Delta Division Project

Related Documents
Delta Division Project History (82 KB)

Related Facilities

General

The Delta Division provides for the transport of water through the central portion of the great Central Valley, including the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The main features of the division are the Delta Cross Channel, Contra Costa Canal, Tracy Pumping Plant, and Delta-Mendota Canal, constructed and operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. This system provided full and supplemental water, as well as temporary water service, for a total of about 380,000 acres of farmland in 1992 The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta`s continual salinity intrusion from San Francisco Bay through Suisun Bay caused problems, especially for the towns of Antioch and Pittsburg, which depended on the nearby water for agriculture and industrial uses. Periods of high salinity made the water useless for these purposes. Unless water flowed past Antioch at a minimum rate of 3,300 cubic feet per second against the high tide, salt water entered Suisun Bay and the Delta, lowering the water quality. Between 1919 and 1924, salt water in Suisun Bay fostered the growth of teredo, a woodboring, salt water worm, whose increased population destroyed $25 million of the bay`s wharves and pilings. In 1924, the water reached its lowest recorded stream flow, and the salt water content at Pittsburg reached 65 percent. Both Pittsburg and Antioch had used water from Suisun Bay for crops and industry, but in 1926, high salinity forced them to stop. An idea for a dam to block salt water gained momentum in the 1920s. Delta residents rejected the idea because they believed it would raise water levels in Suisun Bay. On July 2, 1920, Antioch filed a lawsuit against upstream irrigators to stop the diversion of excess water which slowed the stream flow. Sacramento Valley water users pushed for a salt water barrier in hopes of ending the litigation against them by the Delta interests. The head of the Sacramento Valley Water Development Association worked especially hard to promote construction of the barrier. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) proposed a salt water barrier with a moveable crest and multiple locks between Suisun Bay and the junction of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. The Corps wanted to create a reservoir, raising the water five to ten feet, but the prospect worried area residents. In a report about the salt water barrier, Reclamation engineer Walker R. Young predicted it would prove an expensive proposition and hinder navigation. Young estimated the water level of Suisun Bay could not be safely raised high enough for operation of a barrier with the existing (1926) Delta levees. In 1924, Major U.S. Grant III, COE's Second District Engineer, argued water storage should be the first priority, and the barrier could prove more expensive than the benefits would justify. The barrier went down in defeat for numerous reasons, including the belief that the proposed Kennett (Shasta) Dam would sufficiently help curb the salinity problem. In the 1930s, California state officials realized the state could not afford to implement the State Water Plan. California turned to Reclamation for assistance in constructing the planned facilities, and salinity control in the Delta became one of the major goals of the Central Valley Project. The Water Exchange Contract was a water supply agreement with San Joaquin Valley irrigators to exchange northern water for natural flows of the San Joaquin River diverted at Friant Dam. The contract came about to assure lower San Joaquin farmers that they would not lose irrigation water due to construction of Friant. In 1944, Reclamation officials realized the salinity problem in the Delta was more pronounced than they previously thought. The Region Two Director believed Shasta Dam could not entirely control the salinity problem, precluding use of the Delta as a reservoir as planned at one time. One possible alternative to alleviate the salinity problem was to build a closed conduit through or around the Delta to carry Sacramento River water directly to the other side without letting it mix with Delta water. The proposed closed conduit foreshadowed later plans for the Peripheral Canal. In the course of Delta Division development, though not built, the Peripheral Canal became one of the most controversial elements of Division planning. Reclamation proposed the Peripheral Canal to the Interagency Delta Committee (IDC) in early 1963 as an alternative water transfer system. By early 1965, the proposed canal had almost universal acceptance in the Delta region. California wanted Reclamation to design and construct the Peripheral Canal, and then the State would assume control of the feature. Reclamation did not want State control of the canal, but did not have the authority to build it. California`s Department of Water Resources (DWR), on the other hand, did have the authority to construct the canal. Changing attitudes in the United States, toward the environment and a myriad of other issues, soon infected perceptions of the Peripheral Canal. Contra Costa County opposed the canal because residents viewed it as another way to transport fresh water out of their locale and into southern California. About the same time, questions arose about the environmental impact of the Peripheral Canal on fish populations in the Delta and the Central Valley. Environmentalists believed the canal`s outlets would draw fish to them. They also believed the nitrogen rich water from agricultural drainage could foster algae growth, stagnating waters and suffocating the fish. The Department of Water Resources `proposed an amalgam of joint state-federal programs and facilities,` including the forty-two mile Peripheral Canal, in 1977. DWR contended the canal would circumvent the Delta channels and carry water more efficiently from the Sacramento River to the pumping plants of the CVP and the State Water Project. The canal could release fresh water into the Delta at certain points along its reaches to support irrigation, to benefit fish and wildlife, and to combat salt water intrusion. Supporters, including the Metropolitan Water District of southern California and various agri-businesses, argued the canal would help end the reverse flows caused by the south Delta pumps. The powerful pumping plants in the Delta Division had a major and often detrimental effect on stream flow in the Delta and the San Joaquin River Basin. During periods of low water flow and high quantities of exports, the Delta pumps actually reversed the flow of the San Joaquin River, taking it back upstream. Through the Delta`s transport system, water normally travelling to the west, toward San Pablo Bay, instead moves back toward the east and south. The `reverse flows` disorient migratory fish, often luring them to the pumps, and draw salty ocean water into the San Joaquin River and other waterways. Opponents continued arguing against further exports of water to southern California and against the environmental impact of the canal. A referendum on the entire project went before California voters as Proposition 9 in 1982. Proposition 9 failed because of cost (an estimated $3.1 billion) and environmental concerns. Other alternatives surfaced after the defeat of Proposition 9, but none went forward. All divisions of the Central Valley Project and the features of the State Water Project supply water to the Central Valley, and they all contribute to environmental problems. One high profile problem which grew out of the CVP was the declining population of Chinook salmon in the Sacramento River. Most attention focused on the winter-run Chinook salmon, listed as threatened species by the Federal Government and endangered species by California. The estimated population of the winter-run Chinook in 1969 reached 117,000. In 1991, only 191 adults returned to the Sacramento River to spawn. Factors linked to the decline of the Chinook population include predation by two species introduced into the Delta, Striped bass and Colorado River squawfish, lack of water flow in the rivers because of upstream dams, and disorientation and destruction by the Delta Division pumping plants. The Striped bass population also experienced large declines. Another species facing declines and possible extinction is the three inch long Delta smelt. A fish found only in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the smelt faces destruction by the same forces as the Chinook salmon. The California Fish and Game Commission rejected the smelt for a State listing as a threatened or endangered species, but in March 1993, the Fish and Wildlife Service listed the smelt as a threatened species under the Federal Endangered Species Ac

Construction

For specific recreation opportunities, click on the name below: http://www.recreation.gov/detail.cfm?ID=33 The Delta Division of the Central Valley Project (CVP) acts as the hub around which the CVP revolves. The Delta Division contains the facilities that transfer water from the Sacramento River, to bolster irrigation supplies to thirsty lands formerly dependent on water from the San Joaquin River. In time, the Delta Division became the hub for controversy revolving around the Central Valley Project. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is a roughly, triangle shaped patch of land just northeast of Oakland and San Francisco. The Delta is about fifty miles long north to south with a maximum width of approximately twenty-five miles. Over one-half of the once marsh-filled basin lies at or below sea level. In a 1928 report, engineer Thomas H. Means said the Delta`s Carquinez Straits represented the approximate dividing line between salt and fresh waters. Means based his conclusion on the salt water tolerant plants around San Pablo Bay and the fresh water plants bordering Suisun Bay.(1) Water from the northern Central Valley travels down the Sacramento River to combine with the San Joaquin River in the Delta. The Delta Division of the Central Valley Project removes the water and serves lands to the south in seven California counties; Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Merced, Sacramento, and Stanislaus. The Delta Cross Channel is the only Delta facility in Sacramento County. Most Delta facilities lie in Contra Costa County including; Contra Costa Canal, Clayton Canal, Ygnacio Canal, Martinez Dam and Reservoir, and Contra Loma Dam and Reservoir. The Tracy Pumping Plant and the beginning of the Delta-Mendota Canal are in Alameda County. The Delta-Mendota Canal travels through Stanislaus, San Joaquin, and Merced Counties, ending at the Mendota Pool in Fresno County.(2) When Native Americans inhabited the area, before intrusion by Europeans, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta was a marshland cut by a network of channels linked to the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. Wildlife, in the form of game, birds, and fish, flourished in the Delta. Mostly, Patwins and Eastern Miwoks inhabited the Delta. When the Spanish arrived in the area, setting up missions and military posts, they began proselytizing the two Native American groups.(3) Spanish explorers entered the Delta region in the late eighteenth century. Their explorations soon enlightened them about the persistent threat of salt water intrusion faced by the Delta. Father Juan Crespi and Pedro Fages first explored the Delta area in 1774. They encountered fresh water in Suisun Bay down near Carquinez Straits on March 29, 1774. The next year, when Juan Manuel de Ayala sailed the San Carlos into Suisun Bay, he found salt water penetrating halfway up the bay. An expedition led by a Commander Ringgold entered the Delta in the summer of 1841. Camping four miles upstream from the mouth of the San Joaquin River, near the site of Antioch, he described the water there as `still brackish` (4) After the United States` annexation of California in the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo of 1848, after the Mexican-American War, farmers first diverted irrigation water from the Merced River in 1852. Subsequent diversions from the San Joaquin River noticeably reduced stream flow by 1870. Many immigrants` conformity to the agricultural ideal led them to try to reclaim any land they could for farming. Settlers built dikes along the channels closing off land tracts, pumped out the water, and started farming the land. Increasing expansion of agriculture in California eliminated natural conditions in the Delta by 1920.(5) Upstream mining operations had serious effect on the Delta region. Hydraulic mining washed more than 800 million cubic yards of mining debris through the Delta. The increased sediment raised stream beds and narrowed channels, elevating water levels in the Delta. Higher levees and reclaimed land reduced the size of the flood plain. These factors along with diversions from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers allowed salt water to push farther upstream during high tides. Ever increasing development upstream from the Delta further aggravated the problem.(6) The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta`s continual salinity intrusion from San Francisco Bay, through Suisun Bay, especially caused problems for the towns of Antioch and Pittsburg, which depended on the nearby water for agriculture and industrial uses. Periods of high salinity made the water useless for these purposes. Unless water flowed past Antioch at a minimum rate of 3,300 cubic feet per second against the high tide, salt water entered Suisun Bay and the Delta, lowering the water quality. Between 1919 and 1924, salt water in Suisun Bay fostered the growth of teredo, a woodboring, salt water worm, whose increased population destroyed $25 million of the bay`s wharves and pilings. In 1924, the water reached its lowest recorded stream flow, and the salt water content at Pittsburg reached 65 percent. In 1926, the high salinity forced Pittsburg and Antioch to stop using water from Suisun Bay for crops and industry, which both communities had used as a water source since the middle of the nineteenth century.(7) The proliferation of the teredo, along with a series of unfortunate circumstances, led to tragedy. One of the wood piers at the town of Avon in Suisun Bay belonged to the Associated Oil Company. Affected by the teredo, the pier collapsed on the night of October 28, 1924, while the oil tanker Alden Anderson unloaded its cargo. The falling pier short circuited the wires of the electric lamp. The short circuit ignited a gasoline supply stored in a shed on the wharf, and the blaze quickly spread across the dock to the ship, engulfing it in flames. The Alden Anderson drifted to the center of Suisun Bay, carrying six crew members to their deaths.(8) An idea for a dam to block salt water gained momentum in the 1920s. Delta residents rejected the idea because they believed it would raise water levels in Suisun Bay. On July 2, 1920, Antioch filed a lawsuit against upstream irrigators to stop the diversion of excess water which slowed the stream flow. Sacramento Valley water users pushed for a salt water barrier in hopes of ending the litigation against them by the Delta interests. W.A. Beard, head of the Sacramento Valley Water Development Association worked especially hard to promote construction of the barrier.(9) Captain C.S. Jarvis of the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) proposed a salt water barrier with a moveable crest and multiple locks between Suisun Bay and the junction of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. The Corps wanted to create a reservoir, raising the water five to ten feet, but the prospect worried area residents. The Sacramento Valley irrigators won their court battle, but continued pressing for a salt water barrier. Possibly because of their loss in court, some Delta residents became more responsive to the barrier proposal.(10) In a report about the salt water barrier, Reclamation engineer Walker R. Young predicted it would prove an expensive proposition and hinder navigation. Young estimated the water level of Suisun Bay could not be safely raised high enough for operation of a barrier with the existing (1926) Delta levees. The Bay Barrier Association formed in January 1929, to lobby the California legislature in support of the salt water barrier. The joint legislative committee looking into the matter rejected the salt barrier proposal in April 1929, in spite of the money and lobbying effort put forth by the Association.(11) The Association reorganized and changed its name to the Salt Water Barrier Association (SWBA) on November 27, 1929. A 1930 promotional campaign by the SWBA, included bumper stickers and tire covers promoting the salt water barrier. A Martinez movie theater showing the Gary Cooper film `The Virginian,` exhibited the proclamation, `Boost the Salt Water Barrier for a Better Martinez.`(12) Both the city of Stockton and the Corps of Engineers opposed a salt water barrier in the 1930s, because of its threat to navigation on the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers. Stockton`s reluctance stemmed from its recent payment of one-half of the six million dollars needed to deepen the channels of the San Joaquin River and establish a deep water port. In 1924, Major U.S. Grant III, COE`s Second District Engineer, argued water storage should be the first priority, and the barrier could prove more expensive than the benefits would justify. Walker Young`s report estimated the cost of the salt water barrier ranged from $39 to $97 million. The barrier went down in defeat for numerous reasons, including the belief that the proposed Kennett (Shasta) Dam would sufficiently help curb the salinity problem.(13) The California State Water Plan called for construction of a 420 foot high dam at Kennett, on the Sacramento River, to maintain a regular flow of water to Antioch and keep the salt water intrusion out of the Delta. In the 1930s, California state officials realized the state could not afford to implement the State Water Plan. California turned to Reclamation for assistance in constructing the planned facilities, and salinity control in the Delta became one of the major goals of the Central Valley Project through the Water Exchange Contract. The Water Exchange Contract was water supply agreement with San Joaquin Valley irrigators to exchange northern water for natural flows of the San Joaquin River diverted at Friant Dam, and set maximum allowable chloride levels for the water. The contract came about to satisfy lower San Joaquin farmers that they would not lose irrigation water due to construction of Friant.(14) President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the Central Valley Project on December 2, 1935. Originally the Project contained three Divisions; Friant, Kennett (Shasta), and Contra Costa (Delta). The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1937, re-authorized the CVP`s initial divisions. The act prioritized improvement of navigation, regulation, and flood control of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, with irrigation and domestic uses secondary. The act`s third priority, power generation, did not apply to the Contra Costa Division. On July 1, 1937, Reclamation changed the name of the Contra Costa Division to the Delta Division. The Division included the Contra Costa Canal and the San Joaquin Pumping System.(15) The Delta Division is complex in its operation, and all its features do not operate in conjunction with each other. The Contra Costa Canal transports water to Contra Costa County. The Delta Cross Channel moves water from the Sacramento River through an excavated channel and natural channels to the Tracy Pumping Plant, which pumps the water into the Delta-Mendota Canal. The Delta-Mendota Canal delivers water to the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, ending at the Mendota Pool, thirty miles west of Fresno.(16) Reclamation awarded many contracts for the Contra Costa Canal over a period of about ten years (see Table. I).(17) The delay resulted from the United States` entry into World War II. Reclamation awarded the first construction contract for the Contra Costa Division to Haas, Doughty, & Jones and Marshall & Stacy (Haas-Marshall), for the first section of the Contra Costa Canal, on March 19, 1937. The contractors received the notice to proceed on October 13, 1937, and started work on October 19. The contract inaugurated work on the Central Valley Project. By the end of the year, the contractors completed the Marsh Creek Siphon and started on the Fox Slough Siphon. A strike in 1938, caused the contractors to hire members of a different labor union as the dispute went unresolved. Haas-Marshall completed the contract August 5, 1938. During the year Reclamation revised its cost estimate of the canal from $3.2 million in 1937, to $4,212,800. The revised estimate went over the four million dollar ceiling the Contra Costa County Water District wanted to maintain, Reclamation officials believed, correctly, the District Directors would accept the increase.(18) Reclamation awarded the contracts for Contra Costa Canal construction to Pearson, Minnis, Moody, Werner and Webb (Pearson) on June 30, 1938, Haas-Marshall on December 2, 1938. Haas-Marshall started construction on their contract near the end of the year, receiving the notice to proceed on January 6, 1939. Both Haas-Marshall and Pearson finished their contracts in 1939. Heafey-Moore Company and Frederickson & Watson Construction Company (Heafey-Moore & Frederickson) received a contract on October 14, 1939. The companies nearly finished the contract before the end of 1940, completing the final work on February 15, 1941. Heafey-Moore & Frederickson`s section of the Contra Costa Canal included a concrete lined section.(19) Reclamation awarded George B. Henly Construction Company the $130,397 contract for construction of Contra Costa Pumping Plants One through Four on March 5, 1939. Pomona Pump Company supplied the pump units for $79,392. Henly received the notice to proceed on March 25, 1939, but had already started work March 14. The contractor placed twenty-four inches of reinforced concrete for the base slabs of the plants. Each plant had six pumping units, with nine foot six inch wide intake bays formed by eighteen inch thick concrete walls. Henly completed all contract work on the four pumping plants March 7, 1940.(20) Lee J. Immel received the contract for the Contra Costa Canal headworks, Dutch Slough Dam bridge, a bridge at Station 1+98, and a bridge at Rock Slough. Originally the contract specified August 16, 1940, as Immel`s completion date, but additional work brought an extension to September 15. The added work included placing gravel and corrugated pipe, and surfacing the operating road. Immel completed all of the work on time. Ground saturation did displace earth and concrete in one section of the canal, but F. Stamm and Son restored the damaged section during 1940.(21) Reclamation started test pumping at Pumping Plant One during the summer of 1940, in preparation for using operational portions of the Contra Costa Canal in the fall. Walker Young threw the switch to start one of the pump units on July 8, 1940, on the same day elsewhere on the Central Valley Project, work crews placed the first bucket of concrete on Shasta Dam. Reclamation turned the first water into the sea level section of the canal on August 9, 1940. The hardness of Pittsburg`s well water supply increased from 150 parts per million (ppm) in 1929, to about 800 ppm in 1940. The decreasing water quality convinced Pittsburg residents to contract with Reclamation for water deliveries from the canal. Pittsburg built a water treatment plant in 1939, to accommodate expected delivery. The plant had four pressure filtration units, with a capacity of 2.6 million gallons a day. Pittsburg received its first water delivery from Contra Costa Canal on August 18, 1940. On that date the Contra Costa Canal stretched twenty miles, reaching four miles past the city.(22) Anticipating an extension of the Contra Costa Canal to reach the city of Martinez, city officials advertised the sale of $286,000 in bonds to finance a water treatment plant in 1941. Unsure if Reclamation would construct the extension, Cappy Ricks, Martinez`s Mayor wrote to Reclamation Commissioner John C. Page. Ricks complained that Martinez could not afford construction of both the treatment plant and the canal extension if Reclamation did not build the extension. Ricks said two city council members opposed the bonds, with a third in the balance. The Mayor also feared further financial encroachment by the California Water Service Company, which, he claimed, already took 300 outside customers from Martinez. Regarding the canal extension, Ricks said, `We cannot proceed against corporate greed and dumb citizens unless we get some encouraging word from you.`(23) Construction of the Contra Costa Canal already lagged six months behind schedule because of a landslide four miles east of Martinez.(24) Reclamation awarded a $319,862 contract to Trewhitt-Shields and Fisher (Trewhitt-Shields) October 18, 1940. The company received the notice to proceed February 2, 1941, and started earthwork, canal lining, and structures on March 21, 1941, nearly completing the contract by the end of the year. Trewhitt-Shields completed the contract May 17, 1942, less than a week before operations on Contra Costa Canal halted because of World War II. Trewhitt-Shields received the contract for the next section of canal, and subcontracted it to J.M.S. Company. The subcontractor consisted of former members of the Haas-Marshall joint venture. Work started on May 2, 1942, but Reclamation`s failure to supply construction material prevented any significant progress before the War Production Board (WPB) stopped work.(25) To allow continued operations, on February 26, 1942, Reclamation applied for a preference rating for Contra Costa Canal under the War Food Program. The War Production Board refused the rating because the excessive quantity of critical materials was deemed greater than any benefits from the canal. Work on the Contra Costa Canal halted on May 23, 1942. On August 8, 1943, Reclamation Commissioner Harry Bashore again submitted an application to the WPB to resume construction, obtain priority assistance, and an allotment for controlled materials to complete the Contra Costa Canal system. Once more the WPB rejected the application.(26) Reclamation officials raised the possibility of resuming construction of the Contra Costa Canal several times during the war years, but never received authorization. Reclamation hired armed guards to protect the canal in 1942. Reclamation also armed operating personnel who patrolled the canal`s reaches. The protection program ended in 1944, but Reclamation persuaded several of the guards to remain on as maintenance personnel. When work continued after World War II, the remaining work on the Contra Costa Canal consisted of ten miles of canal, two re-lift canals, and pumping plants at an estimated cost of $1.5 million.(27) Reclamation awarded Parish Brothers the contract for construction of Mountain View (later renamed Martinez) Dam for $568,974 on March 18, 1946. Parish Brothers started work on the dam on May 8, 1946, anticipating the notice to proceed, which the contractor received May 28. The Parish Brothers` contract included the last section of Contra Costa Canal. The contractor finished embankment placement on the dam November 12, 1946, and completed the outlet control tower during the year. Parish Bothers completed Martinez Dam in May 1947. The contractor finished that section of the Contra Costa Canal on September 29, 1947.(28) In March 1947, Parish Brothers received the contract originally awarded to Trewhitt-Shields for Contra Costa Canal, but re-advertised by Reclamation after World War II. Parish Brothers began work on the contract in April 1947. The contract included construction of Ygnacio and Clayton Canals. Exhaustion of funds for the Contra Costa Canal in November 1947, restricted construction on the contract. The same lack of funds also slowed work on the Ygnacio and Clayton Canals.(29) Parish Brothers lined Clayton Canal with concrete, but lined 4.06 miles of Ygnacio Canal with a two inch layer of asphaltic concrete. The lining consisted of asphalt, sand, and some mica. The contractor backed the lining with aluminum foil, and used Standard Plastic Cement on all joints. Parish Brothers used soil sterilants on the canal to prevent weed growth. The contractor used a combination of organic and inorganic soil sterilants. The inorganic sterilant consisted of .608 pounds of borax to one-half pound of Borix Acid per gallon of water. Parish Brothers applied approximately .8 gallons of the mixture per one square yard of the canal. The inorganic sterilants consisted of two types of fuel oil, Dinitro-Ortho-Cresol, and pentachlorophend. Parish Brothers completed construction on Contra Costa, Ygnacio and Clayton Canals by November 8, 1948.(30) Reclamation awarded Walsh and Puccetti the contract for the Clayton and Ygnacio Pumping Plants on June 21, 1946. The contractor completed most of the work in August 1947, except the fence, surfacing yards, and outlet transition at Clayton. Walsh and Puccetti completed finishing work on the Ygnacio Pumping Plant on September 9, 1947, and Clayton on September 12.(31) Contra Costa Canal travels for 47.7 miles from the Delta to Martinez Dam and Reservoir with a capacity of 350 cubic feet per second. The canal has a bottom width of twenty-four feet. Martinez is a modified homogeneous offstream dam 1,200 feet long at the crest, and sixty-two feet wide. The dam has a top width of twenty feet and a maximum base width of 317 feet, with a total volume of 195,000 cubic yards. Martinez Reservoir has a capacity of 268 acre-feet. The Clayton Canal has a length of 4.8 miles and a bottom width of four feet. The Ygnacio Canal travels 5.2 miles with a bottom width of five feet.(32) Because the Madera and Friant-Kern Canal systems of the Friant Division diverted most of the San Joaquin River`s flow out of the river channel, Reclamation built the Delta-Mendota Canal to replace the water diverted at Friant Dam, with a supply from the north. The plan called for the Tracy Pumping Plant to divert water from the Sacramento River into the Delta-Mendota Canal. The canal would transport to water to the Mendota Pool, created by a concrete dam constructed in 1919, for storage. The Mendota Pool is located at the junction of the San Joaquin River and the north fork of the Kings River.(33) The length of the Delta-Mendota Canal required several contracts to complete construction of the earthwork, concrete lining, and structures (see Table. II). Reclamation awarded the first contract for Stations 185+00-231+00 and 243+00-774+00 to Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc., and M.H. Hasler Construction Company (Morrison-Knudsen & Hasler) on October 25, 1946. The contractors acknowledged the notice to proceed on December 30, 1946. Morrison-Knudsen & Hasler obtained a forty day extension and finished the contract on April 18, 1949.(34) Reclamation awarded the contract for Delta-Mendota Canal Station 686+00-1365+00 and the Westley wasteway to Hubert H. Everist Sr. June 14, 1946. Everist started work in August 1946, before receiving the notice to proceed on September 5, 1946. Workers went on strike against the structure subcontractor, Fred J. Maurer and Son, on November 12, 1946. The strike did not end until December 30, 1946. Everist finished the work on November 8, 1948, five days before the completion deadline. Most work on the canal went more smoothly.(35) Reclamation awarded Western Contracting Corporation the contract for a holding reservoir dike, in addition to the earth work on the Delta-Mendota Canal (see Table. II). Johnson Western Constructors received the contract for the Columbia Pumping Plant, Mowry Pumping Plant, and their delivery systems. Reclamation awarded Stolte, Inc., the contract for earthwork, pipelines, and structures (including pumping plants, laterals, and sublaterals) for the Plain View Water District.(36) The Delta-Mendota Canal contractors excavated the canal with motor-driven or tractor-towed scrapers, draglines, and bulldozers. Morrison-Knudsen & Hasler operated the canal construction`s largest dragline on a three shift basis for twenty-one hours a day, six days a week. They trimmed the high spots with a bulldozer and a grader. Part of the United Concrete Pipe Corporation and Vinnell Company, Inc., contract on the lower reach of the canal remained unlined. United Concrete Pipe & Vinnell set aside 5 percent of the excavated material for later use in the unlined canal invert.(37) Around Station 5000, high ground water and sand forced de-watering of the area into a pilot ditch and sump. United Concrete Pipe & Vinnell pumped the water into adjacent drains to allow further excavation. Some areas had unsuitable foundation material classified as `adobe` soil, which the contractors removed before plowing, sprinkling, and compacted the material by rolling. The control structures at Station 5476+35, and nearby, lay below the canal subgrade and required de-watering for construction. United Concrete Pipe & Vinnell installed sump pumps for de-watering the sites.(38) Morrison-Knudsen & Hasler built the Mountain House Road Siphon, placing the last concrete in the structure on March 14, 1949. The siphon had an inside diameter of twenty-four feet three inches with a shell thickness of two feet. Mountain House Road Siphon extended for 1,200 feet. Initial leakage from the siphon amounted to 50,000 gallons in twenty-four hours. Morrison-Knudsen & Hasler backfilled the structure, reducing the leakage to 31,000 gallons in twenty-four hours. Lead wool caulking further reduced the leaks.(39) Rainfall during November 18-19, 1950, caused high water in Los Banos and San Luis Creeks. Water from both creeks broke into the Delta-Mendota Canal, causing considerable damage to the canal and siphons. Water from Los Banos Creek flowed both north and south through the canal. The northward flow emptied out of the San Luis wasteway turnout. San Luis Creek broke into a lined section of the canal, downstream from San Luis Creek Siphon, and rushed out of a wasteway. Water flowing through the San Luis Creek Siphon filled part of the canal with water and debris.(40) The rushing water washed away concrete forms and nearly filled the San Luis Creek Siphon with debris and gravel. The water flow demolished two partly completed construction forms, forcing removal and replacement of the forms and reinforcement steel. The rampaging water damaged some twenty-four inch welded steel pipe, reinforcing steel, and partially placed wood side panels on one of Morrison-Knudsen & Hasler`s sections. The floods stopped work by Morrison-Knudsen & Hasler and United Concrete Pipe & Vinnell, until the contractors could de-water the canal and repair the damage. About two weeks later, during the weekend of December 3, 1950, heavy rains caused water from Garzas Creek to undermine an overchute pier and float some of the Delta-Mendota Canal`s concrete lining. United Pipe & Vinnell underwent a series of strikes from May 1 to May 14, 1951. Because of the delays, Reclamation allowed United Concrete Pipe & Vinnell an extension of sixty days on one schedule and 116 days on another.(41) Western Contracting Corp.`s completion of the San Luis wasteway and holding reservoir dike on April 9, 1952, finished construction of the Delta-Mendota Canal. The final contract cost of the canal totalled $40,981,980.63. Reclamation estimates of the final total cost of the canal reached $48,644,027.32.(42) The Delta-Mendota Canal originates at the intake headworks on the bank of Old River, a natural channel in the Delta. Tracy Pumping Plant raises water from the intake channel some 197 feet to the headworks where the canal carries the water south. The first ninety-five miles of the Delta-Mendota Canal have a concrete lining. The remaining distance is unlined. The canal stretches a distance of 115.7 miles. Delta-Mendota Canal has a bottom width of 100 feet and a capacity of 4,600 cubic feet per second.(43) On June 23, 1947, Reclamation Commissioner Michael Straus personally awarded contracts totaling $5,888,000 for the Tracy Pumping Plant and appurtenant facilities to SUHB Companies, a joint venture of Stolte, Inc., United Concrete Pipe, Ralph A. Bell, and Duncan-Harrelson Company. The contract was the first awarded by a Commissioner in excess of $500,000. Schedule one included the Tracy Pumping Plant structure, the Delta-Mendota Intake Channel, the railroad and highway culvert, and the higher head discharge pipes. The second schedule specified the lower head discharge pipes and the outlet structure. SUHB Companies also received the contract for finishing work and installation of major equipment.(44) SUHB excavated the Tracy Pumping Plant, used untreated forty-two to fifty-one foot Douglas fir pilings, and used pumpcrete machines to transport concrete from the mixer to the placement area. The contractors placed a total of 29,410 cubic yards of concrete and 2,695 tons of reinforcement steel. Worthington Pump and Machinery Corporation of Harrison, New Jersey, supplied the six eighty-four inch pumps for Tracy Pumping Plant, and Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Company of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, supplied the pump drive motors. SUHB installed the pumps and related machinery.(45) SUHB completed Tracy Pumping Plant and the Intake Channel work on December 30, 1949, at an estimated cost of $16,236,513. Tracy Pumping Plant delivers water to the Delta-Mendota Canal. The pumping plant has six pumping units and a total capacity of 4,602 cubic feet per second.(46) On January 12, 1945, Reclamation announced the final location for the Delta Cross Channel. The channel transports water from the Sacramento River to the Tracy Pumping Plant The route followed the plan chosen by California`s State Engineer Edward Hyatt, and the state legislature approved the channel location. Reclamation believed the Delta Cross Channel and the training works in the San Joaquin River necessary to prevent the highly polluted low water flows of the San Joaquin from getting into the Tracy Pumping Plant. The intrusion could raise salinity in the adjoining waters above the standards set in the Water Exchange Contract for low water flow.(47) Reclamation awarded the contract for earthwork on the Delta Cross Channel to the George Pollock Company on May 8, 1950. Other contract awards for the channel included Consolidated Western Steel Corporation`s for supplying the sixty by thirty foot radial gates on May 5, 1950, and Bethlehem Pacific Coast Steel Corporation for the radial gate hoists for the channel flood gate structure on May 15.(48) The Delta Cross Channel travels 1.2 miles between the Sacramento and the Mokelumne River Systems. The channel has a bottom width of 210 feet and a capacity of 3,500 cubic feet per second. Delta Cross Channel draws fresh water from the Sacramento to the Mokelumne, to combat salt water intrusion in the Delta and dilute local pollution. The water travels through natural channels to the Intake Channel at the Tracy Pumping Plant. Reclamation closed the control gates of the Delta Cross Channel during high water to prevent flood stages in the San Joaquin section of the Delta. After the flood danger passes, Reclamation opens the gates to allow Sacramento River water through to the Tracy Pumping Plant.(49) Reclamation awarded the contract for construction of Contra Loma Dam to Parish Brothers, Inc., on March 17, 1966, for $1,781,626. Parish Brothers received the notice to proceed April 2, 1966. The dedication ceremony for the dam was held on November 3, 1967. Parish Brothers completed Contra Loma Dam November 24, 1967. Final cost of the dam reached $1,960,000.(50) Contra Loma Dam is an offstream storage facility for the Contra Costa Canal. The dam consists of the dam and two dikes. Contra Loma Dam is a zoned earthfill structure 107 feet high with a crest length of 1,050 feet. The top width of the dam is thirty feet and the maximum base width is 630. Contra Loma Dam has a total volume of 641,000 cubic yards. Contra Loma Reservoir has a capacity of 2,100 acre-feet. The emergency spillway on the right is an uncontrolled ogee crest with a concrete chute and stilling basin. The spillway has a capacity of 600 cubic feet per second. The dam and reservoir sit at the southern end of the city of Antioch. The pumping plant pumps water from the Contra Costa Canal into the reservoir for storage, and releases the water by gravity.(51) The facilities of the Delta Division provide irrigation water for many acres of farm land in the Central Valley. Most of the land lies outside the Delta. The Contra Costa and Delta-Mendota Canals served over 300,000 people in 1966. Only about 18,000 people in the Delta received irrigation water from the Central Valley Project in 1977. Over 190,000 received water for municipal and other uses during the same year. One priority of Delta residents is assuring a supply of fresh water for a variety of uses. Salinity control contributed to some discord between Reclamation and Delta water users. Reclamation encountered problems in negotiating repayment contracts with the water users because irrigation expenses for other Central Valley water users became salinity control costs for Delta water users. Reclamation did reach a repayment agreement with the Sacramento River and Delta Water Association and the Delta Water Users Association in November 1965. World War II created more problems for agriculture on the Delta than just halting construction of Delta Division facilities. The removal of Japanese and Japanese-Americans from the west coast and the Central Valley caused a shortage of farm workers at harvest time, but the importation of farm workers from Mexico alleviated the problem. The Delta Division supports a large agricultural industry even with the problems it faces with salinity intrusion. Farmers in the Division grow a large number of crops on many acres of land (see Table. III). Much of the acreage lies south of the geographic Delta.

Plan

On January 12, 1945, Reclamation announced the final location for the Delta Cross Channel. The route follows the plan chosen by California`s State Engineer. The Delta Cross Channel is a controlled diversion channel between the Sacramento River and Snodgrass Slough. Water is diverted from the river into the slough through a short excavated channel near Walnut Grove . The channel has a bottom width of 210 feet and a capacity of 3,500 cubic feet per second. Fresh water is drawn from the Sacramento to the Mokelumne to combat salt water intrusion in the Delta and to dilute local pollution. The water then flows through natural channels for about 50 miles to the vicinity of the Tracy Pumping Plant. The diversion provides an adequate supply of water to the intakes of the Contra Costa and the Delta-Mendota Canals, and improves the irrigation supplies in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Reclamation believed the Delta Cross Channel and the training works in the San Joaquin River were necessary to prevent the highly polluted low water flows of the San Joaquin from getting into the Tracy Pumping Plant. The intrusion could raise salinity in the adjoining waters above the standards set in the Water Exchange Contract for low water flow. Reclamation closes the control gates of the Delta Cross Channel during high water to prevent flood stages in the San Joaquin section of the Delta. After the flood danger passes, Reclamation opens the gates to allow Sacramento River water through to the Tracy Pumping Plant. Reclamation started work on the Contra Costa Canal on October 19, 1937, and work was completed in 1948. The canal originates at Rock Slough, about 4 miles southeast of Oakley, California, where it intercepts natural flow in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Water for irrigation and municipal and industrial use is lifted 127 feet by a series of four pumping plants. The 47.7 mile-long canal terminates in Martinez Reservoir. The initial diversion capacity is 350 cubic feet per second, which gradually decreases to 22 cubic feet per second at the terminus. Two short canals, Clayton and Ygnacio, are integrated into the Contra Costa Canal system. Reclamation started work started on Contra Costa Pumping Plants 1 through 4 on March 14, 1939 completed work on March 7, 1940. Reclamation completed work on the Contra Costa Canal headworks, Dutch Slough Dam bridge, a bridge at Station 1+98, and a bridge at Rock Slough by September 15, 1940. Reclamation started test pumping at Pumping Plant One during the summer of 1940, in preparation for using operational portions of the Contra Costa Canal in the fall. Reclamation turned the first water into the sea level section of the canal on August 9, 1940. The hardness of Pittsburg`s well water supply increased from 150 parts per million (ppm) in 1929, to about 800 ppm in 1940. The decreasing water quality convinced Pittsburg residents to contract with Reclamation for water deliveries from the canal. Pittsburg built a water treatment plant in 1939 to accommodate expected delivery. Pittsburg received its first water delivery from Contra Costa Canal on August 18, 1940. On that date, the Contra Costa Canal stretched twenty miles, reaching four miles past the city. Reclamation continued earthwork, canal lining, and structures into 1942, when it halted work because of World War II. The work remaining after World War II consisted of ten miles of canal, two re-lift canals, and pumping plants. Reclamation finished work on the last section of the Contra Costa Canal on September 29, 1947. Reclamation awarded the first contract related to construction of the Tracy Pumping Plant and appurtenant facilities on June 23, 1947. Reclamation completed the plant in 1951. It consists of an inlet channel, pumping plant, and discharge pipes. Water in the delta is lifted 197 feet into the Delta-Mendota Canal. Each of the six pumps at Tracy is powered by a 22,500 horsepower motor and is capable of pumping 767 cubic feet per second. Power to run the huge pumps is supplied by Central Valley Project powerplants. The water is pumped through three 15-foot-diameter discharge pipes and carried about 1 mile up to the Delta-Mendota Canal. The intake canal includes the Tracy Fish Screen, which was built to intercept downstream migrant fish so they may be returned to the main channel to resume their journey to the ocean. The Delta-Mendota Canal, completed in 1951, carries water southeasterly from the Tracy Pumping Plant along the west side of the San Joaquin Valley for irrigation supply, for use in the San Luis Unit, and to replace San Joaquin River water stored at Friant Dam and used in the Friant-Kern and Madera systems. The canal is about 117 miles long and terminates at the Mendota Pool, about 30 miles west of Fresno. The initial diversion capacity is 4,600 cubic feet per second, which is gradually decreased to 3,211 cubic feet per second at the terminus. Reclamation awarded the contract for construction of Contra Loma Dam on March 17, 1966. The dedication ceremony for the dam was held on November 3, 1967, and construcation was completed on November 24, 1967. Contra Loma Dam is an offstream storage facility for the Contra Costa Canal. The facility includes two dikes. The dam is a zoned earthfill structure 107 feet high with a crest length of 1,050 feet. The top width of the dam is 30 feet and the maximum base width is 630 feet. Contra Loma Dam has a total volume of 641,000 cubic yards. Contra Loma Reservoir has a capacity of 2,100 acre-feet. The emergency spillway on the right is an uncontrolled ogee crest with a concrete chute and stilling basin. The spillway has a capacity of 600 cubic feet per second. The dam and reservoir sit at the southern end of the city of Antioch. The pumping plant pumps water from the Contra Costa Canal into the reservoir for storage; the releases are by gravity.

Contact

Title: Area Office Manager
Organization: South-Central California Area Office
Address: 1243 "N" Street
City: Fresno, CA 93721-1813
Phone: 559-487-5116

Contact

Title: Public Affairs Officer
Organization: Mid-Pacific Regional Office
Address: 2800 Cottage Way E-1705
City: Sacramento, CA 95825-1898
Fax: 916-978-5114
Phone: 916-978-5100

Contact

Title: Public Affairs Officer
Organization: Commissioner`s Office
Address: 1849 C Street NW
City: Washington, DC 20240
Fax: 202-513-0575
Phone: 202-513-0305

Contact

Organization: Broadview Water District
Address: PO Box 95
City: Firebaugh, CA 93622
Fax: 209-659-3526
Phone: 209-659-2004

Contact

Organization: Centinella Water District
Address: PO Box 98
City: Westly, CA 95387
Fax: 209-892-4469
Phone: 209-892-4470

Contact

Organization: Colusa Drain Mutual Water Company
Address: 134 5th Street
City: Colusa, CA 95932
Fax: 530-458-4276
Phone: 530-458-4849

Contact

Organization: Davis Water District
Address: PO Box 83
City: Arbuckle, CA 95912
Fax: 530-476-3445
Phone: 530-476-3137

Contact

Organization: Eagle Field Water District
Address: 51170 West Althea
City: Firebaugh, CA 93622
Fax: 916-364-6217
Phone: 209-364-6149

Contact

Organization: Foothill Water District

Contact

Organization: Hospital Water District

Contact

Organization: James Irrigation District
Address: PO Box 757
City: San Joaquin, CA 93660
Phone: 209-693-4356

Contact

Organization: Laguna Water District
Address: PO Box 145
City: Los Banos, CA 93635
Fax: 209-432-2827
Phone: 209-826-5672

Contact

Organization: Mercy Springs Water District
Address: 52027 West Althea Avenue
City: Firebaugh, CA 93622
Fax: 209-364-6122
Phone: 209-364-6136

Contact

Organization: Oro Loma Water District
Address: PO Box 92
City: South Dos Palos, CA 93655
Fax: 209-364-6214
Phone: 209-392-2614

Contact

Organization: Pacheco Water District
Address: PO Box 1447
City: Los Bano, CA
Fax: 209-364-6700
Phone: 209-364-6392

Contact

Organization: Panoche Water District
Address: 52027 West Althea Avenue
City: Firebaugh, CA 93622
Fax: 209-364-6122
Phone: 209-364-6136

Contact

Organization: Plain View Water District
Address: 30215 South Tracy Boulevard
City: Tracy, CA 95376
Fax: 209-835-2869
Phone: 209-835-0375

Contact

Organization: Quinto Water District

Contact

Organization: Salado Water District

Contact

Organization: Sunflower Water District

Contact

Organization: West Stanislaus Irrigation District
Address: PO Box 37
City: Westley, CA 95387
Fax: 209-894-3383
Phone: 209-894-3091

Contact

Organization: Widren Water District
Address: PO Box 1365
City: Los Banos, CA 93635
Fax: 209-826-9566
Phone: 209-826-0342

Contact

Organization: Banta-Carbona Irrigation District
Address: PO Box 299
City: Tracy, CA 95376
Fax: 209-835-2009
Phone: 209-835-4670

Contact

Organization: Central California Irrigation District
Address: P.O. Box 1231
City: Los Banos, CA 93635
Phone: 209-826-1421

Contact

Organization: Del Puerto Water District
Address: PO Box 98
City: Westley, CA 95387
Fax: 209-892-4469
Phone: 209-892-4470

Contact

Organization: Fresno Slough Water District
Address: PO Box 689
City: Tranquillity, CA 93668
Phone: 209-698-7410

Contact

Organization: Kern Canyon Water District

Contact

Organization: Orestimba Water District

Contact

Organization: Pacheco Water District
Address: PO Box 1447
City: Los Bano, CA
Fax: 209-364-6700
Phone: 209-364-6392

Contact

Organization: Patterson Water District
Address: PO Box 685
City: Patterson, CA 95363
Fax: 209-892-4013
Phone: 209-892-6233

Contact

Organization: Romero Water District

Contact

Organization: West Side Irrigation District
Address: PO Box 177
City: Tracy, CA 95378-0177
Fax: 209-835-2702
Phone: 209-835-0503

PROJECTS & FACILITIES

Delta Division Project

General

History

Construction

Plan

Other

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact

Contact