DOCSLIB.ORG

Staff Report – Interim Flood Control-Related Public Safety and Climatic Resiliency Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Staff Report – Interim Flood Control-Related Public Safety and Climatic Resiliency Plan Date: March 16, 2021 To: Yuba Water Agency - Board of Directors From: Ryan McNally, Project Manager Subject: Staff Report – Interim Flood Control-Related Public Safety and Climatic Resiliency Plan Recommendation Receive an update from staff regarding an interim Flood Control-Related Public Safety and Climatic Resiliency Plan that focuses on the various flood risk reduction projects and studies Yuba Water Agency is presently engaged in throughout Yuba County. Background The Yuba Water Agency, consistent with the 2017 – 2021 Strategic Plan, is actively engaged in a number of projects to improve public safety and strengthen climatic resiliency by reducing the risk of catastrophic flooding in Yuba County. Concurrent with the development of Yuba Water’s long-term public safety plan, staff has developed this interim Public Safety and Climatic Resiliency Plan to facilitate the Agency’s focus on specific projects and studies with measurable public safety and climatic resiliency results. Our goal is to support Yuba County in its efforts to achieve and maintain a 200-year level of flood protection for urban areas, and a 100-year level of flood protection for agricultural areas. This is consistent with prior Board of Director policies to continue to enhance flood protection and risk reduction efforts countywide. The Plan is comprised of 12 projects that are intended to advance flood risk reduction and/or climatic resiliency in Yuba County. For FY 2020/21, the Agency has committed roughly $11.8 million toward flood risk reduction projects, with $6 million of that in grants to partnering reclamation districts, cities and Three River Levee Improvement Authority (TRLIA). Our first step in this Plan is to assess the current flood risk reduction projects Yuba Water is engaged in at the study, design, planning or construction level. Staff will then later brief the Board of Directors on each of these individual studies and projects. Those briefings will include the status of each project, relative benefits, financing, and other considerations. Discussion The following are summaries of the various public safety and/or climatic resiliency projects Yuba Water is actively engaged in now: Page 1 of 9 3/16/21 BOD Item 11 Attachment A Page 1 of 9 Marysville Ring Levee The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is currently repairing sections of the 7.5-mile Marysville Ring Levee which surrounds the City of Marysville. With five (5) phases of the project complete since 2012, four (4) phases remain to be constructed. Final project closeout is expected in 2024. Once complete, this project is anticipated to provide the City with close to a 300-year level of protection. This is a federal flood risk reduction project, with the State of California and the Marysville Levee Commission as the non-federal sponsors. Yuba Water has played a significant role by providing technical, financial and policy support throughout this project’s development. The project is advancing. Phase 2B is being re-bid for construction in 2021, and Phase 3 is underway, pending the completion of significant PG&E utility relocations. This necessary relocation effort, however, may result in increased project costs. The USACE Sacramento District is actively managing the issue and is in close coordination with staff. Total project costs include $115 million for design and construction and an additional $35 million in PG&E relocations and land acquisition. Agency staff expects to receive $6.5 million in grant funding for some of the relocation costs, in addition to the previous $2.5 million grant. A future briefing on the project will include more specific information on the project and its costs. Project Cost(s): Marysville Levee District $ 1,000,000 State / Federal $ 111,500,000 Yuba Water Agency $ 2,500,000 Unsecured Need $ 35,000,000 ($6,500,000 grant request to Yuba Water expected) TOTAL $ 150,000,000 Yuba Goldfields Levee To prevent potential breach flows from the Yuba River, the TRLIA completed Phase 1 of the Goldfields Levee in 2017 and achieved an interim 100-year flood protection level by constructing embankments designed to intercept potential breach flows from the Yuba River until Phase 2 is complete. TRLIA is now constructing Phase 2, which will achieve 200-year flood protection by way of a new levee that extends from the existing levee to high ground to control flows in the Goldfields. Funding for this project is anticipated to come from a Department of Water Resources (DWR) Urban Flood Risk Reduction grant, and other funding sources to be determined. The project, once complete, will ensure flood flows do not sweep through the Goldfields into the south part of Yuba County. The Yuba Goldfields Levee project is expected to be complete this year. Project Cost(s): TRLIA $ 11,700,000 State / Federal $ 42,600,000 Yuba Water Agency $ N/A TOTAL $ 54,000,000 Page 2 of 9 3/16/21 BOD Item 11 Attachment A Page 2 of 9 Reclamation District 10 Toe Access Corridor Project Reclamation District (RD) 10 is constructing an elevated toe access corridor along the Feather River from the confluence of Simmerly Slough and the Feather River to around two (2) miles upstream on the east bank of the levee. Elevated toe access corridors provide all-weather access to landside levee toes in areas where ponding water and/or seepage may preclude access for flood monitoring or emergency flood fighting activities. The project also includes the extension of drainage culverts and a safety fence along the landside toe of the new access corridor. Yuba Water is supporting RD 10 by providing $1.3 million to fund the design, permitting and construction of this project. Total project costs were originally expected to be $1.3 million. While design, permitting and acquisition costs are within budget, an updated construction estimate exceeds the original $700,000 estimate by $255,000. As a result, staff expects to receive a supplemental funding request once the final bids are received this summer. Construction is scheduled to begin summer 2021 and be complete prior to the upcoming flood season. Additional reaches of toe access corridors in RD 10 may be pursued in the future. Project Cost(s): RD 10 $ N/A State / Federal $ N/A Yuba Water Agency $ 1,300,000 Unsecured Need $ 255,000 TOTAL $ 1,555,000 Bear River Setback Levee RD 817 plans to construct a 2,800-foot-long setback levee along the north bank of the Bear River west of Wheatland to repair a critical erosion site. This project was awarded a DWR Flood System Repair Program (FSRP) grant with a 90% state cost share. Total project costs are estimated at approximately $11 million. A robust design process identified several cost savings elements to reduce the cost by $1.58 million and the resulting cost savings has enabled the team to coordinate with DWR to repair 12 pipe crossings in RD 817. The pipe crossings needed repair, or replacement, due to corrosion, failures or inadequate size, or for removal due to altered land uses that no longer require these drainage features. These pipe crossings were identified by the Utility Crossing Inventory Program as the responsibility of RD 817, and DWR funded an evaluation of all District pipes through the Deferred Maintenance Program (DMP). Although these were not originally part of the Setback Levee project, these deficiencies were identified as critical repairs, and DWR requested they be repaired utilizing the excess Setback Levee grant funding. Construction may begin as early as this summer and be complete by 2022. Page 3 of 9 3/16/21 BOD Item 11 Attachment A Page 3 of 9 Project Cost(s): RD 817 $ N/A State / Federal $ 9,900,000 Yuba Water Agency $ 1,100,000 (+$1,000,000 temporary cash flow loan) TOTAL $ 11,000,000 Hallwood Side Channel Project This Hallwood Side Channel Project will remove up to 3.2 million cubic yards of sediment from the Yuba River below Daguerre Point, and enhance up to 157 acres of seasonally inundated habitat to restore the natural river and floodplain processes, including the removal of the Middle Training Wall and improvement of nearly eight (8) miles of side channels. The project will benefit the community of Hallwood, the City of Marysville, and RD 10. An extraordinary benefit to this project is that Teichert is providing a substantial in-kind contribution through $72 million worth of grading and extraction of aggregate material utilizing the conveyor system in conjunction with the North Training Wall project. Phase 1, completed in 2020, removed 1.2 million cubic yards of sediment and restored 89 acres of floodplain and habitat. Phase 2 is expected to begin this year and will continue the removal of approximately 800,000 cubic yards of the Middle Training Wall and sediment, restoring 34 more acres of floodplain and habitat. Phases 3 and 4 will eventually remove an additional 815,000 and 400,000 cubic yards of material and restore an additional 13 and 21 acres of floodplain and habitat, returning nearly 2.5 miles of the Yuba River to its natural state. The project is scheduled for completion over the next 5 years in conjunction with the North Training Wall Project– provided funds are available. Project Cost(s): Yuba Water Agency $ 3,200,000 Teichert $ 72,000,000 State / Federal $ 6,700,000 (planning and design) Unsecured Need $ 2,000,000 (grant application submitted) TOTAL $ 83,900,000 Yuba River North Training Wall Project This project is being implemented by TRLIA through Yuba Water Agency grants to reshape the existing North Training Wall and extend it upstream to connect to the high ground near the Cordua Canal fish screen.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sacramento River Flood Control System
    A p pp pr ro x im a te ly 5 0 M il Sacramento River le es Shasta Dam and Lake ek s rre N Operating Agency: USBR C o rt rr reek th Dam Elevation: 1,077.5 ft llde Cre 70 I E eer GrossMoulton Pool Area: 29,500 Weir ac AB D Gross Pool Capacity: 4,552,000 ac-ft Flood Control System Medford !( OREGON IDAHOIDAHO l l a a n n a a C C !( Redding kk ee PLUMAS CO a e a s rr s u C u s l l Reno s o !( ome o 99 h C AB Th C NEVADA - - ^_ a a Sacramento m TEHAMA CO aa hh ee !( TT San Francisco !( Fresno Las Vegas !( kk ee e e !( rr Bakersfield 5 CC %&'( PACIFIC oo 5 ! Los Angeles cc !( S ii OCEAN a hh c CC r a S to m San Diego on gg !( ny ii en C BB re kk ee ee k t ee Black Butte o rr C Reservoir R i dd 70 v uu Paradise AB Oroville Dam - Lake Oroville Hamilton e M Operating Agency: CA Dept of Water Resources r Dam Elevation: 922 ft City Chico Gross Pool Area: 15,800 ac Gross Pool Capacity: 3,538,000 ac-ft M & T Overflow Area Black Butte Dam and Lake Operating Agency: USACE Dam Elevation: 515 ft Tisdale Weir Gross Pool Area: 4,378 ac 3 B's GrossMoulton Pool Capacity: 136,193Weir ac-ft Overflow Area BUTTE CO New Bullards Bar Dam and Lake Operating Agency: Yuba County Water Agency Dam Elevation: 1965 ft Gross Pool Area: 4,790 ac Goose Lake Gross Pool Capacity: 966,000 ac-ft Overflow Area Lake AB149 kk ee rree Oroville Tisdale Weir C GLENN CO ee tttt uu BB 5 ! Oroville New Bullards Bar Reservoir AB49 ll Moulton Weir aa nn Constructed: 1932 Butte aa CC Length: 500 feet Thermalito Design capacity of weir: 40,000 cfs Design capacity of river d/s of weir: 110,000 cfs Afterbay Moulton Weir e ke rro he 5 C ! Basin e kk Cre 5 ! tt 5 ! u Butte Basin and Butte Sink oncu H Flow from the 3 overflow areas upstream Colusa Weir of the project levees, from Moulton Weir, Constructed: 1933 and from Colusa Weir flows into the Length: 1,650 feet Butte Basin and Sink.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Purpose and Need
    TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN GRINNELL, P.E., YUNG-HSIN SUN, Ph.D., AND STUART ROBERTSON, P.E. YUBA RIVER INDEX: WATER YEAR CLASSIFICATIONS FOR YUBA RIVER PREPARED FOR YUBA COUNTY WATER AGENCY PREPARED BY BOOKMAN-EDMONSTON ENGINEERING, INC. Unpublished Work © November 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................1 SACRAMENTO VALLEY INDEX AND SAN JOAQUIN RIVER INDEX .................................................1 NEED FOR YUBA RIVER INDEX ..................................................................................................................2 DISTRIBUTION OF YUBA RIVER ANNUAL UNIMPAIRED FLOWS...........................................................................3 FUNCTIONS AND PURPOSES OF EXISTING FACILITIES..........................................................................................4 YUBA RIVER INDEX........................................................................................................................................6 INDEX DESIGN ...................................................................................................................................................6 INDEX DEFINITION .............................................................................................................................................7 WATER YEAR CLASSIFICATIONS OF YUBA RIVER ..............................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Cottage Creek Dam Modification Project
    INITIAL STUDY FOR THE COTTAGE CREEK DAM MODIFICATION PROJECT Prepared for: Yuba Water Agency 1220 F Street Marysville, CA 95901 Prepared by: 9888 Kent Street Elk Grove, CA 95624 (916) 714-1801 August 2020 INITIAL STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Regulatory Guidance .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Public Review ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................................. 2 1.5 Document Organization .......................................................................................................................... 3 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Project Location ...................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Project History and Background ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Exhibit a Project Description
    Application for New License Major Project – Existing Dam Exhibit A Project Description Security Level: Public Yuba River Development Project FERC Project No. 2246 Prepared by: Yuba County Water Agency 1220 F Street Marysville, CA 95901 www.ycwa.com April 2014 ©2014, Yuba County Water Agency. All Rights Reserved Yuba County Water Agency Yuba River Development Project FERC Project No. 2246 Table of Contents Section No. Description Page No. 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... A-1 2.0 Project Location .............................................................................................................. A-2 3.0 Project Facilities and Features ........................................................................................ A-7 3.1 New Colgate Development ................................................................................. A-8 3.1.1 Developmental Facilities ........................................................................ A-8 3.1.2 New Colgate Development Recreation Facilities ................................. A-15 3.1.2.1 New Bullards Bar Reservoir .................................................. A-18 3.1.2.2 Project Diversion Dam Impoundments .................................. A-38 3.1.3 Streamflow Gages ................................................................................. A-39 3.1.4 Roads..................................................................................................... A-40
    [Show full text]
  • Bowman South Dam Seismic Stability Analyses
    Nevada Irrigation District Staff Report for the Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, August 14, 2019 TO: Honorable Board of Directors FROM: Keane Sommers, P.E., Hydroelectric Manager Dar Chen, P.E., G.E., Senior Engineer - Dam Safety DATE: August 7, 2019 SUBJECT: Bowman South Dam Seismic Stability Analyses HYDROELECTRIC RECOMMENDATION: Award a sole source contract in the amount of $225,581.30 to Quest Structures for the Bowman South Dam Seismic Stability Analyses, and authorize the General Manager to execute the necessary documents. BACKGROUND: Bowman South Dam is a 105-foot-high and 567-foot-long concrete arch dam built in 1927 in a small canyon south of Bowman North Rockfill Dam. Both of the dams form Bowman Lake, which stores and transmits water from 6 other reservoirs on Canyon Creek and the Middle Yuba River upstream to Canyon Creek and the Bowman- Spaulding Canal downstream. According to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Division of Safety of Dams of California (DSOD), Bowman South is classified as an extremely-high-hazard dam due to the potential impacts on the downstream lives and properties in the case of its failure. It is approximately 15 miles west of the Mohawk Valley fault, which can generate up to a magnitude 7.3 earthquake. The last seismic stability analysis for the dam was performed in the mid-1990s. The study identified potential instabilities at the left abutment thrust block. Since then, the seismic criteria and the method of stability analyses have greatly evolved. Based on their dam safety inspections in 2012 and 2016, the FERC required Independent Consultants recommended that the District complete seismic stability analysis updates of the dam based on the latest seismic ground motions and methods of analysis, which include 3-D non-linear, dynamic, finite-element modeling of the dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Dam – Hydro Newstm
    10/2/2015 Some Dam – Hydro News TM And Other Stuff i Quote of Note: “I hate quotations. Tell me what you know.” – -RALPH WALDO EMERSON Some Dam - Hydro News Newsletter Archive for Back Issues and Search http://npdp.stanford.edu/ Click on Link (Some Dam - Hydro News) Bottom Right - Under Perspectives “Good wine is a necessity of life.” - -Thomas Jefferson Ron’s wine pick of the week: 2012 Kaiken Malbec "Ultra" “ No nation was ever drunk when wine was cheap. ” - - Thomas Jefferson Dams: (It only takes money – got any?) Time running out on water pact By LACEY JARRELL H&N Staff Reporter, Sep 20, 2015, heraldandnews.com A coalition of water stakeholders visited Washington, D.C., earlier this month to bolster support for long-term water security and fishery restoration in the Klamath Basin. On Wednesday and Thursday, Sept. 9 and 10, more than one dozen stakeholders met with several Oregon and California delegates in Washington, D.C., to reinforce the importance, and the urgency, of passing water legislation this year. The team — representatives from agricultural, tribal and environmental interests — traveled 2,400 miles to the East Coast to discuss the massive hit the Basin’s $600 million-per-year 1 Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu ag industry and endangered fish esteemed by tribes will take if Senate Bill 133 — the Klamath Water Recovery and Economic Restoration Act — fails to pass Congress in 2015. “It was a coordinated effort on all fronts,” said Brad Kirby, assistant manager of Tulelake Irrigation District.
    [Show full text]
  • Yuba County Water Agency's Yuba River Development Project
    Yuba County Water Agency’s Yuba River Development Project Relicensing YUBA COUNTY WATER AGENCY Yuba County Water Agency (YCWA), located in Marysville, California, is a public agency formed in 1959 pursuant to California State law (Water Code § 20500 et with a capacity of 150 kilowatts at a flow of 5 cfs; (3) New Bullards Bar Minimum seq.). The provisions of the California Water Code, under which YCWA was Flow Transformer, located adjacent to the New Bullards Bar Minimum Flow formed (WC§§ 20500–29978; 22115), permit YCWA to generate, distribute and sell Powerhouse; and (4) appurtenant facilities and features including access roads electricity. within the FERC Project Boundary. YUBA RIVER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NARROWS 2 DEVELOPMENT consists of: (1) Narrows 2 Powerhouse Penstock is a single rock tunnel, concrete lined (20 ft diameter) at the upper 376 feet YCWA owns and operates the Yuba River Development Project, which is located in and steel lined (14 ft diameter) for the final 371.5 feet. The penstock has a Yuba County, California, on the Yuba River and its tributaries including the North maximum flow capacity of 3,400 cfs; (2) Narrows 2 Powerhouse, an indoor and Middle Yuba River and Oregon Creek. A portion of the area within the FERC powerhouse located at the base of the United States Army Corps of Engineer’s Project Boundary is located on federally-owned land managed by the United States (USACE) Englebright Dam. The powerhouse consists of one vertical axis Francis Department of Agriculture Forest Service as part of Plumas and Tahoe national turbine with a capacity of 55 MW at a head of 236 feet and flow of 3,400 cfs; (3) forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change and Flood Operations in the Sacramento Basin, California Ann D
    JULY 2011 Climate Change and Flood Operations in the Sacramento Basin, California Ann D. Willis1, Jay R. Lund2, Edwin S. Townsley3, and Beth A. Faber4 ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Climate warming is likely to challenge many cur- It is often desirable to change regulatory policies with rent conceptions and regulatory policies, particularly changing conditions. A changing climate, along with for water management. A warmer climate is likely to other changes in floodplain land use and flood warn- hinder flood operations in California’s Sacramento ing and forecasting, will pose problems and oppor- Valley by decreasing snowpack storage and increas- tunities for existing flood management (IPCC 2007). ing the rain fraction of major storms. This work This paper focuses on the implications of not adapt- examines how a warmer climate would change flood ing reservoir operating policies for flood management peaks and volumes for nine major historical floods in California’s Sacramento Valley for various forms entering Shasta, Oroville, and New Bullards Bar res- of climate warming. This complements the existing ervoirs, using current flood flow forecast models and literature on adapting water management to changes current flood operating rules. Shasta and Oroville in climate in California (Carpenter and others 2001, have dynamic flood operation curves that accommo- 2003; Tanaka and others 2006; Zhu and others 2007; date many climate-warming scenarios. New Bullards Anderson and others 2008; Hanak and Lund 2008; Bar’s more static operating rule performs poorly for Medellin–Azuara and others 2008). these conditions. Revisiting flood operating rules is When dams are built for flood management, a flood an important adaptation for climate warming.
    [Show full text]
  • Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the Central
    Chapter 10: Terrestrial Biological Resources Chapter 10 1 Terrestrial Biological Resources 2 10.1 Introduction 3 This chapter describes terrestrial biological resources in the Study Area; and 4 potential changes that could occur as a result of implementing the alternatives 5 evaluated in this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Implementation of the 6 alternatives could affect terrestrial biological resources through potential changes 7 in operation of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) 8 and ecosystem restoration. 9 10.2 Regulatory Environment and Compliance 10 Requirements 11 Potential actions that could be implemented under the alternatives evaluated in 12 this EIS could affect terrestrial biological resources in areas: along the shorelines 13 and in the waters of reservoirs that store CVP and SWP water supplies, along 14 rivers and waterways (including bypasses) impacted by changes in the operations 15 of CVP or SWP reservoirs, within agricultural areas served by CVP and SWP 16 water supplies, and modified to provide wetland habitat. Actions located on 17 public agency lands; or implemented, funded, or approved by Federal and state 18 agencies would need to be compliant with appropriate Federal and state agency 19 policies and regulations, as summarized in Chapter 4, Approach to 20 Environmental Analyses. 21 10.3 Affected Environment 22 This section describes terrestrial biological resources that could potentially be 23 affected by implementing the alternatives considered in this EIS. Changes in 24 terrestrial biological resources due to changes in CVP and SWP operations may 25 occur in the Trinity River, Central Valley, San Francisco Bay Area, Central Coast, 26 and Southern California regions.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT System Reoperation Study Forecast‐Based Operations Analysis
    DRAFT System Reoperation Study Forecast‐Based Operations Analysis Technical Report Prepared for Department of Water Resources by 1771 Tribute Road, Suite A Sacramento, CA 95815 916/456-4400 (phone) • 916/456-0253 (fax) Contents 1 Background 1 1.1 System Reoperation . .1 1.2 Forecast-Based Operation . .1 2 Purpose 3 2.1 Water Supply Enhancement . .3 2.2 Flood Control Enhancement . .3 3 Watershed and Reservoir Characteristics 5 3.1 Sacramento River Watershed (Shasta Reservoir) . .6 3.2 Upper Feather River Watershed (Oroville Reservoir) . .6 3.3 Yuba River Watershed (New Bullards Bar Reservoir) . .6 3.4 American River Watershed (Folsom Reservoir) . .7 3.5 Merced River Watershed (New Exchequer Reservoir) . .7 4 Reservoir Operation Zones 8 5 Evaluation of Forecast Reliability 10 6 Water Supply Enhancement 13 6.1 Methodology . 13 6.2 Analysis Assumptions . 13 6.3 Reservoir Operations Model . 15 6.3.1 Historical Reservoir Data . 15 6.3.2 Water Supply Enhancement Zones . 15 6.3.3 Flood Space Evacuation Zones . 16 6.3.4 Other Simulation Regions . 16 6.3.5 Reoperated Outflow . 16 6.4 Results . 17 6.4.1 Reoperation Outflow and Storage . 17 6.4.2 Refill Potential . 20 6.4.3 Monthly Storage Effects . 22 6.5 Evaluation of Benefits . 27 6.6 Recommendations for Further Study . 27 7 Flood Control Enhancement 28 7.1 Shasta . 28 7.2 Oroville . 29 7.3 New Bullards Bar . 29 7.4 Folsom . 29 7.5 Recommendations for Further Study . 29 iii Contents References 31 Appendices A Reoperation Plots 33 A.1 Shasta.........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Project Cost and Revenue
    Draft Application for New License Major Project – Existing Dam Exhibit H Miscellaneous Filing Material Security Level: Public Yuba River Development Project FERC Project No. 2246 Prepared by: Yuba County Water Agency 1220 F Street Marysville, CA 95901 www.ycwa.com Draft – December 2013 ©2013, Yuba County Water Agency. All Rights Reserved Yuba County Water Agency Yuba River Development Project FERC Project No. 2246 Table of Contents Section No. Description Page No. 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... H-1 2.0 Efficient and Reliable Electric Service ........................................................................... H-4 2.1 Increase in Capacity or Generation ..................................................................... H-5 2.2 Project Coordination with Other Water Resources Projects ............................... H-5 2.2.1 YCWA’s Water Supply Project .............................................................. H-5 2.2.2 Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Narrows Project ............................ H-5 2.2.3 California Department of Water Resources’ State Water Project ........... H-6 2.2.4 California Department of Water Resources’ Oroville Project ................ H-6 2.3 Project Coordination with Other Electrical Systems to Minimize Cost of Production ........................................................................................................... H-7 3.0 YCWA’s Need for the Project .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1 970 Part 11 .-Pacific Slope Basins in California
    Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1 970 Part 11 .-Pacific Slope Basins in California GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 661 Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1 970 Part 11 .-Pacific Slope Basins in California GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 661 Washington 1971 United States Department of the Interior ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary Geological Survey W. A. Radlinski, Acting Director Free on application to the U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 20242 Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1970 Part 11.-Pacific Slope Basins in California INTRODUCTION This report lists the streamflow and reservoir stations in the Pacific slope basins in California for which records have been or are to be published in reports of the Geological Survey for periods through September 30, 1970. It supersedes Geological Survey Circular 581. It was updated by personnel of the Data Reports Unit, Water Rescurces Division, Geological Survey. Basic data on surface-water supply have been published in an annual series of water-supply papers consisting of several volumes, including one each for the States of Alaska and Hawaii. The area of the other 48 States is divide':\ into 14 parts whose boundaries coincide with certain natural drainage lines. Prior to 1951, the records for the 48 States were published in 14 volumes, one for each of the parts. From 1951 to 1960, the records for the 48 States were pub~ished annually in 18 volumes, there being 2 volumes each for Parts 1, 2, 3, and 6. Beginning in 1961, theannualseriesofwater-supplypapers on surface-water supply was changed to a 5-year series, and records for the period 1961-65 were published in 37 volumes, there being 2 or more volumes for each of 11 parts and one each for parts 10, 13, 14, 15 (Alaska), and 16 (Hawaii and other Pacific areas).
    [Show full text]