1

NORTH-OF-THE-DELTA OFFSTREAM STORAGE

SACRAMENTO RIVER CONSERVATION AREA FORUM

TAC

NORTH-OF-THE-DELTA OFFSTREAM STORAGE

SACRAMENTO RIVER CONSERVATION AREA FORUM

TAC

State of CaliforniaDepartment of Water Resources

U.S. Department of the InteriorBureau of Reclamation

MAY 3, 2011MAY 3, 2011

Outline

Introduction

NODOS Investigation History:– CALFED and NODOS– Flow Regime TAG

Project Overview:– Alternatives Considered– Alternatives to be Evaluated In Detail

NODOS Operations and Operational Modeling– Some Results– Other Models

Schedule

Contact Information

CALFED and Storage

• “All aspects … are interrelated and interdependent.”

• “The success of all of the elements depends upon expanded and more strategically managed storage.”

• CALFED: Initial Surface Storage Screening• CALFED ROD: 5 surface storage projects• Acceptable surface storage projects

support CALFED Program objectives• Storage provides needed system flexibility

NODOS Objectives

• Water Supply Reliability – agricultural, urban,refuge, and emergency response

• Anadromous Fish and Other Aquatic Species Survival

• Delta Water Quality• Flexible hydropower generation to support

renewable integration• Recreation• Flood Damage Reduction

Sacramento River Flow Regime

• Stakeholder participants identified the flow regime of the Sacramento River as one of the primary areas of concern related to potential implementation impacts.

• Early conceptual formulations of a NODOS project conceived that the flow regime and associated ecosystem processes of the river could be improved with an offstream storage facility.”

Investigation requested formation of a Technical Advisory Group to …

• Identify potential NODOS flow regime impacts and improvements

• Further the general understanding of Sacramento River flow regime

TAG Participation

• Friends of the River• Sacramento River

Conservation Area Forum• Sacramento River Preservation

Trust• Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority• The Bay Institute• The Natural Heritage Institute• The Nature Conservancy• University of California at Davis• California Bay-Delta Authority• U.S. Bureau of Reclamation• NOAA Fisheries

• Department of Fish and Game

• Department of Water Resources

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service• U.S Army Corps of Engineers• DWR/COE Comprehensive

Studies• CH2MHill• Metropolitan Water District of

So California• State Water Contractors• Orland Unit Water User’s

Association

TAG Identified Flow Regime Improvement Opportunities

• Increase peak flows during Winter / Spring to support physical river functions

• Restore Spring snowmelt pattern to support cottonwood success

• Stabilize Fall flows to avoid stranding and desiccation

• Increase Spring flow duration in Yolo Bypass

• Reduce diversions• Improve river temperatures for

salmonids

What we wanted from TAG

• Help identify Ecosystem Restoration benefits of NODOS

• Help develop operational guidance for NODOS diversions

Flow Regime TAG also Suggested

• An assessment of the river’s flow regime using a shorter time-step than CALSIM II (monthly)

• Consideration of additional tools to describe effects of the project

• Consideration of the CALFED Ecosystem Restoration Program

Alternatives Considered

• Red Bank Reservoir (and others within Cottonwood Creek watershed)

• Newville Reservoir• Colusa Reservoir• Sites Reservoir

Alternatives for Detailed Evaluation:

Alternatives for Detailed Evaluation:

Alternatives for Detailed Evaluation:

Ecosystem Enhancement Account

Formulation:• Includes specific water-dependent

restoration actions• Account actions from CALFED

Ecosystem Restoration Program list and input from Sacramento River Flow Regime TAG and Agencies

• Integrated with other project objectives• Adaptive management

Ecosystem Enhancement Actions (EEA) Included in Alternatives:

• Improve the reliability of coldwater pool storage in Shasta Lake

• Provide releases from Shasta Dam to improve Sacramento River water temperatures in during Below Normal, Dry and Critical water year types 

• Improve the reliability of coldwater pool storage in Folsom Reservoir to maintain or improve water temperatures in the lower American River, May through November – all year types

• Provide supplemental Delta outflow during summer and fall months to improve X2 (if possible, west of Collinsville, 81 km)

• Improve the reliability of coldwater pool storage in Lake Oroville to improve water temperature from May through November during all water year types  

• Stabilize flows in the Sacramento River between Keswick Dam and the Red Bluff Diversion Dam particularly during fall months

• Provide increased flows from spring through fall in the lower Sacramento River by reducing diversions at Red Bluff and at Hamilton City

Assumptions for Modeling of NODOS Alternatives

• The assumptions for the Existing Conditions and No Action Alternative include the 2008 and 2009 Biological Opinions

• Red Bluff Fish Passage Improvement Project is assumed to be implemented in the No Action Alternative

• Climate change will be evaluated in a sensitivity analysis

NODOS Operational Schedule

Assumptions Regarding NODOS Intake Operations

• NODOS diversions are coordinated with those of existing users of Tehama-Colusa Canal and Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District Canal

• Operations and Maintenance is scheduled based upon needs at each diversion location

Assumptions Regarding NODOS Intake Operations

• Diversions to storage are restricted until bypass requirements achieved (must be met for diversion to storage to occur)

– Below Hamilton City: 4,000 cfs (3 day average)– At Wilkens Slough: 5,000 cfs (3 day average)– At Freeport/Hood (average monthly):

• 15,000 cfs in January• 13,000 cfs in December or Febraury through June• Otherwise 11,000 cfs

• Diversions to storage restricted to protect potential pulse events

– Up to one pulse event per month (October – May)– Pulse range 15,000 cfs – 25,000 cfs (based on Bend Bridge as

indicator)– Pulse event qualified if duration of seven days– Diversions not restricted once pulse event not qualified (not in range or

event already occurred)

Example of Pulse Protection

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

10/2

/83

11/2

/83

12/2

/83

1/2/

84

2/2/

84

3/2/

84

4/2/

84

5/2/

84

6/2/

84

7/2/

84

8/2/

84

9/2/

84

10/2

/84

11/2

/84

12/2

/84

1/2/

85

2/2/

85

3/2/

85

4/2/

85

5/2/

85

6/2/

85

7/2/

85

8/2/

85

9/2/

85

10/2

/85

Div

ersi

on (c

fs)

Restricted NODOS diversions Signal Wilkins Slough Freeport

Pulse Protection Zone

Sample Results

From NODOS Alternatives

System Flexibility: Total Storage of Trinity, Shasta, Oroville, Folsom and NODOS

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Vo

lum

e (T

AF

)

Probability of Exceedence

May Total NOD CVP/SWP Storage

NAA ALT_A ALT_B ALT_C

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Vo

lum

e (T

AF

)

Probability of Exceedence

September Total NOD CVP/SWP Storage

NAA ALT_A ALT_B ALT_C

Total Diversions and Releases

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

ALT_A ALT_B ALT_C

483.0 483.1542.9

Vo

lum

e (T

AF

)

October-September Total Sacramento River Diversions to Fill Sites Reservoir Averages

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

EX 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

NAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ALT_A 59.5 199.8 1407.1 2162.7 2085.8 1557.0 336.5 99.1 46.0 5.2 71.6 30.9

ALT_B 78.1 142.3 1030.5 1453.5 1687.3 2209.6 827.7 388.9 53.5 17.2 120.5 32.7

ALT_C 79.2 202.0 1398.3 2232.6 2371.6 1944.5 463.2 177.9 81.8 5.7 80.4 28.2

0.0

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

Flo

w (

CF

S)

Month

Total Sacramento River Diversions to Fill Sites Reservoir Averages

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

EX 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

NAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ALT_A 922.4 847.5 114.8 8.0 37.2 83.9 479.2 536.0 1485.5 2113.8 1075.3 1166.1

ALT_B 831.0 843.3 89.4 0.0 34.8 71.3 567.4 605.4 1030.3 1562.2 899.0 1084.5

ALT_C 1066.3 997.4 175.2 9.3 80.4 92.1 473.7 564.6 1559.8 2129.6 1341.3 1264.0

0.0

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

Flo

w (

CF

S)

Month

Total Releases from NODOS Averages

Diversions at Red Bluff, Hamilton City and Delevan Pipeline

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

EX 113.8 7.1 0.0 0.0 2.9 16.7 151.7 436.3 729.0 833.6 678.5 159.2

NAA 110.4 6.6 0.0 0.0 2.1 12.6 132.6 412.7 749.1 811.0 661.0 149.5

ALT_A 110.7 109.8 701.8 1256.7 1240.7 859.8 284.9 391.3 394.6 455.0 620.6 103.4

ALT_B 106.4 120.0 755.3 1371.9 1528.8 1476.7 580.5 633.5 685.2 668.3 673.3 96.6

ALT_C 114.1 111.5 702.6 1276.3 1376.1 1037.9 360.8 436.5 394.1 459.3 600.0 101.0

0.0

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

3,000.0

Flo

w (

CF

S)

Month

Red Bluff Diversion Dam Diversion Averages

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

EX 693.0 387.8 178.7 68.7 53.7 37.6 2197.9 2011.2 2846.3 2673.0 1944.4 477.8

NAA 753.5 445.2 210.1 83.4 67.5 40.2 2190.2 2084.9 2903.1 2798.2 2066.3 548.5

ALT_A 713.6 432.8 571.3 237.4 273.5 455.9 2196.8 1996.3 2066.7 1767.8 1963.2 487.5

ALT_B 735.1 418.7 482.5 179.5 244.8 811.6 2477.2 2242.8 2631.2 2372.1 2121.5 494.3

ALT_C 681.6 419.6 570.0 242.7 303.5 570.7 2237.1 2015.2 2044.9 1745.3 1840.3 466.5

0.0

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

3,000.0

Flo

w (

CF

S)

Month

Hamilton City Diversion Averages

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

EX 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

NAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ALT_A 6.8 54.8 342.6 761.1 654.6 308.2 68.2 65.9 694.2 468.0 18.8 7.2

ALT_B 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ALT_C 16.1 55.0 335.0 805.9 776.2 406.0 70.7 78.0 689.8 485.2 16.4 2.4

0.0

400.0

800.0

1,200.0

Flo

w (

CF

S)

Month

New Delevan Pipeline Intake Diverion Averages

Cold Water Pool ManagementShasta Lake End-of-Month Storage

0.0

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

3,000.0

3,500.0

4,000.0

4,500.0

5,000.0

10/1/1921 10/1/1931 10/1/1941 10/1/1951 10/1/1961 10/1/1971 10/1/1981 10/1/1991 10/1/2001

Vo

lum

e (T

AF

)

Date

Shasta Lake Storage

EX NAA ALT_A ALT_B ALT_C NOTUSED

0.0

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

3,000.0

3,500.0

4,000.0

4,500.0

5,000.0

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Vo

lum

e (T

AF

)

Probability of Exceedence

May Shasta Lake Storage

EX NAA ALT_A ALT_B ALT_C NOTUSED

0.0

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

3,000.0

3,500.0

4,000.0

4,500.0

5,000.0

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Vo

lum

e (T

AF

)

Probability of Exceedence

September Shasta Lake Storage

EX NAA ALT_A ALT_B ALT_C NOTUSED

Sacramento River Temperature at Bend Bridge

54.0

56.0

58.0

60.0

62.0

64.0

66.0

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Probability of Exceedence

June-September Temperature of Flow at Bend Bridge

NAA ALT_A ALT_B ALT_C

Tem

pera

ture

(d

eg

rees

F)

Stability Flows: Sacramento River Flow below Keswick Dam

0.0

2,000.0

4,000.0

6,000.0

8,000.0

10,000.0

12,000.0

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Flo

w (C

FS

)

Probability of Exceedence

December-February Sacramento River Flow below Keswick Reservoir

EX NAA ALT_A ALT_B ALT_C NOTUSED

Water Supply ReliabilityNODOS_ALTC NOACTION

NODOS_ALTC minus NOACTION

Water Supply ReliabilitySacramento River Hydrologic Region

TCCA DeliveryLong Term 199 191 9Driest Periods 51 47 5Long Term 0 0 0Driest Periods 0 0 0Long Term 224 214 10Driest Periods 58 52 5Long Term 213 211 2Driest Periods 163 160 2Long Term 24 23 1Driest Periods 17 14 3

San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region (not including Friant-Kern and Madera Canal water users)Long Term 293 290 3Driest Periods 89 85 5Long Term 16 16 0Driest Periods 13 12 0Long Term 4 4 0Driest Periods 3 2 0

San Francisco Bay Hydrologic RegionLong Term 36 36 1Driest Periods 12 11 1Long Term 306 306 1Driest Periods 332 331 1Long Term 209 199 10Driest Periods 149 127 21

Central Coast Hydrologic RegionLong Term 46 44 2Driest Periods 33 28 5

Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region (not including Friant-Kern Canal water users)Long Term 609 601 8Driest Periods 196 185 11Long Term 691 657 35Driest Periods 493 425 68Long Term 88 84 4Driest Periods 64 54 11

South Lahonton Hydrologic RegionLong Term 281 267 14Driest Periods 200 167 34

South Coast Hydrologic RegionLong Term 9 8 0Driest Periods 6 5 1Long Term 1,419 1,353 67Driest Periods 1,028 876 152

Total For All RegionsLong Term 4,469 4,311 159Driest Periods 2,856 2,534 321

Notes:1. Long Term is the average quantity for the period of Oct 1921 - Sep 2003.2. Driest Periods is the average quantity for the combination of periods of May 1928 - Oct 1934, Oct 1975 - Sep 1977, and Jun 1986 - Sep 1992.

SWP AgContract Delivery (including Article 21) (annual average)

SWP M&I Contract Delivery (annual average)

CVP AgContract Delivery (annual average - includes Cross Valley Canal)

Contract Delivery (including Article 21, includes transfers to SWP contractors) (annual average)

Contract Delivery (including Article 21) (annual average)

Contract Delivery (annual average)

CVP M&I

SWP M&I

Contract Delivery (annual average)

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

SWP AgContract Delivery (including Article 21) (annual average)

(TAF/year)

SWP M&I Contract Delivery (annual average)

Total SuppliesContract Delivery (CVP, SWP and other) (annual average)

(TAF/year)

SWP M&I

(TAF/year)

SWP M&IContract Delivery (including Article 21) (annual average)

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

Contract Delivery (annual average - does not include Settlement contractors)

Contract Delivery (annual average)

Contract Delivery (including Article 21, includes transfers to SWP contractors) (annual average)

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

Contract Delivery (annual average) (TAF/year)

TCCA Non-CVP Delivery

TCCA CVP Ag Delivery

Delivery (annual average) (TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

CVP Ag

(TAF/year)

(TAF/year)

Contract Delivery (annual average; does not include Exchange contractors)

CVP M&I

CVP Ag (includes TCCA CVP)

CVP M&I

SWP M&I Contract Delivery (annual average)

SWP Ag

CVP Ag

Contract Delivery (annual average)

Delta Water Quality Improvement

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

NAA 533.0 575.6 577.9 531.6 461.3 330.6 286.1 344.3 366.8 284.1 312.7 430.5

ALT_A 483.6 518.3 561.8 530.8 447.8 330.8 288.0 345.9 366.7 283.2 297.6 379.9

ALT_B 480.3 521.3 556.0 527.1 442.6 327.3 286.2 344.6 367.6 284.0 295.8 378.3

ALT_C 462.9 493.5 549.2 517.1 447.2 331.5 287.6 346.0 366.9 283.9 297.7 375.4

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

450.0

500.0

550.0

600.0

650.0

Month

Old River Water Quality at Rock Slough (ANN based estimate) Averages

EC

Delta Water Quality AugmentationLong Term 0 142 142Driest Periods 0 92 92Long Term 255.9 246.8 -9.1Driest Periods 299.7 300.1 0.4

Delta Export Water Quality TDS (export weighted)

NODOS Release

(mg/l)

(TAF/year) Flow (annual average from July-Dec)

Alternatives Performance

31

Average Driest Period Average Driest Period Average Driest PeriodAlternative A Alternative B Alternative C

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Yie

ld

(TA

F)

Water Quality

Ecosys-tem

Ag. and M&I

Modeling Status and Ongoing Activities

Analytical Framework – System (feasibility, system-level impacts)

Hydrology &System Operations

CALSIM II, USRDOM

Water supply impacts, river flows, exports, storage

Salinity (EC, Cl, TDS, Br) and fingerprinting (EC, volume)

Delta HydrodynamicsDSM2-HYDRO

Delta Water QualityDSM2-QUAL

Reservoir/River TempUSRWQM,

Reclamation Temperature

Power LTGEN,

SWP Power, NODOS Power

Economics SWAP,

LCPSIM/SUPEM, LCRBWQM/SBWQM

Delta channel flows, stages, velocities

Reservoir, River temperatures

Climate Change Modified Hydrology

Sea Level RiseVIC, ANN

FisheriesReclamation

Mortality, SALMOD,WRCLCM (IOS)

Quantification of Economic Benefits

Net Generation and Use

Survival, Potential Production, Population

Analytical Framework – Local (local watershed impacts)

SRH-SIAM Sediment Loads

SRH-Meander

Point Bar Growth

SRH-2DLocal Vel.

Scour, & Stage

SRH-1DVRiparian Veg.

Survival

RHEMRiparian Veg.

Growth

Fluvial Geomorphology and Riparian Habitat

Surface Water Quality

USRWQMDaily Sacramento River

Temperature

Other Quantitative

and Qualitative Analyses

CAL2DOMCALSIM II

Monthly storage, flow &

diversion operations

USRDOMDaily storage, Sac River

and tributary flow & diversion operations

Surface Water Resources

Aquatic Biological Resources

WRCLCM (IOS/DPM Model)

Sacramento RiverWinter Chinook

Other Quantitative

and Qualitative Analyses

SALMODSacramento River

Fall, Late-Fall, Winter &Spring Chinook

SAC-EFTSacramento RiverChinook salmon, steelhead, green sturgeon, bank

swallow, western pond turtle

Schedule

• PUBLIC DRAFT NODOS EIR / EIS and Feasibility Study Report

December 2011

• FINAL DRAFT NODOS EIR / EIS and Feasibility Study Report

December 2012

Contacts

Jim Wieking

Department of Water Resources

P.O. Box 942836

Sacramento CA 94236

916-651-9279

jwieking@water.ca.gov

Sharon McHale

Bureau of Reclamation

2800 Cottage Way, MP-700

Sacramento CA 95825

916-978-5086

smchale@usbr.gov

Project Websites:

www.storage.water.ca.gov/northdelta/index.cfm

www.usbr.gov/mp/nodos/index.html