ROCK CREEK DAM
FERC # 12494-000 California
Previous Progress Reports
Progress: May 2005
A draft MOU submitted in November 2005 is being reviewed by PG&E. We are actively working with CFG and the Econogical Review Committee of PG&E's Project 1962 to fininsh the Stage 1 studies. We anticipate draft completion of these studies by June, 2006.
Progress: October 2005
During a meeting in September, the draft Memorandum of Understanding was discussed by PG&E and Davis Hydro. There were some concerns on both sides with an emphasis by PG&E on a concern on controlling their river release flows, and concern by Davis Hydro that incentives were in place to economically operate the hydro. All concerns by both parties were addressed and concerns were addressed and answered. This MOU contained the draft components of a Agreement in Principle being drafted between PG&E and Davis Hydro. The discussion draft of that MOU is available on request. With some significant modifications, notably addressing access by Davis Hydro and control over flow by PG&E, all concerns were addressed. This modified MOU will form the backbone of the Agreement in Principle.
July - September 2005
During the summer we continued work on a Memorandum of Understanding, the required environmental studies from Phase I consultation, the interconnection agreement, and mutual and joint work on recreational and fisheries issues continued by both parties.
June & July 2005
We completed a thorough project review during the middle of June, with feedback from PG&E that there were no red flags. Based on positive feedback from the review meeting that took place June 9th, 2005 we have forwarded to PG&E detailed electrical interconnection diagrams for their review. A engineering project review was held on June 9th 2005 in Chico with PG&E Hydro Operations, Hydro Engineering and FERC Compliance staff. General review drawings of the project to be discussed at the meeting are available as:
We have requested PG&E review our interconnection documents. A copy of the electrical submission is available here as a packet of 1.7 MB zipped 11x17 drawings (5/6/05). PG&E responded with a study proposal included here as a word document. After a review, Davis Hydro requested inclusion of some items that had been discussed informally. PG&E readily agreed to these and an acceptable document was received early June 2005, a copy of the revised document is available here.
As background: Davis Hydro has received informal analysis that a 400 kW induction turbine will probably create few interconnection problems, but above that a study will have to be made. Due to sizes of "off the shelf" equipment, we are requesting PG&E study an installation of 450 KW or 600 Hp.
Process speed is somewhat of the essence, due to a change in proceedure engendered by the FERC in their Order 2006 [RM02-12-000 ], Standardization of Small Generator Interconnection Agreements and Procedures issued May 12th, 2005.
After the meeting, it was suggested that we look at the power available up at Buck's Lake and associated diversion dams as either separate projects or as an improvement on the proposal at Rock Creek Diversion Dam. Following that suggestion, we examined Buck's storage lake, Grizzley Forebay, and the Diversion dam on Bucks Creek - also called Buck Creek Lower Dam. The latter two had modest head, but too little water released to be economic. Buck's Lake is a storage facility, and head changes dramatically over the year. This coupled with very long small penstock pipes means that there is little power available for hydro on an annual basis.
Davis Hydro hosted stage 1 consultation meeting late in January 2004. The intent of the meeting was to Scope out what additional studies are needed for this project. A summary of that meeting - as sent in March to the FERC - is included below
Work is progressing on the Consultation 1 requested studies primarily for CFG, and we are working on the best turbine setting.
We have received an informal indication that it will be possible to export at least 400 kW from this area over PG&E distribution lines without major (uneconomic) distribution upgrades. Thus we are limiting our design to less than 500 kW with an economic operating point between 400 and 500 kW.
Equipment designs are currently being solicited from equipment manufacturers that will be both fish friendly as possible, and very low maintenance. Design goals include safety, Low O&M, and return on investment,
Activity: December 2004
December engineering 2004 work is focusing on interconnection and turbine setting definition. A request for stage one of an interconnection study was forwarded to PG&E early in December to address the difficulty in getting the power out of the North Fork Valley. The valley is constrained in that there are already two other micro-hydro sites active in the valley. Engineering work is focusing on setting design and a folder of working materials can be found here. For parties interested in the current design thinking, this is a rich site with several variations on the proposed design discussed.
Davis Hydro is currently working on those studies requested by agencies and working with the Forest service, Plumas County, and PG&E to accomplish their recreational goals below the Dam.
In October 2004, Davis Hydro was granted multiple access to the Rock Creek Dam for engineering measurements and has received continuing excellent cooperation from PG&E. At the request of the Forest Service, we have worked with PG&E surveyors to define property boundaries below the day and lay out a potential recreation area for river access. Davis Hydro is continuing to work in this area figuring out the best mixture of fisheries enhancement and recreation access the area can support. Davis Hydro has contributed in a minor way to the efforts by Plumas county to obtain support for river access development just below the Rock Creek Dam.
The engineering measurements taken at the dam will allow for improved drawings for PG&E engineers who are currently evaluating our proposed hydropower design. These same drawings will form the basis of discussion with various turbine manufacturers. See the turbine setting page for details on setting design.
Recreation Release Control:
The original 2’ diameter
fish release valves are still available and may afford some opportunity,
but they would have to be plumbed from downstream to be used as water
or air injectors. This work is on hold. In passing, it is noted that
the 30” valve is passing significant small stones while recreation
releases are taking place through the sluice gate nearby.
Environmental Consultation Activity: 1st stage Consultation
Agency Consultation is proceeding with the publishing of "Stage 1" Consultation Package and additional designs in response to concerns at the January meeting. For that meeting we had distributed the Consultation package including Graphics with separate drawings to the FERC Mandated Agency and Stakeholder Groups. We had also sent notice that this packet is available to the Environmental Review Committee on FERC Project 1962, and sent notice of document availability on this site to all additional members on FERC's Project 1962 Service List as of 12/2/03.
2003, Davis Hydro
Web design/maintenance by Documagik