Dams Within Jurisdiction of the State of California - Listed Alphabetically by Dam Name

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | August 31st, 2017

An alphabetical listing of dams by dam name within the jurisdiction of the state of California.

An alphabetical listing of dams by dam name within the jurisdiction of the state of California.

Dams within the Jurisdiction of the state of California - Listed Alphabetically by Reservoir Name

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | August 31st, 2017

An alphabetical listing of dams by reservoir name within the jurisdiction of the state of California.

An alphabetical listing of dams by reservoir name within the jurisdiction of the state of California.

Delta Conveyance Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) | December 16th, 2022

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR or the applicant) is proposing to construct new conveyance facilities in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta). As

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR or the applicant) is proposing to construct new conveyance facilities in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta). As the lead agency for the Delta Conveyance Project (project or proposed action), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Sacramento District has prepared an environmental impact statement (EIS) for construction of the action alternatives. This Draft EIS analyzes the applicant’s proposed action and alternatives, which include intake facilities on the Sacramento River, tunnel reaches and tunnel shafts, a southern forebay and pumping plant, and south Delta conveyance facilities that would connect to the existing State Water Project (SWP) infrastructure. Because construction of the proposed action and action alternatives would alter federal levees, permission from USACE is required under Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 United States Code [USC] § 408) (Section 408). Construction of the proposed action and action alternatives would cross under the Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel (a federal navigation project); therefore, a real estate outgrant1 from USACE would be required. In addition, the proposed work in navigable waters of the United States requires authorization from USACE under Section 10 of the RHA (33 USC § 403), and discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States requires authorization from USACE under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 20 1344). DWR is the requester under Section 408 and the applicant under Section 10, Section 404, and the real estate outgrant. Once constructed, the new facilities that comprise the proposed action would become part of the SWP. Operation of the SWP, including the facilities proposed in this project, is outside USACE authority under Section 408, Section 10, and Section 404. Therefore, the Draft EIS focuses only on 25 those actions requiring USACE authorization or approval. Operations are discussed briefly and qualitatively throughout the Draft EIS. Readers should refer to the Delta Conveyance Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (Delta Conveyance Project Draft EIR) (California Department of Water Resources 2022) for a more in-depth analysis of operations and associated effects on the environment. Where noted, this Draft EIS incorporates by reference portions of the Delta Conveyance Project Draft EIR (California Department of Water Resources 2022).

Delta Levee Investment Strategy: Final Report

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | August 4th, 2017

In the California Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta), levee failure could cause catastrophic flooding, potentially causing injury or loss of life, and possibly damaging

In the California Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta), levee failure could cause catastrophic flooding, potentially causing injury or loss of life, and possibly damaging property, water supply, infrastructure, and environmental resources of importance to the entire State of California (State). Though levee maintenance and improvements over the past three decades have reduced the frequency of levee failures, the State has no comprehensive method to prioritize its investments in Delta levees operations, maintenance, and improvement projects. The Delta Plan, adopted on May 16, 2013, recommends that the Delta Stewardship Council (Council), in consultation with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), the Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB), the Delta Protection Commission (DPC), local agencies, and the California Water Commission, implement California Water Code (CWC) section 85306 by developing a Delta Levees Investment Strategy (DLIS) to identify funding priorities for State investments in Delta levees. The DLIS is an innovative approach for determining priorities for State funds for levee improvement in the Delta and Suisun Marsh. The DLIS, which considers the assets protected by levees, the threats to levees, and the multiple beneficiaries of levee investments, uses a risk analysis methodology to recommend priorities for State investments in levee operations, maintenance, and improvements. This methodology was developed in close coordination with State agency partners, local and regional flood management and emergency response planning agencies, and other interested parties. In total, the Council worked with 113 different stakeholders and conducted 10 public meetings, 60 stakeholder outreach meetings, and 60 interagency coordination meetings. The Council also discussed DLIS issues at 38 Council meetings and workshops, which provided opportunities for public comment. The DLIS team developed a Decision Support Tool (DST) to enable the Council and stakeholders to review and update the data and analysis that form the basis of the risk evaluation. The DST supports deliberations by summarizing information about baseline and future risks, aggregating and displaying risks, and then identifying portfolios of investments that have the potential to reduce risk to State interests. The data components in the DST are designed to be updated as new information is collected or identified.

Design Life Level: Quantifying risk in a changing climate

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | September 23rd, 2013

In the past, the concepts of return levels and return periods have been standard and important tools for engineering design. However, these concepts are based on theassu

In the past, the concepts of return levels and return periods have been standard and important tools for engineering design. However, these concepts are based on theassumption of a stationary climate and do not apply to a changing climate, whether local orglobal. In this paper, we propose a refined concept, Design Life Level, which quantifies risk in a nonstationary climate and can serve as the basis for communication. In current practice, typical hydrologic risk management focuses on a standard (e.g., in terms of a high quantile corresponding to the specified probability of failure for a single year). Nevertheless, the basic information needed for engineering design should consist of (i) the design life period (e.g., the next 50 years, say 2015–2064); and (ii) the probability (e.g., 5% chance) of a hazardous event (typically, in the form of the hydrologic variable exceeding a high level) occurring during the design life period. Capturing both of these design characteristics, the Design Life Level is defined as an upper quantile (e.g., 5%) of the distribution of the maximum value of the hydrologic variable (e.g., water level) over the design life period. We relate this concept and variants of it to existing literature and illustrate how they, and some useful complementary plots, may be computed and used. One practically important consideration concerns quantifying the statistical uncertainty in estimating a high quantile under nonstationarity.

Developing the Next Framework to Manage the Colorado River: Flexible Tools to Benefit Tribes and the Basin

Water and Tribes Initiative | August 2nd, 2022

Development and Application of a 1D Compaction Model to Understand 65 Years of Subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | June 2nd, 2022

High rates of land subsidence, caused by groundwater overdraft, are resulting in millions of dollars of infrastructure damage in California's San Joaquin Valley (SJV). In

High rates of land subsidence, caused by groundwater overdraft, are resulting in millions of dollars of infrastructure damage in California's San Joaquin Valley (SJV). In recent years, the use of interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) has enabled us to substantially improve our understanding of this subsidence. However, only very occasionally have the InSAR data been integrated with a physical model of subsurface compaction. Here, we have used InSAR and other data to parameterize and calibrate a 1D compaction model. We applied our model to a study area in the SJV where we had access to the necessary information on hydraulic head to develop model inputs. Our model simulated subsidence in the three aquifer system layers over the period 1952–2017, and is the first 1D compaction model in the SJV to simulate multiple aquifer system layers from the 1950s to 2017. The results from our model suggest that previous studies have significantly underestimated the time constants governing the slow, residual compaction of subsurface clays. We suggest that residual compaction of clays is a process that continues for decades-to-centuries, indicating that to significantly reduce subsidence requires some recovery of head, not just a stabilization. We also show how compaction in the lower, confined aquifer has accounted for over 90% of subsidence in the past 20 years. Although our study area is small, our findings are likely representative of the subsiding regions of the SJV, and our methodology can be applied to unconsolidated aquifer systems exhibiting subsidence worldwide.

Dimension reduction approach for understanding resource-flow resilience to climate change

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | June 15th, 2024

DISB Review of the Draft EIR/EIS for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | May 15th, 2014

The Delta Reform Act of 2009 (§85320(c)) instructs the Delta Independent Science Board to review the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) Draft Environmental Impact Report

The Delta Reform Act of 2009 (§85320(c)) instructs the Delta Independent Science Board to review the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (DEIR/DEIS) and to submit our comments to the Delta Stewardship Council and the California Department of Fish and Game. We have focused our review on the adequacy of the science and the validity of the conclusions drawn from that science. The accompanying document constitutes our legislatively mandated review. We commend the preparers of the Draft BDCP documents for assembling and analyzing mountains of scientific information, and for exploring environmental impacts of many proposed BDCP actions. The preparers faced a bewildering array of regulatory requirements and economic, social, and political pressures. We find, however, that the science in this BDCP effort falls short of what the project requires. We highlight our concerns in the attached report. The report, in turn, draws on our detailed responses to charge questions from the Delta Stewardship Council (Appendix A) and on our reviews of individual chapters in the DEIR/DEIS (Appendix B). Our concerns raise issues that, if not addressed, may undermine the contributions of BDCP to meeting the co-equal goals for the Delta.

Drinking Fountains and Public Health: Improving National Water Infrastructure to Rebuild Trust and Ensure Access

Pacific Institute | February 27th, 2017

Public drinking fountains are disappearing across the U.S., yet many people – including children, commuters, joggers, tourists, and the homeless – rely on them for ch

Public drinking fountains are disappearing across the U.S., yet many people – including children, commuters, joggers, tourists, and the homeless – rely on them for cheap, accessible, and safe municipal water. Concerns over drinking water quality and possible disease transmission as well as widely-publicized water contamination incidents are both contributing factors in the decline. Are drinking fountains truly a cause of illness? What would it take to rebuild public trust in this important water infrastructure so drinking fountains can continue to be a safe, accessible resource for those who rely on them? In this Pacific Institute report, the authors examine epidemiology studies and other evidence of drinking fountain-related health issues. They find limited evidence of a causal relationship between illness and the use of drinking fountains. Further, problems that were identified can be traced to contamination from poor cleaning and maintenance or from old water infrastructure in buildings, rather than contamination at the point of use, and these problems can be fixed.