are responsible for over flow streams, rivers, and lakes causing water flooding, particularly at the lower elevation areas. San Joaquin Basin is located between the Sierra Nevada (on the east) and the Coast Ranges (on the west) where flooding is typically characterized by infrequent severe storms during winter season due to heavy rain and snow- melt runoff coming from the foothills, east of Merced County (Jesse Patchett 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • Management of Coarse Sediment in Regulated Rivers of California
    UC Berkeley Technical Completion Reports Title Management of Coarse Sediment in Regulated Rivers of California Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5rw9k19j Authors Kondolf, G. Mathias Matthews, W.V. Graham Publication Date 1991-12-01 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California MANAGEMENT OF COARSE SEDIMENT IN REGULATED RIVERS OF CALIFORNIA By G. Mathias Kondolf Principal Investigator and w.v. Graham Matthews Research Associate Center for Environmental Design Research University of California Berkeley CA 94720 TECHNICAL COMPLETION REPORT ,.\. Project No. UCAL-WRC-W-748 December 1991 University of California Water Resources Center The research leading to this report was supported by the University of California, water Resources Center, as part of Water Resources Center Project UCAL-WRC-W-748. :TCR / Abstract There are significant problems in the management of coarse sediment (sand and gravels) in regulated rivers of California. Unfortunately, these have been generally treated (or ignored) on a case-by-case basis, however, the effects are pervasive and profound, with substantial costs and severe environmental impacts. Problems arise due to the human manipulation of coarse sediment through reservoir construction, which blocks the movement of coarse sediment down the river, and through instream gravel mining, which removes this material from the river system for use primarily in construction-related projects. Impacts identified include: bed material coarsening, channel incision, channel geometry changes, hydrologic regime alterations, and changes in transport of sediment. Many of these impacts result in damage to or destruction of anadromous fisheries habitat, and are partly responsible for the dramatic declines in anadromous fisheries resources in the last 50 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishing Guide Weaverville & Big Bar Ranger Stations - Shasta-Trinity National Forest ?*
    Fishing Guide Weaverville & Big Bar Ranger Stations - Shasta-Trinity National Forest ?* Lakes and streams in the Weaverville and Big Bar be caught mostly by trolling. Shore areas provide excellent opportunities for every type fishing should be done where water is fairly deep. Fish can of angling enthusiast. Fishing opportunities are be caught on night crawlers, spinners and a variety of dry and wet flies. numerous and await anyone willing to make an effort to seek them out. Use this guide as a general Wilderness lakes and streams introduction to fishing in this area. The Trinity Alps Wilderness has over 100 glacially carved lakes. There are three species of trout that might be found The Lakes in these high country lakes: rainbow trout, eastern brook Trinity Lake trout and brown trout. Many lakes are regularly stocked with fingerling rainbow trout and/or eastern brook trout. It This is the largest man made reservoir in this area. It is is advisable to allow plenty of time to hike in, set up camp, 16,400 acres in size and 465 feet deep at maximum and still have a couple of days for fishing. capacity. There are several Forest Service boat ramps and campgrounds available. Bait and techniques for fishing the lakes and streams in the backcountry. The trout in these lakes can be caught The previous State record smallmouth bass and the current using a variety of baits. They will take anything from lures State record brown bullhead were caught in Trinity Lake. to live bait such as grasshoppers. Fly fishing with dry flies This lake is designated by the Department of Fish and has also produced some good sized fish.
    [Show full text]
  • ZACHARY B. SHARP, Phd Research Engineer, Utah State University 435‐797‐3167 / [email protected]
    ZACHARY B. SHARP, PhD Research Engineer, Utah State University 435‐797‐3167 / [email protected] EDUCATION PhD Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, 2016 Major: Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulics. Dissertation: Applications of Computational Fluid Dynamics in Flow Metering and Meter Design. MS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, 2009 Major: Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulics. Thesis: Energy Losses in Cross Junctions BS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, 2008 Major: Civil and Environmental Engineering. WORK SUMMARY 2009 ‐ Present: Research Engineer, Utah Water Research Laboratory, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, Utah 2009 ‐ Present: Independent Engineering Consultant 2007 ‐ 2009: Research Assistant/Graduate Student, Utah State University/Utah Water Research Laboratory 2004 - 2007: Engineering Lab technician, Utah State University/Utah Water Research Laboratory 1998 ‐ 2004: Construction Worker, Various companies and responsibilities in residential and commercial construction EXPERIENCE Extensive experience performing hydraulic structure physical model studies on dams and spillways, pumping pits, power plant intakes, erosion control issues, pipelines, channels, spillway basins, gated structures, control structures, outlet and energy dissipation structures, fish screens, bypasses, sewer and storm water systems. A sample list of model studies is shown below. Hydraulic Structures (Partial Listing) 2016, Physical Model Study of the Tekai Dam and Stair Step Spillway for to evaluate gate operation Snowy Mountain Engineering Consultants (SMEC). 2016, Physical Model Study of the Brainerd Dam to evaluate gate operation for Barr Engineering. 2015, Physical Model Study of the 2nd Street Pump Station in Fargo North Dakota conducted for the Cascade Pump company. 2015, Physical Model Study of the John Hart Generating Station intake structure and operating gate conducted for SCN-Lavalin.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Bryan Kelly Director of Regulatory Compliance and Government Affairs, Water Merced Irrigation District
    Bryan Kelly Director of Regulatory Compliance and Government Affairs, Water Merced Irrigation District Testimony on H.R. 869 - To clarify the definition of flood control operations for the purposes of the operation and maintenance of Project No. 2179 on the Lower Merced River. Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands June 14, 2011 Chairman Bishop, Ranking Member Grijalva, and members of the Subcommittee, my name is Bryan Kelly and I am the Director of Regulatory Compliance and Government Affairs -Water for the Merced Irrigation District (MID). I am pleased to be offered this opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 869, legislation that would allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to consider proposed improvements to the spillway at New Exchequer Dam that will provide additional water supply to Merced County and the San Joaquin Valley of California. I’d like to begin by thanking Congressman Denham and the cosponsors of H.R. 869 for introducing this bipartisan bill that could improve the precarious water supply situation in California’s San Joaquin Valley without major environmental impact and at no cost to the federal government. The Merced Irrigation District is a California Public Agency under the California Irrigation District Law. MID owns, operates and maintains hydro-electric facilities on the Merced River, consisting of the New Exchequer Dam and Reservoir (Lake McClure) and McSwain Dam and Reservoir (Lake McSwain). They are located in the western foothills of the Sierra Nevada mountain range, approximately 23 miles northeast of the City of Merced. Lake McClure has a storage capacity of 1,024,600 acre feet, while Lake McSwain has a storage capacity of 9,730 acre feet and is operated principally as a regulating reservoir for MID’s hydroelectric generation facilities at New Exchequer Dam (FERC Project No.
    [Show full text]