Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded bySan Diego County Water Authority
Bay-Delta Activities Update
This document provides background information on California's efforts to address water supply issues related to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and transport of State Water Project water. It summarizes the history of initiatives including CalFed and the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). The document then outlines topics discussed at recent Metropolitan Water District board meetings regarding the BDCP/California WaterFix, including project details, costs, risks and timeline. It concludes by summarizing the key aspects and public review process for the recently released recirculated draft environmental documents.
More Related Content
Similar to Bay-Delta Activities Update
Bay-Delta Activities Update
- 1. Amy Chen, Directorof MWD Program Debbie Espe, Senior Water Resources Specialist Imported Water Committee July 23, 2015
- 2.
- 3. CalFed formed toresolve issue of transporting SWP water through the Delta Bay-Delta Accord initiated long- term planning process to improve the Delta CalFed published plan to fix Delta and address challenges over next 50 years State created California Bay Delta Authority to oversee implementation of CalFed’s plan 3 1994 1994 2000 2003 2005 2006 2007 2009 2013 Little Hoover Commission found CalFed to be “costly, underperforming, unfocused and unaccountable.” Legislature dissolve CBDA and California Natural Resources absorbed its functions Bay Delta Conservation Plan process initiated Delta Reform Act creates Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Plan) to achieve state mandated coequal goals Administrative Drafts of BDCP released BDCP Public Comments Received2014
- 4. 16 Boardmeetings since January 2013 ◦ Bay Delta issues and alternatives ◦ Scope of alternatives for staff review ◦ Demand assumptions, export yields ◦ Economic study, cost and funding ◦ BDCP process and timeline, CEQA/NEPA process, baselines ◦ Water supply/demand/yield analysis ◦ Physical facilities, supply/demand risk assessment ◦ Financing risk assessment, MWD costs ◦ Engineering risk assessment, BDCP governance ◦ Economic and financial risk to Water Authority 4
- 5. Draft BDCP & EIR/EIS Conceptual Engineering Report Implementing Agreement Governance Implementation Funding EconomicBenefits Environmental Analysis Environmental Baseline Decision Tree Federal Agency Section 7 Coordination Regulatory Assurances Future BDCP Modifications Schedule Cost Estimate Accuracy Project Risks 5
- 6. Released July10, 2015 Primary purpose is to make the physical and operational improvements to the state’s main delivery system in the Delta 6 Lead agencies ◦ Department of Water Resources (CEQA) ◦ Bureau of Reclamation (NEPA) ◦ Cooperating Agencies: National Marine Fisheries Services and US Fish and Wildlife Service (Section 7) CA Fish and Wildlife (Permit after EIR/EIS Approval)
- 7. BDCP’s initialstrategy (Alternative 4) proposed as a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) ◦ Sought 50-year permit through ESA Section 10 and Natural Community Conservation Plan ◦ Provided broad scale regional habitat restoration and new Delta water delivery infrastructure 7 California WaterFix (Alternative 4A) ◦ Proposes Section 7 consultation and CESA Section 2081(b) permit process ◦ Includes new Delta water delivery infrastructure, without HCP ◦ Allows for others to address habitat conservation efforts
- 8. Introduction ofthree new sub-alternatives Design Modification to Alternative 4 (BDCP Preferred Alternative) Updated environmental analysis ◦ Fish and Aquatic Habitat ◦ Water Quality ◦ Effects Downstream of the Delta ◦ Air Quality Health Risk Assessment, Traffic and Noise ◦ Geotechnical Investigations ◦ Inclusion of Additional NEPA Determinations The cost is estimated at $14.9 billion (2014$) 8
- 9. 9 July – OctoberStaff to review and assess recirculated documents August 27 State representative to address Imported Water Committee on new approach September 24 Report on staff assessment October 30 Public Comment Deadline