Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Bay Delta Conservation Plan Update
Margie J. WheelerOrange County Business CouncilMay 14, 2013
OverviewMetropolitan Water DistrictBay Delta Conservation Plan
Overview and purpose
Costs
Administrative Draft
Conveyance Facility
Conservation Measures
Benefits/Costs/Economic Impacts of BDCP Proposed Project and Alternatives
State Water ProjectCritical supply for Southern California
Schedule
The Metropolitan Water Districtof Southern California
MWD Service Area
Six-County Service Area: 5,200 square miles
Population: 19 million
Gross Domestic Product: $1 Trillion
Projected growth: ~170,000 people/year
50%+ of region’s supply
Southern California’s Water Portfolio
25% Colorado River supplies30% State Water Project (flowing through the Delta)45% Local Supplies
Los Angeles AqueductConservationRecyclingGroundwaterDesalination
4
Bay Delta Conservation PlanOverview Video
5
Source: Governor’s Delta Vision Report (Estimated total annual runoff 32.85 maf)
Pacific Ocean48%
UpstreamConsumptive
Use31%
Delta Exports17%
MWD4%
In-Delta Consumptive
Use4%
Water Flowing Through the Delta
6
BDCP: Organizations InvolvedFederal Agencies
Council on Environmental QualityDepartment of InteriorDepartment of CommerceDepartment of AgricultureUS Environmental Protection AgencyDepartment of the Army
State AgenciesNatural Resources AgencyDepartment of Water ResourcesDepartment of Fish/Game
7
Public Water AgenciesState Water ContractorsCentral Valley Project Contractors
Environmental Organizations American RiversDefenders of WildlifeEnvironmental DefenseNatural Heritage InstituteThe Bay InstituteThe Nature Conservancy
BDCP: Purpose
Increased reliability
Comprehensive restoration for the Delta
Basis for permits Federal and state endangered species laws
Sources of funding and new methods of decision-making
Adaptive management and monitoring to adjust as conditions change and new information is available
Streamline permitting for projects covered by the plan
Users pay – new conveyance & associated mitigation
Beneficiaries pay – habitat conservation & other state-wide benefits
Average cost for Southern Californians ~ $5 - 6/month per household
Improvements Capital Annual O&M Funding Source
Conveyance $14 billion $83 million Water Contractors
Eco-Restoration & Other Stressors $3.6 billion $46 million Fed/State/Water
Contractors/Other
9
Metropolitan’s share is approximately 25 percentThe $14 billion estimate per the Governor’s announcement (July 25, 2012)Other cost information from Dec-2010 BDCP document
BDCP: Preliminary Cost Analysis
10
Bay Delta Conservation Plan Administrative Draft
BDCP Administrative Draft
Joint documentHabitat Conservation PlanNatural Community Conservation Plan
57 species11 fish species46 terrestrial species
214 Biological goals and objectives22 Conservation measuresAdaptive management Research and monitoring
11
Bay Delta Conservation Plan Administrative Draft – Schedule
March 14 – Released Chapters 1-4• Introduction, Existing Conditions,
Conservation Strategy and Covered Actions• March 20 – Public Workshop
March 27 – Released Chapters 5-7• Effects Analysis, Plan Implementation, Implementation Structure• April 4 – Public Workshop
Late May– Scheduled release of Chapters 8-12• Implementation Costs & Funding Sources, Alternatives to Take,
Integration of Independent Science, List of Preparers, Glossary• TBD– Public Workshop
12
Sacramento
13
SWP PumpsCVP Pumps
Sac River
Stockton
Preliminary Subject to Revision
SJ River
Tunnels
Dual ConveyanceSouth Delta (existing)North Delta (new)
Three intakes/pumping plantsState-of-the-art fish screensForebay temporarily stores water pumped from river Two gravity flow tunnels (35 miles long; 9,000 cfs)
North Diversion
South Diversion
CM1: Water Facilities and OperationCM1: Water Facilities and Operation
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
14
ConveyanceConveyance
Tidal Marsh Tidal Marsh
Yolo BypassYolo Bypass
Floodplain RestorationFloodplain
Restoration
Natural Communities
Natural Communities
Construction
20 projects
62,455 acres
65,000 acres
10,000 acres
20 linear miles
Some activities ongoing/others on as needed basis
Channel MarginChannel Margin
Other StressorsOther Stressors
BDCP Conservation MeasuresYEARSYEARS
Benefits/Costs/Economic Impacts of BDCP Proposed Project and AlternativesPrepared by ICF International and The Brattle Group
Costs and funding sources MayBDCP Chapter 8
Alternatives to “take” MayAnalysis of alternative that may avoid harm to various speciescovered in the BDCP
BDCP Chapter 9
Economic benefits to participating water agencies July
Statewide economic impact May
Employment impacts (published February 2013)
Socioeconomic impacts MayEIR/EIS Chapter 16 Administrative Draft
15
16
State Water ProjectCritical supply for Southern California
Challenges Replacing SWP Supplies
SWP supplies are essential to alternative supply options
SWP provides baseline supplies that we conserve and recycleSWP provides valuable water quality benefits
Colorado River & groundwater blendingRecycling
Feasibility of alternative supplies
17
Heavy dependence on imported supply
and SWP Diversions
Emphasis on Conservation, Local Supplies, and Storage &
Transfers
Early 1990’s 2010 IRP Strategy
Diversification of Water Portfolio(Dry-Year Supplies)
Local Supplies
Local Supplies
State Water Project
State Water Project
Colorado River Aqueduct
Storage & Transfers
Storage & Transfers
Conservation
Conservation
18
Regional InvestmentsReducing Reliance on ImportsRegional InvestmentsReducing Reliance on Imports
19
Conservation: 900,000 af/yr
Recycling: 335,000 af/yr
Groundwater Recovery: 111,000 af/yr
Seawater: 46,000 af/yr (planned)
Conservation represents regional actions both active & passiveRecycling & groundwater represents total regional production 2012 (MWD & member agency)Seawater represents 3 planned local projects
Cost Comparison (per acre-foot)
20
Stormwater Groundwater Recovery
Recycled Desalination$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
Supp
ly C
ost
($/A
F)
$1,600 -3,500+/AF $940 -
2,500/AF
$1,400 -3,500+/AF
$1,600 -2,300/AF
Local Supply Avg. ~ $1,500/AF
SWP Existing ($650/AF) + Delta Improvements ($200/AF) = ~ $850/AF
Metropolitan is committed to meeting future additional water supply needs through local resources and conservation
Revised: December 18, 2012
Risks of Doing Nothing
Status Quo
Ecosystem decline
Pumping restrictions (supply reduced 30%)
Major Levee Failure
Up to three-year disruption of water deliveries
$40 billion estimated impact to California’s economy
21
22
Schedule 2013
May 10 Consultant Administrative Draft EIR/EIS Released
Late May Administrative Draft BDCP Chapters 8-12
TBD Public Workshop
October 1 Public Draft BDCP and EIR/EIS Release
Winter Final BDCP and EIR/EIS
May 16-17 DSC expected to certify EIR and adopt Final Delta Plan
May 2013 Proposed regulations sent to OAL for 30 day review
June-July OAL approves or disapproves regulations
July 1- October 1
Regulations enforceable and DSC begins
BDCP DSC Delta Plan
The DeltaThe DeltaSacramentoSacramento
StocktonStockton
Suisun BaySuisun Bay
State & Federal Pumping PlantsState & Federal Pumping Plants
Capital Cost Comparisons BDCP Delta Facilities
San Francisco PUC Hetch Hetchy ProjectRepairs to protect against future seismic events, and to meet current building codes and drinking water regulations
Contra Costa Water District’s Los Vaqueros ProjectImproves water quality and provides emergency storage
25BDCP Economic Benefits and Financial Strategies, SCWC/The PFM Group, February 2012
Cost Population Served Per Capita Cost
$14 billion(Per 7/25 Announcement)
25 million(3 million acres of Ag)
$560
Cost Population Served Per Capita Cost
$4.6 billion 2.5 million $1,840
Cost Population Served Per Capita Cost
$570 million 550,000 $1,036
Regional Cost Comparisons MWD share of BDCP Cost
MWD Diamond Valley Reservoir/Inland Feeder projectsPrimarily an emergency storage facility but also provides drought and water quality benefits
SDCWA Emergency Storage ProjectEnhances reliability of the water supply of San Diego in the event of seismic disruption
26
Cost Population Served Per Capita Cost $3.5 billion 19 million $184
Cost Population Served Per Capita Cost $3.1 billion 18 million $172
Cost Population Served Per Capita Cost $1.5 billion 2.8 million $536
BDCP Economic Benefits and Financial Strategies, SCWC/The PFM Group, February 2012
Seismic RiskBay Area Faults
Key Delta RisksKey Delta Risks
27
Fishery Declines Delta smelt
Subsidence
Sea Level Rise
BDCP Administrative DraftChapter Title
1 Introduction
2 Existing Ecological Conditions
3 Conservation Strategy
4 Covered Actions
5 Effects Analysis
6 Plan Implementation
7 Implementation Structure
8 Implementation Costs and Funding Sources
9 Alternatives to Take
10 Integration of Independent Science into BDCP
11 List of Preparers
12 Glossary
Local
Los Angeles Aqueduct
Colorado River Aqueduct
State Water Project
The Bay-DeltaHub of California’s Water
Bay Area – 33%Bay Area – 33%
Central Valley – 23 to 90%Central Valley – 23 to 90%
Southern Cal – 30%Southern Cal – 30%
Some regions up to 100% dependent
Some regions up to 100% dependent
29
30
The Bay-Delta: The State Water “Hub”Drinking Water for 25 Million CaliforniansDrinking Water for 25 Million Californians
Northern California Southern California
Central Valley
Irrigation for half of the Nation’s Fruits and Vegetables
Irrigation for half of the Nation’s Fruits and Vegetables
Metropolitan Board Actions Board Approved
Delta Action Plan June 2007Delta Conveyance Criteria Sept 2007Delta Governance Principles Aug 2008Delta Vision Implementation Jan 2009Delta-Related Legislation Apr 2009
Board AuthorizedExecution of Planning Agreement for BDCP Oct 2006Execution of BDCP Cost-Sharing Agreement Nov 2006Execution of amendments to Planning Agreement Dec 2009Execution of amendment (additional funds) July 2010Execution of amendment to MOA Aug 2011
Planning costs: $170 millionMetropolitan share: 25%
31
BDCP: Reducing Environmental Stressors
Toxic pollutantsInvasive speciesPredator controlIllegal poachingHatchery practices
32
Water Quality & Salinity Management
ObjectivesImprove export quality to meet Public Health standards & reduce treatment costsSupport actions to minimize salinity imports Meet 500 mg/l blending goal
Some Basin Plans have low TDS objectivesCould restrict extended recharge of high salinity Colorado River water *
OrangeCounty
MainSan Gabriel
Raymond
Chino
San Jacinto
33
Las Posas
Cucamonga
Warner Valley
ElsinoreUpper San JuanSan Mateo
& San Onofre
Six Basins
Sylmar
VerdugoEast SanFernando
* Some of the highlighted basins do not currently receive MWD recharge supplies
Peripheral Canal BDCP*Conveyance 43 miles
Above ground open channel
35 milesUnderground gravity tunnels
Conveyance Type Fully isolated Dual conveyance allowing through-Delta operations
Capacity 21,800 cfs 9,000 cfs (tentative)
Number of Intakes 1 3
Number of Fish Screens
1(Addressing salmon
and striped bass only)
3(Advanced technology; comprehensive goal to
protect more fish species)
34
* A final decision on the proposed conveyance facility awaits the completion of regulatory and environmental review and public input consideration.Source: BDCP : A 21st century Strategy. http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/Home.aspx
Peripheral Canal & BDCP: Comparison
Peripheral Canal BDCP*
Potential Ag Impact (For conveyance only)
Approximately 6,600 acres
Approximately 2,400 acres**
Regulatory Controls Avoid jeopardy Conserve/contribute to recovery
Habitat Conservation No (HCP not law until 1982)
Yes
Natural Community Conservation Planning
No (State law not enacted
until 1991)
Yes
35Source: BDCP : A 21st century Strategy. http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/Home.aspx
** Additional acres of agricultural land would be impacted due to disposal of dirt and material during construction. The Peripheral Canal proposal did not quantify such materials in detail.
Peripheral Canal & BDCP: Comparison
* A final decision on the proposed conveyance facility awaits the completion of regulatory and environmental review and public input consideration.
