Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

May 1 Water Talks - Halla Razak, P.E.

2,502

Published on

Halla Razak, P.E., Colorado River Program Director at the Water Authority provides an overview of the Quantification Settlement Agreement, the associated canal linings and the benefits to the San …

Halla Razak, P.E., Colorado River Program Director at the Water Authority provides an overview of the Quantification Settlement Agreement, the associated canal linings and the benefits to the San Diego region. Presented as part of the May 1 forum, Water Talks: The Colorado River and its Future

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,502
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  1. May 1, 2012 Halla Razak, PEColorado River Program Director
  2.  Changes in the Colorado River Basin Quantification Settlement Agreement ◦ Water transfer with Imperial Irrigation District ◦ Canal lining projects Binational discussions for river management ◦ Rosarito Beach seawater desalination study 2
  3.  Acre-foot: ◦ A volume of one acre covered with 1 foot of water ◦ 325,851 gallons ◦ Water amount used by 2 typical suburban families in a year Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) ◦ A set of agreements that quantified California’s agricultural agencies water use, and allowed California to live within its apportionment of 4.4 million acre-feet
  4. 1962 2012Demographics / Land Use •Population served 12 million 30 million •Acres irrigated < 3 million 3 millionPhysical System •Storage capacity 30 maf 67 maf •Hydropower generation 6,700 GW 12,400 GW capacityNatural System •Annual mean natural flow at L.F. 15.5 maf 14.4 maf •Lowest 10-yr average flow at 12.5 maf 12.0 maf L.F. (1931-1940) (2001-2010) * 50-year period ending in year shownLegal Colorado River Compact, Boulder •Acts, agreements, etc Canyon Project Act, AZ v. CA, NEPA, ESA, QSA, ICS Upper Colorado6 River Basin Compact
  5. Upper Basin States Lower Basin States 1.04 .49 3.86 1.71 .3 .2 .80 1.8 5.1 .05 .02 4.4 2.8 2.4Apportionments .84 .39Deliveries in 1990s 2.5 1.5 Mexico
  6.  California regularly exceeded 4.4 maf/yr ◦ CA used more than 4.4 maf/yr in 37 of 39 years prior to 2003 ◦ Reclamation delivered water to meet demand out of unused AZ and NV apportionment and “surplus” Growth of Las Vegas, increased use in Upper Basin ◦ Other Basin States demand CA limit use to “basic apportionment” 2001 Interim Surplus Guidelines ◦ Authorize additional surplus supplies for municipal use to provide a “soft landing” as CA reduces to 4.4 mafy California’s Colorado River Water Use April 20, 2012 8
  7.  Quantified California’s Colorado River water apportionments ◦ PVID ◦ Yuma Project 3,850,000 af ◦ IID and CVWD ◦ MWD………………………………..550,000 af = 4,400,000af (California’s apportionment) Allowed ag-to-urban water transfers Funded the canal lining projects 10
  8.  Reduces California demand to 4.4 maf Improves water supply reliability for urban and agricultural agencies Reduces need to export more water from Northern California to Southern California Funds Salton Sea restoration 11
  9. Significance of QSA for San Diego• SDCWA / IID water transfer • Largest ag-to-urban water transfer ever: 200,000 af/yr • Authority pays IID for farmers to conserve water, which becomes available for urban use • Volume transferred to date: 410,000 af • Current unit cost: $491/af 12
  10.  Canal lining projects ◦ Status of projects:  Constructed parallel concrete-lined sections of All American, Coachella canals  Combined projects conserve 78,000 af/yr  Project costs:  AACLP: $305 million ($170 million paid by state)  CCLP: $125 million ($84 million paid by state) 13
  11. Proposed Lined Section Existing Unlined Section1.5H:1V side slope 2H:1V side slope 55’ 20’ O&M Road Spoils 40’ – 46’ 16’ 16
  12. 17
  13. 18
  14. QSA Validation Suit• 2009 Superior Court ruling that QSA and related agreements violated California Constitution and were invalid • Ruling based on the State’s obligation to pay environmental mitigation costs in excess of funds provided by the QSA JPA• 2011 Court of Appeal reversed Superior Court ruling • State’s obligation is “unconditional”• April 2012 federal district court ruled in favor of a QSA case regarding challenges to NEPA compliance. Decision is subject to appeal. 21
  15. Water Authority/IID Joint Petition to the SWRCB • Water Authority and IID ask the State Water Resources Control Board to modify existing QSA environmental mitigation requirements. • Goal is to develop more durable habitat and air quality projects at the Salton Sea, while protecting the financial viability of the QSA JPA. • The Joint Petition seeks to: • Halt planned delivery of water to Salton Sea from 2014-17 • Transfer some of the water to the Water Authority or MWD to generate funds for alternative mitigation • Implement additional habitat and air quality mitigation 22
  16.  U.S. and Mexico engaged in discussions on broad array of river management issues Formal discussions could lead to Minute 319 ◦ Agreement to implement specific projects, operating guidelines, and management strategies Activities include studying potential binational seawater desalination plant
  17.  Otay emergency connection Desalination (ocean and brackish) Mexicali Valley irrigation improvements Drought management Operational storage Storage in Lake Mead Wetlands and habitat restoration, protection Mexico water delivery via All American Canal New River water Aquifer monitoring 24
  18.  Potential plant at Rosarito Beach, Mexico Could supply U.S. or Mexico users ◦ Direct delivery via pipeline to San Diego County ◦ Exchange with U.S. Colorado River users Capacity 50-75 million gallons / day Four-phase study leading to preliminary design
  19. ● No “fatal flaws” to project were found● Significant Mexico / U.S. demand for product water (greater than 50 MGD)● Suitable building sites are available● Sufficient electric power is available, with access to intake and outfall channels for seawater supply and brine disposal● Need to develop alternative pipeline alignments to deliver product water● Complex environmental permitting issues 26
  20.  Mexico provided funds and is now evaluating pipeline alternatives to San Diego County border Working within binational cooperative process U.S. funding agencies considering Phase 2 ◦ Considering potential impacts from Minute 319 27
  21. Increasing San Diego Countys Water Supply Reliability through Supply Diversification 1991 5% 2011 4% 2020 11% 95% 14% 3% 10% 13% 6% 13% 11% 7%Total = 578 44% 4% TAF 24% 30% 6% Total = 594 TAF Total = 779 TAF Metropolitan Water District Recycled Water Imperial Irrigation District Transfer Seawater Desalination All American & Coachella Canal Lining Groundwater Conservation (existing and additional) Local Surface Water 28

×