Feasibility of Fish Passage at Alameda Creek Diversion Dam

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Feasibility of Fish Passage at Alameda Creek Diversion Dam■■Screened Diversion with Schedule B Bypass Flows represents the estimated amount of water thatcould have been diverted under simulated flows if bypass flows consistent with the SFPUCproposednormal water year instream flow schedule were bypassed downstream at ACDD, whileother flows up to 370 cfs were diverted during the November-through-April time period.Lost Water Diversion Opportunity due to Screening compares the two different diversionscenarios (i.e., unscreened and screened) and quantifies the volume of water that wouldpotentially not be diverted after screen implementation. Consistent with the order-of-magnitudecost estimating in this conceptual feasibility study, the SFPUC-proposed “normal water year”instream flow schedule (Schedule B) was used in this diversion comparison scenario.The estimates depicted in Table 5-2 indicate that on average, use of screens results in an annualdiversion reduction of approximately 1,510 acre-feet of water that could have been diverted in anunscreened diversion condition. Annual reductions in diversion for both a wet and a dry water year areillustrated in Figure 5-2. For the purposes of this analysis, the average annual diversion reduction ofapproximately 1,510 acre-feet of water was used to estimate the annual diversion reduction due toscreening facility operation. An estimated 2016 water rate of $1,500 per acre-foot 11 was used in thisanalysis because it accounts for the time differential of up to several years between this estimate and theactual construction and operation of a potential fish ladder. Therefore, the annual lost diversionopportunity cost due to reduced diversion capacity with screening is approximately $2,265,000. Thiswater cost is added to the annualized screen component cost in Section 5.3.5.2.2 FISH SCREEN BYPASS FLOWSFish screening would require bypass flows at the downstream end of the screens, to maintain sweepingvelocity and prevent fish and small debris from being impinged on the screens, and to provide safedownstream passage for fish (NMFS, 2008a). The volume of water available for diversion toCalaveras Reservoir would be reduced due to this requirement.For purposes of cost estimation it is assumed that the fish screen bypass would require 5 cfs of flow,whenever flows sufficient are available, during the entire diversion period. The estimated annual watercost calculation (Section 5.2) assumes that the SFPUC-proposed normal water year instream flowschedule bypass flows (Section 2.3.2.2) will be used to operate the fish screen bypass when they areavailable. Because the SFPUC-proposed flows (dry, normal, and wet years) would always be sufficientfor operation of a fish screen bypass (5 cfs minimum), it is assumed that there is no additional annualwater cost associated with the operation of the fish screen bypass alone. The entire water costassociated with screening is due to the potential reduction in the maximum rate of diversion withscreening, as described in Section 5.2.1.5.2.3 FISH LADDER OPERATION FLOWSOperation of a fish ladder at ACDD would require a prescribed set of minimum flows, whenavailable, to be maintained prior to any water diversion during certain months of the year when theladder would be in operation, December through April (Table 4-1). Therefore, the volume of wateravailable for diversion to Calaveras Reservoir would also likely be reduced if a fishway wasimplemented. The degree to which SFPUC-proposed instream flows (Section 2.3.2.2) would besufficient to operate a fishway, and the cost of the water in excess of the proposed flows that wouldbe required for that purpose is addressed in this section.11Cost of water cited may be a minimum cost of replacement water (water lost from storage) as it will depend on whereand how SFPUC is able to replace the water. For example, recycled water development in San Francisco is estimatedto cost approximately $3,900 per acre-foot. Thus, the actual cost of replacement water will depend on replacementsources available at the time replacement water is needed.ACDD Passage June 2009 Page 5-6
12001998 Modeled Hydrology, Wet Year1000800Flow (cfs)600400200011/1 11/15 11/29 12/13 12/27 1/10 1/24 2/7 2/21 3/7 3/21 4/4 4/18 5/2Date12002002 Modeled Hydrology, Dry Year1000800Flow (cfs)600400200011/1 11/15 11/29 12/13 12/27 1/10 1/24 2/7 2/21 3/7 3/21 4/4 4/18 5/2DateCurrent Maximum DiversionMaximum Diversion with ScreensAlameda Creek Predicted FlowLost Water Diversion Opportunity Due to EstimatedReduction in Diversion Capacity With ScreensPotential Reduction in Diversions due to ReducedMaximum Diversion Capacity with ScreensFeasibility of Fish Passage at Alameda Creek Diversion DamTechnical MemorandumJune 2009 Figure 5-2
Page 1:
T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U
Page 4 and 5:
Feasibility of Fish Passage at Alam
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 11 and 12:
1.0 Introduction1 INTRODUCTION1.1 B
Page 13:
24Alamo680DanvilleAlameda CreekWate
Page 16 and 17: Feasibility of Fish Passage at Alam
Page 18 and 19: oleyriesSanCalaveras Creekalaveras
Page 20 and 21: (a)(b)Alameda Creek Diversion Dam (
Page 23 and 24: 2.0 Setting2.3.2.1 ALAMEDA CREEK DI
Page 25 and 26: 2.0 Settingalmost never submerged;
Page 27 and 28: 2.0 SettingRainbow trout are the sa
Page 29: 2.0 SettingA number of future proje
Page 42 and 43: (a) A view of the navigation lock a
Page 44 and 45: (a) A pickup truck adapted for haul
Page 57: Approximately 1.8 miles toCalaveras
Page 77 and 78: 6.0 Additional Considerations and A
Page 79: 6.0 Additional Considerations and A
Page 89 and 90: 9.0 Report Preparation9 REPORT PREP
Page 91 and 92: 10.0 References10 REFERENCESAACE (A
Page 93 and 94: 10.0 ReferencesHayes, Darrel, 2001.
Page 95 and 96: 10.0 ReferencesSak, B., San Francis
Page 97: 10.0 ReferencesWDFW (Washington Dep
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120:
show all

Feasibility of Fish Passage at Alameda Creek Diversion Dam

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?