DOCSLIB.ORG

Sites Reservoir Project Public Draft EIR/EIS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sites Reservoir Project Public Draft EIR/EIS Appendix 6 Surface Water Resources Line items and numbers identified or noted as “No Action Alternative” represent the “Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition” (described in Chapter 2 Alternatives Analysis). Table numbering may not be consecutive for all appendixes. This page intentionally left blank. Contents Appendix 6: Surface Water Resources 6A Modeling of Alternatives 6B Water Resources System Modeling 6B1 Project Operations 6B2 River Operations 6B3 Delta Operations 6B4 Regional Deliveries 6C Upper Sacramento River Daily River Flow and Operations Modeling 6D Sensitivity Analysis Using the Latest CALSIM II Model This page intentionally left blank. Appendix 6A Modeling of Alternatives Line items and numbers identified or noted as “No Action Alternative” represent the “Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition” (described in Chapter 2 Alternatives Analysis). Table numbering may not be consecutive for all appendixes. This page intentionally left blank. Appendix 6A Modeling of Alternatives CALSIM II and DSM2 Modeling Assumptions for Sites Reservoir Alternatives 6A.1 Introduction This appendix describes the assumptions for the CALSIM II and DSM2 modeling of the Existing Conditions, No Action Alternative, and Sites Reservoir Project (Project) alternatives included in the Sites Reservoir Project Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS). The following model simulation was prepared as the basis of evaluating the impacts of the Project alternatives: 1. Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition The following model simulations of alternatives were prepared: 1. Alternative A – includes a 1.3-million-acre-foot (MAF) Sites Reservoir with conveyance to and from the reservoir provided by the existing Tehama-Colusa and Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District (GCID) Main canals and a new Delevan Pipeline (2,000-cubic-foot-per-second [cfs] diversion/1,500-cfs release) 2. Alternative B – includes a 1.8-MAF Sites Reservoir with conveyance to and from the reservoir provided by the existing Tehama-Colusa and GCID Main canals, and a new release–only Delevan Pipeline (1,500-cfs release) 3. Alternative C – includes a 1.8-MAF Sites Reservoir with conveyance to and from the reservoir provided by the existing Tehama-Colusa and GCID Main canals and a new Delevan Pipeline (2,000- cfs diversion/1,500-cfs release) 4. Alternative D – includes a 1.8-MAF Sites Reservoir with conveyance to and from the reservoir provided by the existing Tehama-Colusa and GCID Main canals and a new Delevan Pipeline (2,000- cfs diversion/1,500-cfs release); 480 thousand acre-feet (TAF) of Sites storage is reserved for local project participants in the Colusa Basin Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition modeling assumptions were developed through a coordinated process with the Federal and State Lead Agencies to reflect the best CALSIM II and DSM2 model representation of the Reasonable and Prudent Actions (RPAs) in the 2008 Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and 2009 National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Biological Opinions (BOs). Alternatives A, B, and C modeling assumptions were developed by the North-of-Delta Offstream Storage (NODOS) EIR/EIS Lead Agencies, Alternative D modeling assumptions were developed by the Sites Project Authority (Authority). SITES RESERVOIR PROJECT DRAFT EIR/EIS 6A-1 Appendix 6A Modeling of Alternatives 6A.2 Assumptions for Existing Conditions/No Project/ No Action Condition Model Simulations As described in Chapter 2 Alternatives Analysis, because facilities, regulatory regime, and water demands would be similar under the Existing Conditions and the No Project/No Action Alternative under year 2017 conditions, the analysis in this EIR/EIS assumes that the Existing Conditions baseline and No Project/No Action Alternative are similar and substantially the same baseline condition. Therefore, the identification of impacts for this Draft EIR/EIS is based on the evaluation of the action alternatives compared to what is termed the “Existing Conditions/ No Project/No Action Condition.” This section presents the assumptions used in developing the CALSIM II and DSM2 model simulations for the Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition used in the Sites Reservoir Draft EIR/EIS evaluation. The No Action Alternative CALSIM II and DSM2 models developed for the NODOS Feasibility Study and EIR/EIS were used for the Sites Reservoir Draft EIR/EIS Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition. The modeling assumptions were selected by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) management team for the NODOS Feasibility Study and EIR/EIS. The assumptions were selected to satisfy California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. The basis for these assumptions is described in the Chapter 2 Alternative Analysis. Assumptions that are applicable to the CALSIM II and DSM2 modeling are included in the following section. The Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition assumptions include implementation of water operations components of the RPAs specified in the 2008 USFWS and 2009 NMFS BOs. The specific assumptions and implementation in the CALSIM II and DSM2 models were developed by a multiagency team comprised of fisheries and modeling experts from the DWR, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG, now known as California Department of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW]), Reclamation, USFWS, and NMFS. In Section 6A.2.1 Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition, the description of CALSIM II and DSM2 assumptions refer to the No Action Alternative. However, these assumptions are applicable to the Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition in the Sites Reservoir Draft EIR/EIS. The detailed assumptions used in developing CALSIM II and DSM2 simulations for the Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition are included in Section 6A.4 Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition Modeling Assumptions Callout Tables, in Tables 6A-5 and 6A-6. Additional information is provided in the footnotes of each table. Table entries and footnotes refer to supporting appendix sections and other documents. Even though these tables show different assumptions for the Existing Conditions and the No Action Alternative, as previously noted, the No Action Alternative was used to represent the Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition in the Draft EIR/EIS. The Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition simulation was developed assuming Year 2030 level of development and regulatory conditions. The Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition assumptions include existing facilities and ongoing programs that existed as of March 2017 (publication of the Notice of Preparation) that could affect or could be affected by implementation of the alternatives. The Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition assumptions and the models do not include any restoration actions or additional conveyance over the current conditions. SITES RESERVOIR PROJECT DRAFT EIR/EIS 6A-2 Appendix 6A Modeling of Alternatives 6A.2.1 CALSIM II Assumptions for Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition 6A.2.1.1 Hydrology Inflows/Supplies CALSIM II model includes the historical hydrology with projected 2030 modifications for the operations upstream of the rim reservoirs. Reservoir inflows, stream gains, diversion requirements, irrigation efficiencies, return flows and groundwater operation are all components of the hydrology for CALSIM II. Level of Development CALSIM II input hydrology is based on an analysis of agricultural and urban land use and population estimates. The assumptions used for Sacramento Valley land use result from aggregation of historical survey and projected data developed for the California Water Plan Update (Bulletin 160-98). Generally, land use projections are based on Year 2020 estimates (hydrology serial number 2020D09E). However, the San Joaquin Valley hydrology reflects draft 2030 land use assumptions developed by Reclamation. Where appropriate Year 2030 projections of demands associated with water rights and State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP) water service contracts have been included. Specifically, projections of full build out are used to describe the American River region demands for water rights and CVP contract supplies and California Aqueduct and the Delta Mendota Canal SWP/CVP contractor demands are set to full contract amounts. Demands, Water Rights, CVP/SWP Contracts CALSIM II demand inputs are preprocessed monthly time series for a specified level of development (e.g. 2020) and per hydrologic conditions. Demands are classified as CVP project, SWP project, local project or non-project (e.g. pre-1914 water rights, in-Delta consumptive use etc.). CVP and SWP demands are separated into different classes based on the contract type. A description of various demands and classifications included in CALSIM II is provided in the 2008 Operations Criteria and Plan (OCAP) Biological Assessment Appendix D (Reclamation, 2008a). Non-project demands within each Depletion Study Area are based on the proportion of the acreage served by the projects versus the total acreage, for each land-use type. Non-project demands are satisfied from sources other than project storage and project conveyance facilities and are reduced as a function of water availability in the absence of project operations. Table 6A-1 includes the summary of the CVP and SWP project
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conservation of Endangered Buena Vista Lake Shrews
    CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED BUENA VISTA LAKE SHREWS (SOREX ORNATUS RELICTUS) THROUGH INVESTIGATION OF TAXONOMIC STATUS, DISTRIBUTION, AND USE OF NON-INVASIVE SURVEY METHODS Prepared by: Brian Cypher1, Erin Tennant2, Jesus Maldonado3, Larry Saslaw1, Tory Westall1, Jacklyn Mohay2, Erica Kelly1, and Christine Van Horn Job1 1California State University, Stanislaus Endangered Species Recovery Program 2California Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 3Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute National Zoological Park June 16, 2017 Buena Vista Lake Shrew Conservation CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED BUENA VISTA LAKE SHREWS (SOREX ORNATUS RELICTUS) THROUGH INVESTIGATION OF TAXONOMIC STATUS, DISTRIBUTION, AND USE OF NON-INVASIVE SURVEY METHODS Prepared by: Brian Cypher, Erin Tennant, Jesus Maldonado, Lawrence Saslaw, Tory Westall, Jacklyn Mohay, Erica Kelly, and Christine Van Horn Job California State University-Stanislaus, Endangered Species Recovery Program California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 4 Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park CONTENTS Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................... ii Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods .........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • To View the 2019 Sites Project Authority Annual Report
    Sites Project Authority Annual Report 2019 Bringing resiliency, reliability, and flexibility to California's water supply We understand how critical it is to have a water system that provides multiple benefits. Sites Reservoir will produce significant benefits to the environment and secure water supply resiliency across the state for future generations. Letter from the Sites Board Chair On behalf of the Sites Project Authority (Authority), I am pleased to publish this inaugural annual report to highlight the significant progress we have made in developing Sites Reservoir. Since 2010, the Authority, representing 28 public agencies throughout California, has advanced this important project. The Authority’s strength lies in our participants, which represent the local counties where the project is located, along with cities, and water and irrigation districts throughout the Sacramento Valley, San Joaquin Valley, Bay Area, and Southern California. Through this spirit of teamwork and regional collaboration, the Authority has made great progress in advancing Sites Reservoir. In 2019, the Authority focused on project permitting, operation modeling, financial analysis, and conducting a proactive stakeholder engagement effort. We have been diligently working on developing a project that meets the needs of our participants and is affordable for our investors. We remain steadfast in our commitment to working in partnership with both landowners and project stakeholders to advance a project that meets the needs of our communities and the environment. I believe strongly that Sites Reservoir offers a unique and generational opportunity to construct a multi-benefit water storage project that helps restore flexibility, reliability, and resiliency to our statewide water supply, and provide a dedicated supply of water for environmental purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Mendota Pool Bypass and Reach 2B Improvement Project Draft EIS/R
    Draft Mendota Pool Bypass and Reach 2B Improvements Project Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report SCH # 2009072044 June 2015 The San Joaquin River Restoration Program is a comprehensive long-term effort to restore flows to the San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to the confluence of Merced River and restore a self-sustaining Chinook salmon fishery in the river while reducing or avoiding adverse water supply impacts from Interim and Restoration flows. Mission Statements The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American Public. The California State Lands Commission serves the people of California by providing stewardship of the lands, waterways, and resources entrusted to its care through economic development, protection, preservation, and restoration. Executive Summary INTRODUCTIONAND BACKGROUND Introduction and Background The Mendota Pool Bypass and Reach 2B Improvements Project (Project) includes the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Mendota Pool Bypass and improvements in the San Joaquin River channel in Reach 2B (Figure S-1). The Project consists of a floodplain width that conveys at least 4,500 cubic feet per second (cfs), a method Mendota Pool to bypass Restoration Flows around Mendota Pool, and a method to deliver water to Mendota Pool. The Project footprint and vicinity (Figure S-2) extend from approximately 0.3 mile above the Chowchilla Bifurcation Structure to approximately 1.0 mile below the Mendota Dam. The Project footprint comprises the area that could be directly affected by the Project. The Project study area or “Project area” includes areas directly and indirectly affected by the Project.
    [Show full text]
  • Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins Climate Impact Assessment
    Technical Appendix Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins Climate Impact Assessment U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation October 2014 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Technical Appendix Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins Climate Impact Assessment Prepared for Reclamation by CH2M HILL under Contract No. R12PD80946 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Michael K. Tansey, PhD, Mid-Pacific Region Climate Change Coordinator Arlan Nickel, Mid-Pacific Region Basin Studies Coordinator By CH2M HILL Brian Van Lienden, PE, Water Resources Engineer Armin Munévar, PE, Water Resources Engineer Tapash Das, PhD, Water Resources Engineer U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation October 2014 This page left intentionally blank Table of Contents Table of Contents Page Abbreviations and Acronyms ....................................................................... xvii Preface ......................................................................................................... xxi 1.0 Technical Approach .............................................................................. 1 2.0 Socioeconomic-Climate Future
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 Vegetation Classification and Mapping of Peoria Wildlife Area
    Vegetation classification and mapping of Peoria Wildlife Area, South of New Melones Lake, Tuolumne County, California By Julie M. Evens, Sau San, and Jeanne Taylor Of California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 In Collaboration with John Menke Of Aerial Information Systems 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 November 2004 Table of Contents Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 1 Vegetation Classification Methods................................................................................................................ 1 Study Area ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Figure 1. Survey area including Peoria Wildlife Area and Table Mountain .................................................. 2 Sampling ................................................................................................................................................ 3 Figure 2. Locations of the field surveys. ....................................................................................................... 4 Existing Literature Review ......................................................................................................................... 5 Cluster Analyses for Vegetation Classification .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Westlands Water District – Warren Act Contract for Conveyance of Kings River Flood Flows in the San Luis Canal
    Final Environmental Assessment Westlands Water District – Warren Act Contract for Conveyance of Kings River Flood Flows in the San Luis Canal EA-11-002 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region South-Central California Area Office Fresno, California January 2012 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Table of Contents Page Section 1 Purpose and Need for Action ....................................................... 1 1.1 Background ........................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need ................................................................................. 1 1.3 Scope ..................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Reclamation’s Legal and Statutory Authorities and Jurisdiction Relevant to the Proposed Federal Action.............................................. 2 1.5 Potential Issues...................................................................................... 3 Section 2 Alternatives Including the Proposed Action............................... 5 2.1 No Action Alternative ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Simulation of Flows and Water Quality in the California Aqueduct Using DSM2
    Simulation of Flows and Water Quality in the California Aqueduct Using DSM2 Siqing Liu, Bob Suits DWR, Bay Delta Office, Modeling Support Branch 2011 CWEMF Annual Meeting, February 28 –March 2 1 Topics • Project objectives • Aqueduct System modeled • Assumptions / issues with modeling • Model results –Flows / Storage, EC, Bromide 2 Objectives Simulate Aqueduct hydraulics and water quality • 1990 – 2010 period • DSM2 Aqueduct version calibrated by CH2Mhill Achieve 1st step in enabling forecasting Physical System Canals simulated • South Bay Aqueduct (42 miles) • California Aqueduct (444 miles) • East Branch to Silverwood Lake • West Branch to Pyramid Lake (40 miles) • Delta‐Mendota Canal (117 miles) 4 Physical System, cont Pumping Plants Banks Pumping Plant Buena Vista (Check 30) Jones Pumping Plant Teerink (Check 35) South Bay Chrisman (Check 36) O’Neill Pumping-Generating Edmonston (Check 40) Gianelli Pumping-Generating Alamo (Check 42) Dos Amigos (Check 13) Oso (West Branch) Las Perillas (Costal branch) Pearblossom (Check 58) 5 Physical System, cont Check structures and gates • Pools separated by check structures throughout the aqueduct system (SWP: 66, DMC: 21 ) • Gates at check structures regulate flow rates and water surface elevation 6 Physical System, cont Turnout and diversion structures • Water delivered to agricultural and municipal contractors through diversion structures • Over 270 diversion structures on SWP • Over 200 turnouts on DMC 7 Physical System, cont Reservoirs / Lakes Represented as complete mixing of water body •
    [Show full text]
  • Ad-Hoc Drought Management on an Overallocated River: the Ts Anislaus River, Water Years 2014-15 Philip Womble
    Hastings Environmental Law Journal Volume 23 | Number 1 Article 16 2017 Ad-hoc Drought Management on an Overallocated River: The tS anislaus River, Water Years 2014-15 Philip Womble Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_environmental_law_journal Part of the Environmental Law Commons Recommended Citation Philip Womble, Ad-hoc Drought Management on an Overallocated River: The Stanislaus River, Water Years 2014-15, 23 Hastings West Northwest J. of Envtl. L. & Pol'y 115 (2017) Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_environmental_law_journal/vol23/iss1/16 This Series is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Environmental Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ad-hoc Drought Management on an Overallocated River: The Stanislaus River, Water Years 2014-15 Philip Womble* *J.D., Stanford Law School, 2016; Ph.D. Candidate, Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources, Stanford University. Many thanks to stakeholders who took the time to share their thoughts with me in interviews and to Leon Szeptycki, Jeffrey Mount, Brian Gray, Molly Melius, Ellen Hanak, Ted Grantham, Caitlin Chappelle, John Ugai, and Elizabeth Vissers for their feedback and support. This publication was developed with partial support from Assistance Agreement No. 83586701 awarded by the US Environmental Protection Agency to the Public Policy Institute of California. It has not been formally reviewed by EPA. The views expressed in this document are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Power and Energy Technical Report, DEIS
    Draft Power and Energy Technical Report Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, California Prepared by: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation June 2013 Contents Contents Chapter 1 Affected Environment ....................................................................................... 1-1 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 1-1 Shasta Lake and Vicinity ................................................................................................. 1-7 Upper Sacramento River (Shasta Dam to Red Bluff) ...................................................... 1-9 Lower Sacramento River and Delta ............................................................................... 1-10 CVP/SWP Service Areas ............................................................................................... 1-12 Chapter 2 Modeling Results ................................................................................................ 2-1 Chapter 3 Bibliography ....................................................................................................... 3-1 Tables Table 1-1. Central Valley Project Power Plants, Capacities, and Historical Annual Generation ................................................................................................................. 1-5 Table 1-2. Major State Water Project Facilities, Capacities, and Historical Power Generation
    [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]
  • Northern Calfornia Water Districts & Water Supply Sources
    WHERE DOES OUR WATER COME FROM? Quincy Corning k F k N F , M R , r R e er th th a a Magalia e Fe F FEATHER RIVER NORTH FORK Shasta Lake STATE WATER PROJECT Chico Orland Paradise k F S , FEATHER RIVER MIDDLE FORK R r STATE WATER PROJECT e Sacramento River th a e F Tehama-Colusa Canal Durham Folsom Lake LAKE OROVILLE American River N Yuba R STATE WATER PROJECT San Joaquin R. Contra Costa Canal JACKSON MEADOW RES. New Melones Lake LAKE PILLSBURY Yuba Co. W.A. Marin M.W.D. Willows Old River Stanislaus R North Marin W.D. Oroville Sonoma Co. W.A. NEW BULLARDS BAR RES. Ukiah P.U. Yuba Co. W.A. Madera Canal Delta-Mendota Canal Millerton Lake Fort Bragg Palermo YUBA CO. W.A Kern River Yuba River San Luis Reservoir Jackson Meadows and Willits New Bullards Bar Reservoirs LAKE SPAULDING k Placer Co. W.A. F MIDDLE FORK YUBA RIVER TRUCKEE-DONNER P.U.D E Gridley Nevada I.D. , Nevada I.D. Groundwater Friant-Kern Canal R n ia ss u R Central Valley R ba Project Yu Nevada City LAKE MENDOCINO FEATHER RIVER BEAR RIVER Marin M.W.D. TEHAMA-COLUSA CANAL STATE WATER PROJECT YUBA RIVER Nevada I.D. Fk The Central Valley Project has been founded by the U.S. Bureau of North Marin W.D. CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT , N Yuba Co. W.A. Grass Valley n R Reclamation in 1935 to manage the water of the Sacramento and Sonoma Co. W.A. ica mer Ukiah P.U.
    [Show full text]
  • Tulare SWRP Public Draft
    Cottonwood Creek Storm Water Resource Plan Public Draft September 2018 Project Number 184031062 Prepared for: Tulare County Resource Management Agency Prepared by: Stantec 3301 C, Suite 1900 Sacramento, CA 95816 Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................... i Plan Objectives .......................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Objectives ....................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Plan Organization ............................................................................................ 1-1 Watershed Identification ........................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Watersheds and Subwatersheds .................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Political and Service-Area Boundaries ............................................................ 2-1 2.3 Water Quality Priorities ................................................................................... 2-6 2.4 Surface Water and Groundwater Resources .................................................. 2-7 Water Quality Compliance ........................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Land Use and Activities ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]