DOCSLIB.ORG

SACFEM2013: Sacramento Valley Finite Element Groundwater Flow Model User’S Manual

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SACFEM2013: Sacramento Valley Finite Element Groundwater Flow Model User’S Manual Appendix M SACFEM2013 Manual This page left blank intentionally. SACFEM2013 Sacramento Valley Finite Element Groundwater Flow Model User’s Manual Prepared for United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Prepared by February 2015 Google™ earth Image Landset SACFEM2013: Sacramento Valley Finite Element Groundwater Flow Model User’s Manual Prepared for United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Prepared by CH2M HILL and MBK Engineers, Inc. February 2015 Contents Sections Page Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. vii 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 2 Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin Conceptual Site Model Overview ................................... 2-1 2.1 Geologic Setting ..................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Hydrogeology ......................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Regional Hydrology .............................................................................................................. 2-12 3 Groundwater Flow Model Construction ..................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Model Code Description ........................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1.1 Numerical Assumptions ............................................................................................ 3-1 3.1.2 Scientific Bases .......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.3 Data Formats ............................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1.4 Limitations ................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Model Construction ............................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.1 Model Domain .......................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.2 Subsurface Hydraulic Parameters ............................................................................. 3-6 3.2.3 Model Time Discretization ...................................................................................... 3-14 3.2.4 Boundary Conditions .............................................................................................. 3-14 3.2.5 Agricultural Water Budget ...................................................................................... 3-49 3.3 Model Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 3-59 4 Groundwater Flow Model Calibration ........................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Calibration Process ................................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1.1 Selection of Calibration Targets ................................................................................ 4-1 4.1.2 Calibration Parameters ............................................................................................. 4-2 4.1.3 Iterative Manual Calibration Procedure ................................................................... 4-2 4.2 Calibration Results ................................................................................................................. 4-2 4.2.1 Groundwater Elevations ........................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.2 Stream Gain/Loss ...................................................................................................... 4-5 4.2.3 Calibrated Hydraulic Parameters .............................................................................. 4-9 4.2.4 Groundwater Balance ............................................................................................... 4-9 4.3 Potential Sources of Error .................................................................................................... 4-10 4.3.1 Transient Effects ..................................................................................................... 4-10 4.3.2 Human Errors .......................................................................................................... 4-10 4.3.3 Scaling Effects ......................................................................................................... 4-10 4.3.4 Interpolation Effects ............................................................................................... 4-20 4.3.5 Numerical Errors ..................................................................................................... 4-20 4.4 Calibration Outcome ............................................................................................................ 4-20 5 SACFEM Application .................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 SACFEM2013 Project File ....................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 SACFEM2013 Base-model (“Param” tab) ................................................................. 5-3 5.1.2 SACFEM2013 Thickness File (“Thick” Tab) ................................................................ 5-4 5.1.3 SACFEM2013 Storativity File (Stor Tab) .................................................................... 5-4 5.1.4 SACFEM2013 Top Systems (“Top” Tab) .................................................................... 5-5 5.1.5 SACFEM2013 Extra Register (“Xtra” Tab) ................................................................. 5-5 ES100814162520RDD III CONTENTS, CONTINUED Section Page 5.1.6 Other MicroFEM Files ................................................................................................ 5-5 5.2 Preparation of Input Data-Sets............................................................................................... 5-7 5.2.1 SACFEM2013 Input File Generation – The “Input” Worksheet ................................. 5-7 5.2.2 SACFEM2013 Batch File Generation – The “FEB” Worksheet ................................. 5-10 5.3 Running SACFEM2013 – The MicroFEM Batch File .............................................................. 5-16 5.3.1 Non-Looping Batch File ........................................................................................... 5-18 5.3.2 Looping Batch File ................................................................................................... 5-19 5.4 The MicroFEM LOG File ........................................................................................................ 5-21 5.5 Model Post-processing ......................................................................................................... 5-22 5.5.1 Run #Log Reader...................................................................................................... 5-22 5.5.2 Hydrograph and Summary Statistics Utility ............................................................ 5-24 5.5.3 Transient Water Budget Files .................................................................................. 5-28 6 References ................................................................................................................................ 6-1 Appendixes A Historical Surface Water Diversion Data and IDC Applied Water Demand Comparisons B Summary of Quantitative Calibration Targets C Simulated and Measured Groundwater Hydrographs D SACFEM2013.feb File Tables 1 Major Lithologic Units of the Sacramento Valley ................................................................................ 2-5 2 Assumed Streambed Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity ....................................................................... 3-25 3 Wetted Stream Width Values ............................................................................................................ 3-26 4 Gage Locations Used to Estimate Sacramento and Feather River Stage .......................................... 3-31 5 Monthly Distribution of Total Annual Mountain Front Recharge ..................................................... 3-36 6 Mountain Front Recharge Adjustment Factors ................................................................................. 3-43 7 Urban Pumping .................................................................................................................................. 3-44 8 Monthly Distribution of Annual Urban Pumping .............................................................................. 3-49 9 Land Use Data Source and Year by County ....................................................................................... 3-50 10 Precipitation Stations and Associated Water Budget Areas ............................................................. 3-56 Figures 1 Location Map ....................................................................................................................................... 2-3 2 Generalized Geologic Section of the Sacramento Valley .................................................................... 2-7
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TYPICAL VALLEY INDIAN HOMES Vol. 2 No. 11 YUBA CITY, CALIFORNIA
    Vol. 2 No. 11 YUBA CITY, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17 1961 TYPICAL VALLEY INDIAN HOMES SUTTER COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY FALL MEETING OCTOBER 17, 1961 TUESDAY EVENING — 8 P.M. PLACE: Board of Supervisors Chambers County Office Building, 2nd Street PRESIDENT: Mrs. Florence Arritt PROGRAM CHAIRMAN: Randolph Schnabel PROGRAM SPEAKER: Waddell F. Smith President, National Pony Express Centennial Association TOPIC: The History of the Pony Express and Its Centennial BOARD OF DIRECTORS MINUTES October 5, 1961 The Board of Directors of Sutter County Historical Society met in regular session October 5, 1961 at 7:30 P.M. in the office of the County Superintendent. The meeting was called to order by Vice President, Mrs. Ida Littlejohn in the absence of the president, Mrs. Florence Arritt. Mrs. Arritt is on her vacation traveling in the southwest and visiting many spots of historic interest such as Tombstone, Arizona. The minutes of the July Board meeting and regular meeting were read and approved. The treasurer reported cash in the bank $737.33. Film Fund $447.00 and general fund $290.33. Mr. Ramey reported a membership of 111. Fifteen new members were secured at the county fair booth. The following bills were approved for payment: Valley Print Shop — Membership Cards, Stationery $41.70. County of Sutter — Bulletin pictures $6.20. Earl Ramey — Postage $3.50. Program Chairman, Randolph Schnabel reported the program had already been arranged for the annual dinner meeting in January. Mrs. Gibson presented an invitation to the Sutter County Historical Society to en- tertain the Symposium of Historical Societies of Northern California and Southern Oregon in the fall of 1962.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Features and Ground-Water Storage Capacity of the Sacramento Valley California
    Geologic Features and Ground-Water Storage Capacity of the Sacramento Valley California By F. H. OLMSTED and G. H. DAVIS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1497 Prepared in cooperation with the California Department of ff^ater Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1961 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRED A. SEATON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director Tlie TT.S. Geological Survey Library catalog card for this publication appears after page 241. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C. CONTENTS Page Abstract___________________________________________________ -_ 1 Introduction.-.--- .___-___________-___._--.______-----_ 5 Purpose and scope of the investigation.__________________ ______ 5 Location of area__-__-________-____________-_-___-_-__--____-_- 6 Development of ground water___________________-___-__ ___ __ 7 Acknowledgments....-------- ____________ _________________ 8 Well-numbering system..________________________________ _ 9 Geology--__--_--_--__----_--_-----____----_ --_ ___-__-- 10 Geomorphology_____________________________________________ 10 General features _______________________________________ 10 Mountainous region east of the Sacramento Valley...__________ 11 Sierra Nevada_______________________________________ 11 Cascade Range.._____________________-__--_-__-_---- 13 Plains and foothill region on the east side of the Sacramento Valley..__-_________-_.-____.___________ 14 Dissected alluvial uplands west of the Sierra
    [Show full text]
  • An Examination of a Barrier Jet in the Sacramento Valley Using the Weather Event Simulator (WES)
    An Examination of a Barrier Jet in the Sacramento Valley Using the Weather Event Simulator (WES) James Mathews, WFO Sacramento, CA & John Juskie, WFO Sacramento, CA Introduction Barrier winds or barrier jets are common occurrences in the Sacramento valley due to the orientation of the topography. The Sacramento valley is bounded by the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east and the coastal range to the west. These mountains often cause terrain-induced winds in the Sacramento valley. As an example, onshore flow from the Pacific Ocean causes air to be forced through the gap in the coastal range mountains called the Golden Gate. Once the air passes through the Carquinez Strait east of the Golden Gate, it spreads out as it reaches the valley and results in a southerly wind direction for the Sacramento valley. Usually, these wind speeds are not strong enough to cause significant problems. However, on occasion, southerly winds can result in the formation of the southerly barrier jet along side the Sierra Nevada Mountains (Parish, 1982). Given unique circumstances, wind speeds can become significant to the public and wind advisories, high wind warnings, or Red Flag Warnings are issued to highlight this phenomenon. Staudenmaier (1994) discussed the formation of a northerly barrier jet and the implications to extreme fire behavior. Staudenmaier offered three conditions forecasters should examine for the potential development of a northerly barrier jet: (1) a sufficiently deep surface or near-surface based layer (at least 150 mbs deep) of northeasterly flow over the Sacramento valley for at least 6 hours, (2) strong stability as shown by the Oakland, CA (KOAK) sounding extending from around 800 mbs to at least as high as the terrain and, (3) enhancement of gusty surface winds if the stable layer caps a slightly less stable layer allowing for momentum transfer to the surface.
    [Show full text]
  • SWFSC Archive
    Historical Population Structure of Central Valley Steelhead and its Alteration by Dams STEVEN T. LINDLEY1, ROBERT S. SCHICK1, ADITYA AGRAWAL2, MATTHEW GOSLIN2, THOMAS E. PEARSON2, ETHAN MORA2, JAMES J. ANDERSON3, BERNARD MAY4, SHEILA GREENE5, CHARLES HANSON6, ALICE LOW7, DENNIS MCEWAN7, R. BRUCE MACFARLANE1, CHRISTINA SWANSON8 AND JOHN G. WILLIAMS9 ABSTRACT Effective conservation and recovery planning for Central Valley steelhead requires an understanding of historical population structure. We describe the historical structure of the Central Valley steelhead evolutionarily significant unit using a multi-phase modeling approach. In the first phase, we identify stream reaches possibly suitable for steelhead spawning and rearing using a habitat model based on environmental envelopes (stream discharge, gradient, and temperature) that takes a digital elevation model and climate data as inputs. We identified 151 patches of potentially suitable habitat with more than 10 km of stream habitat, with a total of 25,500 km of suitable habitat. We then measured the dis- tances among habitat patches, and clustered together patches within 35 km of each other into 81 dis- tinct habitat patches. Groups of fish using these 81 patches are hypothesized to be (or to have been) independent populations for recovery planning purposes. Consideration of climate and elevation differ- ences among the 81 habitat areas suggests that there are at least four major subdivisions within the Central Valley steelhead ESU that correspond to geographic regions defined by the Sacramento River basin, Suisun Bay area tributaries, San Joaquin tributaries draining the Sierra Nevada, and lower-ele- vation streams draining to the Buena Vista and Tulare basins, upstream of the San Joaquin River.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    Sacramento Valley Water Management Agreement Short-term Workplan Executive Summary October 2001 Sacramento Valley Water Management Agreement Short-term Workplan Executive Summary Background implemented and provide benefits by the 2002 and 2003 water years. As an alternative to participating in the This document summarizes the results of the adversarial State Water Resources Control Short-term Workplan effort. As required by Board (SWRCB) Phase 8 Bay–Delta Water the Agreement, this workplan was com- Rights Hearings, California Department of pleted on October 29, 2001. Water Resources (DWR), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), Sacramento Valley Process water interests, and export water users entered into the Sacramento Valley Water The Short-term Workplan was prepared by Management Agreement (Agreement) in the Workplan Development Team (WDT), April 2001. This unprecedented Agreement which was formed to provide the technical establishes a process by which the parties are expertise needed to evaluate the projects to collaborating in the development and be included in the workplans. A implementation of a variety of water Management Team (MT) was formed to management projects that will increase the oversee the efforts of the WDT and provide availability of Sacramento Valley water policy-related input. resources. The Agreement provides that increased supplies resulting from the The WDT included water district, agency, projects would be used first to fully meet and consultant staff representing both inbasin needs, but would also be made northern California and south-of-Delta available to help meet the requirements of export interests with expertise in the areas of the 1995 Water Quality Control Plan (WQCP), as well as additional export needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Central Valley Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Plan
    Draft Central Valley Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Plan for Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon Central Valley spring-run Chinook Salmon Central Valley Steelhead National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region November 2009 1 Themes of the CV Recovery Plan • This is a long-term plan that will take several decades to fully implement • The recovery plan is intended to be a “living document” that is periodically updated to include the best available information regarding the status or needs of the species • Implementation will be challenging and will require the help of many stakeholders • The plan is intended to have realistic and attainable recovery criteria (i.e, de-listing criteria) 2 What are Recovery Plans? • Purpose of the Endangered Species Act: To conserve (recover) listed species and their ecosystems • Required under section 4(f) of the ESA for all Federally listed species • Provide the road map to species recovery • Must contain objective, measurable criteria for delisting a species • Guidance documents, not regulations 3 Winter-run Chinook salmon (Endangered) 4 Status of Species – Winter-run Chinook 5 Central Valley Spring-run Chinook salmon (Threatened) 6 Status of Species – Spring-run Chinook Declining abundance across range: Extinction risk is increasing Central Valley Spring-run Chinook Salmon Adult Summer Holding Escapement Rivers/Creeks 25,000 Sacramento Battle 20,000 Clear Beegum 15,000 Antelope Mill 10,000 Deer Big Chico 5,000 Butte 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 7 Central Valley steelhead (Threatened) 8 Key
    [Show full text]
  • Diverse Metamorphic Trajectories, Imbricated Ocean Plate Stratigraphy, and Fault Rocks, Yuba River Area, Feather River Ultramafic Belt, California
    ABSTRACT DIVERSE METAMORPHIC TRAJECTORIES, IMBRICATED OCEAN PLATE STRATIGRAPHY, AND FAULT ROCKS, YUBA RIVER AREA, FEATHER RIVER ULTRAMAFIC BELT, CALIFORNIA The Feather River Belt (FRB), the most extensive of the ultramafic belts in the Sierra Nevada, is a north–south trending 150-km-long by 1-8 km wide ultramafic belt and includes related rocks that form the basement of the northern Sierra Nevada of California. These rocks have been long interpreted as a Paleozoic to early Mesozoic "suture" zone (position of former subduction zone) and provide a good opportunity to more closely investigate the details of the rock record associated with subduction processes. Conventional tectonic models cannot explain the spatial-temporal distribution of the metamorphic grade of the FRB. Geologic mapping, petrographic, and electron microprobe analyses reveal a complex spatial and relative time relationships between different lithologies and units of different metamorphic grade. In the greater Middle and North Yuba River area, ultramafic rocks structurally overlie amphibolite, composed of primarily metamafic rocks, that structurally overlies the blueschist facies Red Ant schist (RAS). These tectonic contacts have been isoclinally folded at scales of hundreds of meters to a km. In the North Yuba River area, amphibolite records low- pressure, high-temperature metamorphism with redbrown (high Ti, low Al) amphibole and ilmenite. In the Forest City and Alleghany areas on the North Fork-Middle Fork divide, amphibolite grade rocks comprise imbricates of ocean plate stratigraphy, represented by repeated sheets of metabasites, metacherts, and metaclastics. These rocks include zones of cataclasites with pseudotachylites (frictional melts generated by fault movement). The Alleghany amphibolites ii appear to comprise two slabs with contrasting metamorphic history.
    [Show full text]
  • Birding Hotspots of the Northern Sacramento Valley 15 Miles North to Red Bluff ° Upper Bidwell Park !!# !!# 6 Duncan Wildwood !Hcorning ")2 East Ave
    Birding Hotspots of the Northern Sacramento Valley 15 miles north to Red Bluff ° Upper Bidwell Park !!# !!# 6 Duncan Wildwood !HCorning ")2 East Ave. Manzanita MainSt Corning 3 ")1 Samuel Ayer/ ") Sacramento River NWR - Bruce Dog Island Park South Ave City Main St Rio Vista Unit ¤£99 Breckenridge of 32 ¤£ Bruce Rd City of Antelope Chico §¨¦I-5 ¤£32 Red £99 Skyway ° Dominic S ¤ S a River Rd. a c ° Bluff c r Morrow r ° a a Genetic Resource & m 11 m Conservation Center Cramer ee n County Rd 200 e tto k o R a R iiv L v ee r e r t t u County Rd 200 I-5 B §¨¦ Sacramento River NWR- k East Ave 6 k k c ")4 Pine Creek Unit ")Bruce Rd e e la Hamilton City ee B Orland ")5 ¤£32 CCrr !H tet e 32 t ¤£ !H t !H uu Black Butte Rd Chico BB ¤£99W ")7 W Sacramento Ave Chico ¤£45 10 11 ")8 ") ") Skyway ")9 Chico River Rd ")12 Oroville-Chico Hwy Sacramento River NWR- ¤£191 Ord Bend Unit River Rd Durham Dayton Hwy ¤£70 ")15 14 Rd 32 Road 33 ") Ord Ferry Road ")17 Grainland Rd ¤£149 Road R ")16 Table # # Llano Seco Unit - Midway !! !! Road WW Mountain ")13 Steve Thompson 18 Road 39 North Central Valley ") Wildlife Mg't Area ¤£99 ")19 Seven Mile Lane Cottonwood Rd. Upper Butte Nelson Rd £162 Basin WA - ")20 ¤ Llano Seco Unit !H ¤£162 Nelson Rd Willows Upper T Road V h 162 !H Aguas Frias Rd ¤£ Butte e Road WW r m Oroville Road 57 Road P Rd 57 Basin WA - Oroville Rd Rd W l Howard i National Wildlife Refuge Road 59 t Larkin Rd Slough Unit ")21 o 22 ¤£162 Af terbay ") Road 60 State Wildlife Area Road 61 !HButte City Oroville Hamilton WA Sacramento State Park 24 River NWR- ") Road Z 23 Packer Unit ") Afton Rd City Park Upper Afton Afton Blvd(RdY) Road 68 !H Butte Roads Sacramento PrincetonPrinceton Basin WA - NWR Little Dry Gravel Creek Unit Butler Rd Adobe Rd !H Gridley Colusa Hwy Gridley Paved Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Strategic Plan April 2018 1.0
    Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Strategic Plan April 2018 1.0 Introduction The Sutter-Butte Basin (Basin) covers 300 square miles bordered by the Cherokee Canal to the north, the Sutter Buttes to the west, the Sutter Bypass to the southwest and the 44-mile long Feather River to the east—see Figure 1. The Basin is home to 95,000 residents and encompasses $7 billion of damageable assets (as estimated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or USACE). The region has sustained numerous floods, including the 1955 levee failure on the Feather River, which resulted in the deaths of at least 38 people. The personal safety and economic stability of large segments of the population are reliant on flood management systems that, until recent efforts, did not begin to meet modern engineering standards. Numerous projects and programs have been implemented in the Basin over the years to reduce flood risk, including the Feather River West Levee Project, which is nearing completion. The Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA) leads the planning and implementation efforts in the Basin to reduce the risk of catastrophic, riverine flooding. In this role, SBFCA collaborates with local, regional, state, tribal and federal agencies and organizations. On January 13, 2016 the SBFCA Board of Directors adopted the Strategic Plan to guide these efforts. This version is the first update to the Strategic Plan. 2.0 Purpose of the Strategic Plan The purpose of the Strategic Plan is to help formulate and articulate a vision for flood management within the Basin and to describe an approach to achieve this vision.
    [Show full text]
  • Geochemistry of Ground Water in the 1 Sacramento Valley, California
    IQJUN GEOCHEMISTRY OF GROUND WATER IN THE 1 SACRAMENTO VALLEY, CALIFORNIA U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1401-B Geochemistry of Ground Water in the Sacramento Valley, California By LAURENCE C. HULL CENTRAL VALLEY OF CALIFORNIA RASA PROJECT GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1401-B UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Hull, Laurence C. Geochemistry of ground water in the Sacramento Valley, California (Geological Survey Professional Paper 1401-B) (Central Valley of California RASA Project) Bibliography: 36 p. 1. Water, Underground California Sacramento Valley. 2. Water chemistry. I. Title. II. Series. III. Series: Central Valley of California RASA Project. GB1025.C2H781984 551.4'9'097945 84-600016 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract .................. Bl Temporal changes ............... B13 Introduction ................ 1 Methods of data analysis ........ 15 Geography ............... 1 Dissolved solids .............. 15 Purpose and scope .......... 3 Hydrochemical facies ......... 16 Data compilation ............ 3 1 Nitrate ................... 19 Well-numbering system ........ 3 Hydrochemical facies ......... 20 Acknowledgments ........... 3 Hypothesis testing ............ 21 Description of the study area ...... 3 Processes controlling ground-water chemistry 22 Geology and geomorphology ..... 3 Methods of data analysis ........ 22 Geologic synopsis ......... 4 Principal components analysis .... 22 Geomorphic units ......... 4 Trend surface analysis ........ 22 Hydrogeology ............. 6 Processes and their spatial variation . 22 Hydrochemical facies ........... 7 Mineral stability relations ........... 25 Criteria and procedure for division . 7 Mineralogy of sediments ......... 25 Descriptions of hydrochemical facies Well 12N/01E-34Q .......... 25 Tuscan volcanic rocks .....
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda – Regular Meeting, February 14, 2018, 1 P.M
    Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Board of Directors Agenda – Regular Meeting, February 14, 2018, 1 p.m. City of Yuba City Council Chambers - 1201 Civic Center Blvd., Yuba City, CA The agenda is posted in the building of the Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency at 1130 Civic Center Blvd. Suite B, Yuba City, and at the Sutter County Library, 750 Forbes Avenue, Yuba City. The agenda summary, backup materials, and approved minutes are also posted on the Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency website at sutterbutteflood.org. Materials related to an item on this agenda and submitted to the Board of Directors after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Clerk at 1130 Civic Center Blvd, Suite B, Yuba City, during normal business hours. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, the meeting room is wheelchair accessible and disabled parking is available. If you have a disability and need, disability related modifications or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the SBFCA office at 530-755-9859 or [email protected]. Requests must be made one full business day before the start of the meeting. County of Sutter County of Butte City of Yuba City City of Live Oak Mat Conant Bill Connelly John Buckland Jason Banks Larry Munger Steve Lambert Stan Cleveland Alt. Lakhvir Ghag Alt. Ron Sullenger Alt. Manny Cardoza Alt. Jim Whiteaker Alt. Shon Harris City of Gridley City of Biggs Levee District 1 Levee District 9 Frank Hall Bo Sheppard Francis Silva Mike Morris Alt. Gary Davidson Alt.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3 Existing Environment
    Yuba County Water Agency Narrows Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 1403 SECTION 3 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT In addition to this introductory information, this section is divided into two subsections. Section 3.1 provides a general description of the river basin in which the Project occurs. Section 3.2 provides existing, relevant and reasonably available information regarding the resources. 3.1 General Description of the River Basin 3.1.1 Existing Water Projects in the Yuba River Basin Sixteen existing water projects occur in the Yuba River Basin. Eight of the water projects are licensed or exempt from licensing by FERC. Together, these eight projects have a combined FERC-authorized capacity of 782.1 MW, of which the Narrows Hydroelectric Project has approximately 1.5 percent of the total capacity. The remaining eight non-FERC-licensed projects do not contain generating facilities. Each of these water projects is described briefly below. 3.1.1.1 Narrows Hydroelectric Project The existing Narrows Hydroelectric Project is described in detail in Section 2 of this PAD. 3.1.1.2 Upstream of the Narrows Hydroelectric Project 3.1.1.2.1 South Feather Power Project The 117.5-MW South Feather Power Project, FERC Project No. 2088, is a water supply/power project constructed in the late 1950s/early 1960s and is owned and operated by the South Feather Water and Power Agency (SFWPA). None of the project facilities or features is located in the Yuba River watershed except for the Slate Creek Diversion Dam, which is located on a tributary to the North Yuba River.
    [Show full text]